Next-Generation Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering

Next-Generation Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering

Tony T.Y. Yang, Ph.D., P.Eng.

GUANGZHOU UNIVERSITY

2018 06 14

4TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON EARTHQUAKE

ENGINEERING AND DISASTER MITIGATION

PADANG, INDONESIA

Professor, Director of Smart Structures Laboratory Department of Civil Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Professor, Executive DirectorInternational Joint Research Laboratory of Earthquake EngineeringTongji University, Shanghai, China

1906 San Francisco Earthquake, USA

• Destroyed 80% of the “golden” city.

• Over 3,000 died and half of the population homeless.

22019 09 27 Padang Indonesia

2011 Christchurch earthquake, New Zealand

Financial loss: $35 Billion USD


2011 Tohoku earthquake, Japan




Earthquake engineering


damage threshold

collapseonset

OPEN

OPEN

OPEN

Performance-based design approach


Deformation

Performance LevelsIO LS CP

Frequency of Design Ground Shaking Level

Frequent Rare Very rare

FEMA 356

X

X

X

X

XX

2011 Christchurch earthquake, New Zealand


XX

X

X

+1200 demolitions (~70% of CBD) and counting!

damage threshold

collapseonset

OPEN

OPEN

OPEN

Performance-based design approach


Deformation

Performance LevelsIO LS CP

Frequency of Design Ground Shaking Level

Frequent Rare Very rare

FEMA 356

$, % replacement0 25% 50% 100%

Downtime, days0 1 7 30 180

Casualty rate0.0 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.25

Decision Variable OPEN

OPEN

OPEN

Loss

AnalysisPSHA

Damage Analysis

Response

Analysis

Seismic Risk

( ) ( | ) d ( | ) d ( | ) d ( )dv DV G dv dm G dm edp G edp im imλ λ< = ∫∫∫

PBEE framework


Intensity Measure

Damage Measure

Engineering Demand Parameter

PEER

Implementation of PBEE


Earthquake Engineering

112019 09 27 Padang IndonesiaURS

Seismic hazard level: 10% in 50 years

Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis

122019 09 27 Padang IndonesiaURS

Seismic hazard level: 10% in 50 years

Suites of ground motions


EDP

Response analysis


DS1 DS2 DS3

Flexural cracks < 3/16"Shear (diagonal) cracks < 1/16"No significant spallingNo fracture or buckling of r/fNot structurally significant

Flexural cracks > 1/4"Shear (diagonal) cracks > 1/8"Moderate spalling/ loose coverNo fracture or buckling of r/fInsignificant residual drift/shorteningRepairable in place

Max. crack widths >3/8"Significant spalling/ loose coverFracture or buckling some r/fSignificant residual drift/shorteningRepair in place impractical

DESCRIPTION

ILLUSTRATION

(example photo or drawing)

BASIC COMPOSITION DAMAGES STATES

No of square feet of flexurally controlled RC concrete shear walls in each direction DS2 DS3 DS4


1.5% 3.0% 5.0%

0.2 0.3 0.4

Patch cracks each side with caulk Remove loose concrete Shore Paint each side Patch spalls with NS grout Demo existing wall

Patch cracks each side with caulk ReplacePaint each side Patch and paint

Cost per sq ft of wall for repair

Max. cost up to lower quantity $4.00 per sq ft up to 800 sq ft $10.00 per sq ft up to 800 sq ft $50.00 per sq ft up to 200 sq ft

Min cost over upper quantity $2.00 per sq ft over 4000 sq ft $5.00 per sq ft over to 4000 sq ft $30.00 per sq ft over 2000 sq ftBeta (cost) 0.2 0.3 0.3

CORRELATION (%) 70%

REPAIR MEASURES

CONSEQUENCE FUNCTION

MEDIAN EDP

(interstory drift)

BETA

ATC58

1.25% 2.5% 3.5%

0.5

1.0Pro

bab

ility

Damage analysis

Fragility curves:


0.0

0.5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

EDP = inter-story drift [%]

Pro

bab

ility

EDP

Damage analysis


EDP

0.0

0.5

1.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

EDP = inter-story drift [%]

