LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Stefanidou, S.P.; Kappos, A. J. (2017)
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: TG, TA
Identifiers:doi:10.1002/eqe.2774
A new methodology for the development of bridge-specific fragility curves is proposed with a view to improving the reliability of loss assessment in road networks and prioritising retrofit of the bridge stock. The key features of the proposed methodology are the explicit definition of critical limit state thresholds for individual bridge components, with consideration of the effect of varying geometry, material properties, reinforcement and loading patterns on the component capacity; the methodology also includes the quantification of uncertainty in capacity, demand and damage state definition. Advanced analysis methods and tools (nonlinear static analysis and incremental dynamic response history analysis) are used for bridge component capacity and demand estimation, while reduced sampling techniques are used for uncertainty treatment. Whereas uncertainty in both capacity and demand is estimated from nonlinear analysis of detailed inelastic models, in practical application to bridge stocks, the demand is estimated through a standard response spectrum analysis of a simplified elastic model of the bridge. The simplified methodology can be efficiently applied to a large number of bridges (with different characteristics) within a road network, by means of an ad hoc developed software involving the use of a generic (elastic) bridge model, which derives bridge-specific fragility curves.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Billah AHMM, Alam MS. Seismic fragility assessment of highway bridges: a state-of-the-art review. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering 2015; 11(6):804-832.
    • 2. Cardone D. Displacement limits and performance displacement profiles in support of direct displacement-based seismic assessment of bridges. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2013; 43(8):1239-1263.
    • 3. Banerjee S, Shinozuka M. Nonlinear Static Procedure for Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Bridges. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering 2007; 22(4):293-305.
    • 4. Moschonas IF, Kappos AJ, Panetsos P, Papadopoulos V, Makarios T, Thanopoulos P. Seismic fragility curves for greek bridges: methodology and case studies. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2008; 7(2):439-468.
    • 5. Choi E, DesRoches R, Nielson B. Seismic fragility of typical bridges in moderate seismic zones. Engineering Structures 2004; 26(2):187-199.
    • 6. Zhang J, Huo Y. Evaluating effectiveness and optimum design of isolation devices for highway bridges using the fragility function method. Engineering Structures 2009; 31(8):1648-1660.
    • 7. DesRoches R, Padgett J, Ramanathan K, Dukes J. Feasibility Studies for Improving Caltrans Bridge Fragility Relationships. Report CA 12-1775. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, U.S.A, 2012.
    • 8. Berry M, Eberhard M. Performance Models for Flexural Damage in Reinforced Concrete Columns. PEER Report 2003/18, University of California, Berkeley, 2003.
    • 9. Nielson BG. Analytical Fragility Curves for Highway Bridges in Moderate Seismic Zones Analytical Fragility Curves for Highway Bridges in Moderate Seismic Zones. PhD Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 2005.
    • 10. Crowley H, Colombi M, Silva V, Monteiro R, Ozcebe S, Fardis M, Tsionis G, Askouni P. SYNERG : Deliverable D3.6-Fragility functions for roadway bridges, University of Pavia, Italy, 2011.
    • 11. Hwang H, Jernigan JB, Lin Y-W. Evaluation of Seismic Damage to Memphis Bridges and Highway Systems. Journal of Bridge Engineering, (ASCE) 2000; 5(4):322-330.
    • 12. Fajfar, P. Capacity Spectrum Method Based on Inelastic Demand Spectra. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 1999; 28(9):979-993.
    • 13. Shinozuka M, Feng MQ, Kim H, Kim S-H. Nonlinear Static Procedure for Fragility Curve Development. Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE) 2000; 126(12):1287-1295.
    • 14. Elnashai AS, Borzi B, Vlachos S. Deformation-based vulnerability functions for RC bridges. Structural Engineering and Mechanics 2004; 17(2):215-244.Kircher C, Nassar A, Kustu O, Holmes W. Development of buildings earthquake loss damage functions for earthquake loss estimation. Earthquake Spectra 1997; 13(4):663-682.
    • 15. Mackie KR, Nielson, BG. Uncertainty Quantification in Analytical Bridge Fragility Curves. Proc. of TCLEE :Lifeline Earthquake Engineering in a Multihazard Environment (ASCE), Oakland, California, 2009.
    • 16. Aviram A, Mackie K, Stojadinovic, B. Epistemic Uncertainty of Seismic Response Estimates for Reinforced Concrete Bridges. Proc. of 14th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering. Beijing, China, 2008.
    • 17. Towashiraporn, P. Building Seismic Fragilities using Response Surface Metamodels. PhD Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2004.