Pro

bab

ility y1

y2 y3

y4

Performance group i

Quantities

y1 y2 y3 y4

Damage state

concrete 0 0 0 10

Repair quantity calculation


wallboard 0 0 100 10,000

paint 100 10000 10,000

steel 0 0 0 20

electrical 0 0 00

…

Quantities1 2 … Totals

Performance group

concrete 10 0 … 30

steel 20 0 … 20

All performance groups



wallboard 10,000 100 … 10,100

paint 1000 …10,000 11,000

steel 20 0 … 20

electrical 0 … 00

…

Quantity i (e.g., sq ft of the

concrete shear wall)

Unit Cost, $

Total repair cost



Quantity

Ci Total cost = ΣCiQi

(plus contractor's OH and profit (~12%) and general project costs (design, admin etc, at 20-50%).

Qi

∆1 [%] ∆2 [%] ∆3 [%] Ag [%] Α1 [%] Α2 [%] Α3 [%]

Cost

EDP

EDP matrix


GM 1 1.26 1.45 1.71 0.54 0.87 0.88 0.65

GM 2 1.41 2.05 2.43 0.55 0.87 0.77 0.78

GM 3 1.37 1.96 2.63 0.75 1.04 0.89 0.81

: : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : :

GM N 1.73 2.55 2.46 0.45 0.57 0.45 0.59

Cost1Cost2

Costn

:

Generate correlated EDP matrix

X Yln

Z = A U + B

Function of rv:

=> MZ = A MU + B

=> ΣZZ = A ΣUU AT


=> ΣZZ = A ΣUU A

and ΣUU = I=> MU = 0

If I choose U

=> MZ = B

=> ΣZZ = AAT

Yang et al. (2009)


X Y

Z = A U + B

If U is a vector of

uncorrelated standard

normal RVs.

=> MZ = B

ln

U


=> MZ = B

=> ΣZZ = AAT

ZMZ = MY = B

ΣZZ = ΣYY = AAT

expW

Z = chol(ΣYY) U + MY

Yang et al. (2009)


GM EDP 1 EDP 2 EDP 3 … … … EDP N

GM 1 … … … … … … …

GM 2 … … … … … … …

…. … … … … … … …


… … … … … … … …

…. … … … … … … …

… … … … … … … …

…. … … … … … … …

GM M … … … … … … …

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

P(T

ota

l R

ep

air

Co

st

<=

$C

)

Conceptual repair cost calculation


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 x 106

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

$C (dollar)

P(T

ota

l R

ep

air

Co

st

<=

$C

)

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

P(T

ota

l R

ep

air

Co

st

<=

$C

)

ν(DV>$dv) = ∫ P(dv|im)x|dν(im)/dim| dim

Distribution of repair costs


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

$C (dollar)

P(T

ota

l R

ep

air

Co

st

<=

$C

)

Return period = 72 years



IM = 5 Mw

IM = 6 Mw

IM = 7 Mw

x 106

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045A

nn

ua

l ra

te o

f e

xce

ed

ing

a t

ota

l re

pa

ir c

ost,

$C

Loss curve (mean cumulative annual total repair cost = $ 31,300)

Annual rate of exceedance


0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 x 1060

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

$C (dollar)

An

nu

al r

ate

of

exce

ed

ing

a t

ota

l re

pa

ir c

ost,

$C

(a) Expected cost for M7 scenario

$1.2M

(b) 90% confidence cost does not exceed threshold for 975-yr return period hazard level

$3.8M

Various expression of costs


(d) Contributions to total cost for scenario

structural

nonstructural

(c) Mean cumulative annual total cost of damage

$31,000

1

Pro

bab

ilit

y

Deaggregation of repair cost


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415160

5

10x 10

5

0

0.5

PG(s)Total repair cost ($C)

Pro

bab

ilit

y

PE and new structural systems

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

P(T

ota

l R

ep

air

Co

st

<=

$C

)

BRB

MF

MF+VF200K

302019 09 27 Padang IndonesiaRon Mayes, SGH

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 x 1060

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

P(T

ota

l R

ep

air

Co

st

<=

$C

)

$C (dollar)

Application of PBEE• A high value content facility, 75 Million USD• Laboratory, Lecture hall, OfficeHeight: 370 m

Area: 321,213 m2

Dalian Guomao Building


Dalian Guomao Building

Application of PBEE

Structural

Components

Architectural

Components


Building

Services

Application of PBEE

Loss

AnalysisPSHA

Damage Analysis

Response

Analysis

Seismic Risk



Application of PBEE

Loss

AnalysisPSHA

Damage Analysis

Response

Analysis

Seismic Risk


-5000

0

5000

10000

15000

-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

荷载

/KN

位移/mm-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

荷载

/KN

位移/mm


-80000

-60000

-40000

-20000

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

荷载

/KN

位移/mm

-15000

-10000

-4000

-3000

-2000

-1000

-800

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800

1000

-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

荷载

/KN

位移/mm

Loss

AnalysisPSHA

Damage Analysis

Response

Analysis

Seismic Risk


Application of PBEE


Non-structural Component Name: Location Type

Interior Glazing All floors Architectural

Exterior Glazing All floors Architectural

Stone Wall Panels First floor Architectural

Partition Walls All floors Architectural

Suspended Ceilings All floors Architectural

Elevators All floors Building Services

Cold Water Piping All floors Building Services

Natural Gas Piping Labs, Floors B1,2,3,4 Building Services

Compressed Air Piping Labs, Floors B1,2,3,4 Building Services

Fire Suppression Piping All floors Building Services

Sanitary Piping All floors Building Services

HVAC Chiller Roof Building Services

Heat Pump Basement Floor Building Services

HVAC Cooling Tower Roof Building Services

Non-medical Air Compressor Roof Building Services

Application of QuakeProof©


Non-medical Air Compressor Roof Building Services

HVAC ductwork All floors Building Services

Air Handling Units Basement Floor Building Services

Pump Control System Basement Floor Building Services

Electrical Transformer Basement Floor Building Services

Electrical Switch Gear Basement Floor Building Services

Electrical Distribution Panel All floors Building Services

Suspended LAN cable trays All floors Building Services

Office Shelving/Cabinets All floors Contents

Computer Labs Floor 1,3,4 Contents

Document Cameras Theatres - Floors B1,1,2 Contents

AV control module Theatres - Floors B1,1,2 Contents

Lecture Projectors Theatres - Floors B1,1,2 Contents

Theatre Speakers Theatres - Floors B1,1,2 Contents

Wireless Network Routers All floors Contents

Lab Equipment Labs, Floors B1,2,3,4 Contents

Computer servers Basement Floor Contents

Office Electronics All floors Contents

Office Bookshelves All floors Contents

Application of PBEE


Application of PBEE

Loss

AnalysisPSHA

Damage Analysis

Response

Analysis

Seismic Risk



Application of PBEE


10

x 1

05

Hazard

leve

l :50/5

0

Applicatio

n o

f PBEE

Loss

Analys

isP

SH

AD

am

age

Analys

is

Response

Analys

is

Seis

mic

R

isk

()

(|

)d(

|)d

(|

)d

()

dv

DV

Gd

vd

mG

dm

ed

pG

ed

pim

imλ

λ<

=∫∫∫8 9

10

x 1

05

Hazard

leve

l :10/5

0

10

12

14

x 1

05

Partition Walls NS

Partition Walls EW

Ceilings

Lab Equipment

Median repair cost [USD]

Hazard

leve

l :2/5

0

42

2019 0

9 2

7 P

adang In

donesia

05

10

15

20

25

30

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Exterior Curtain Walls North-SouthExterior Curtain Walls East-WestInterior Curtain WallsTimber Partition Walls North-SouthTimber Partition Walls East-WestLab Partition Walls North-SouthLab Partition Walls East-WestSuspended CeilingsElevatorsCold Water PipingCold Water Pipe BracingHot Water PipingHot Water Pipe BracingSanitary PipingSanitary Pipe BracingSteam PipingSteam Pipe BracingFire Supression PipingFire Sprinkler DropRecessed LightingPendant LightingHVAC DuctingHVAC DropVAV BoxOffice WorkstationMisc Shelved Office ItemsComputersBookcaseFiling CabinetBenched Lab Equipment