    • 18. Shinozuka M, Feng MQ, Lee J, Naganuma T. Statistical Analysis of Fragility Curves. Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE), 2000; 126(12):1224-1231.
    • 19. Padgett JE, Nielson BG, DesRoches R. Selection of optimal intensity measures in probabilistic seismic demand models of highway bridge portfolios. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2008; 37:711-725.
    • 20. Mander J, Basöz N. Enhanchement of the Highway Transportation Lifeline Module in HAZUS. Final Pre-Publication Draft (#7) prepared for the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), 1999.
    • 21. Kappos A, Sextos A, Stefanidou S, Mylonakis G, Pitsiava M, Sergiadis G. (2014). Seismic Risk of Inter-Urban Transportation Networks. Procedia-Economics & Finance 2014; 18:263 - 270
    • 22. Iman RL, Conover WJ. A distribution-free approach to inducing rank correlation among input variables. Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 2007; 11(3):311-334.
    • 23. Baker JW. Trade-offs in ground motion selection techniques for collapse assessment of structures. Proc. of Vienna Congress on Recent Advances in Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vienna, Austria, 2013, paper no. 123.
    • 24. Stefanidou S. Bridge Specific Fragility Curves for As Built and Retrofitted Bridges, PhD. Thesis (in greek). Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, 2015.
    • 25. Papanikolaou VK. Analysis of arbitrary composite sections in biaxial bending and axial load. Computers and Structures 2012; 98-99:33-54.
    • 26. Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R. Theoretical Stress-Strain Model for Confined Concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering 1988; 114(8):1804-1826.
    • 27. Kappos AJ. Analytical Prediction of the Collapse earthquake for R/C buildings : Suggested Methodology. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 1991; 20:167-176.
    • 28. Park R, Sampson RA. Ductility of Reinforced Concrete Column Sections in Seismic Design. ACI Journal Proceedings 1972; 69(9):543-555.
    • 29. McKeena F, Fenves GL. Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, 2015.
    • 30. Mathworks. Matlab: Language of Technical Computing. New York: Mathworks, 2011.
    • 31. Biskinis D, Fardis MN. Flexure-controlled ultimate deformations of members with continuous or lap-spliced bars. Structural Concrete 2010; 11(2):93-108.
    • 32. Priestley MJN, Calvi GM, Kowalsky MJ. Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Structures. IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy, 2007.
    • 33. Zahn FA, Park R, Priestley MJN. Flexural Strength and Ductility of Circular Hollow Reinforcement Concrete Columns without Confinement on Inside Face. ACI Structural Journal 1990; 87(2):156- 166.
    • 34. Lee J-H, Choi J-H, Hwang D-K, Kwahk I-J. Seismic performance of circular hollow RC bridge columns. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 2015; 19(5):1456-1467.
    • 35. Lu Y, Gu X, Guan J. Probabilistic Drift Limits and Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Columns. Journal of Structural Engineering 2005; 131(6):966-978.
    • 36. Qiang H, Xiuli D, Zhou Y, Lee, GC. Experimental study of hollow rectangular bridge column performance under vertical and cyclically bilateral loads, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration 2013; 12(3):433-445.
    • 37. Delgado R, Delgado P, Vila Pouca N, Arêde A, Rocha P, Costa A. Shear effects on hollow section piers under seismic actions: Experimental and numerical analysis. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2009; 7(2):377-389.
    • 38. Hannewald P, Beyer K. Plastic hinge models for the displacement-based assessment of wall-type bridge piers with poor detailing. Proc. of Vienna Congress on Recent Advances in Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics.Vienna, Austria, 2013, paper no. 218.
    • 39. Naeim F, Kelly JM. Design of Seismic Isolated Structures: From Theory to Practice. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, 1999.
    • 40. Dymiotis C, Kappos AJ, Chryssanthopoulos M., Seismic Reliability of Masonry-Infilled RC Frames. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2001; 127(3):296-305.
    • 41. Celik OC, Ellingwood BR. Seismic fragilities for non-ductile reinforced concrete frames - Role of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties. Structural Safety 2010; 32(1):1-12.
    • 42. Vamvatsikos, D. Estimating Seismic Performance Uncertainty using IDA with Progressive Accelerogram-wise Latin Hypercube Sampling. Proc. of 11th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering. Zurich, 2011.
    • 43. Katsanos EI, Sextos AG. ISSARS : An intergrated software environment for structure specific earthquake ground motion selection. Advances in Engineering Software 2013; 58:70-85.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article