PG

[-]

05

10

15

20

25

30

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Exterior Curtain Walls North-SouthExterior Curtain Walls East-WestInterior Curtain Walls

Timber Partition Walls North-SouthTimber Partition Walls East-West

Lab Partition Walls North-SouthLab Partition Walls East-West

Suspended CeilingsElevators

Cold Water PipingCold Water Pipe BracingHot Water PipingHot Water Pipe BracingSanitary PipingSanitary Pipe BracingSteam PipingSteam Pipe BracingFire Supression PipingFire Sprinkler DropRecessed LightingPendant LightingHVAC DuctingHVAC DropVAV BoxOffice Workstation

Misc Shelved Office ItemsComputers

BookcaseFiling Cabinet

Benched Lab Equipment


PG

[-] 05

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8

Exterior Curtain Walls North-South

Exterior Curtain Walls East-WestInterior Curtain Walls

Partition Walls NS

Partition Walls EWLab Partition Walls North-SouthLab Partition Walls East-West

Elevators

Cold Water Piping

Cold Water Pipe Bracing

Hot Water PipingHot Water Pipe Bracing

Sanitary Piping

Sanitary Pipe BracingSteam Piping

Steam Pipe Bracing

Fire Supression PipingFire Sprinkler Drop

Recessed Lighting

Pendant LightingHVAC Ducting

HVAC DropVAV Box

Office Workstation

Misc Shelved Office Items

ComputersBookcase

Filing CabinetLab Equipment


PG

[-]

Application of PBEE

Loss

AnalysisPSHA

Damage Analysis

Response

Analysis

Seismic Risk


7

8

9x 10

6 Median Repair Cost of Selected Performance Groups

Shear Walls

0.8

0.9

1

Pro

babili

ty n

ot

exceedin

g indic

ate

d r

epair c

ost

Total repair cost

2/50

10/50

50/50


250 1050 50500

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Hazard Level

Media

n R

epair C

ost

[$]

Partition Walls

Ceilings

ElevatorsHVAC

Office Equipment

Lab Equipment

Columns

Partition Walls

CeilingsElevatorsOffice EquipmentLab Equipment

Columns

Shear Walls

0 5 10 15

x 106

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Pro

babili

ty n

ot

exceedin

g indic

ate

d r

epair c

ost

Repair cost [USD]

Application of PBEE


AI vision-based technology for PBEE


Source: https://software.intel.com

Visual sensing technologyAdvancement of deep-learning-based computer vision technology brought breakthroughs in the image processing tasks



Source: https://github.com/karolmajek/Mask_RCNN

Classification



Ok (√) Collapsed (X) Collapsed (X)


DS 0: No damage

Classification

DS 1: Minor damage


DS 3: Server damage DS 4: Collapsed


Detection


Summary and conclusionsEarthquake is one of the most extreme loading condition that a structure will experience during its design lifetime.

Advanced analytical tools are being developed to understand the seismic risk of the structures.

PBEE incorporates the state-of-the-art seismic


PBEE incorporates the state-of-the-art seismic assessment research outcome to allow engineers to share resources to quantify the performance of the structure.

Hence, structures can be designed to be more economical and resilient toward future earthquakes.

Together, we can make a difference!

Question?Thank you for your attention!


Tony T.Y. Yang, Ph.D., P.Eng.Professor, Department of Civil EngineeringThe University of British ColumbiaEmail: [email protected]; http://www.civil.ubc.ca/people/faculty/faculty-yang.phphttp://smartstructures.civil.ubc.ca/

Vancouver, Canada

I look forward to welcoming you to beautiful British ColumbiaProf. Tony T.Y. Yang, Ph.D., P.Eng. Email: [email protected]

2019 09 27 Padang Indonesia 52

Next-Generation Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering

Documents

Transcript of Next-Generation Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering