Skip to main content
Log in

Performance-based seismic financial risk assessment of reinforced concrete frame structures

  • Published:
Journal of Central South University Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Engineering facilities subjected to natural hazards (such as winds and earthquakes) will result in risk when any designed system (i.e. capacity) will not be able to meet the performance required (i.e. demand). Risk might be expressed either as a likelihood of damage or potential financial loss. Engineers tend to make use of the former (i.e. damage). Nevertheless, other non-technical stakeholders cannot get useful information from damage. However, if financial risk is expressed on the basis of probable monetary loss, it will be easily understood by all. Therefore, it is necessary to develop methodologies which communicate the system capacity and demand to financial risk. Incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) was applied in a performance-based earthquake engineering context to do hazard analysis, structural analysis, damage analysis and loss analysis of a reinforced concrete (RC) frame structure. And the financial implications of risk were expressed by expected annual loss (EAL). The quantitative risk analysis proposed is applicable to any engineering facilities and any natural hazards. It is shown that the results from the IDA can be used to assess the overall financial risk exposure to earthquake hazard for a given constructed facility. The computational IDA-EAL method will enable engineers to take into account the long-term financial implications in addition to the construction cost. Consequently, it will help stakeholders make decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. CORNELL C A, JALAYER F, HAMBURGER R O. Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC federal emergency management agency steel moment frame guidelines[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2002, 128(4): 526–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. KRAWINKLER H, MIRANDA E. Performance-based earthquake engineering in earthquake engineering: From engineering seismology to performance-based engineering [M]. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  3. AUGUSTI G, CIAMPOLI M. Performance-based design in risk assessment and reduction [J]. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2008, 23(4): 496–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. BRADLEY B A, CUBRINOVSKI M, DHAKAL R P, MACRAE G A. Probabilistic seismic performance and loss assessment of a bridge-foundation-soil system [J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2010, 30(5): 395–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. ASLANI H, MIRANDA E. Probability-based seismic response analysis [J]. Engineering Structures, 2005, 279(8): 1151–1163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. BAKER J W. Probabilistic structural response assessment using vector-valued intensity measures [J]. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2007, 36: 1861–1883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. RUIZ G J. Performance-based assessment of existing structures accounting for residual displacements [D]. Stanford, California: Stanford University, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  8. KRAWINKLER H. A general approach to seismic performance assessment [C]// Proc International Conference on Advances and New Challenges in Earthquake Engineering Research, ICANCEER. Hong Kong, 2002: 173–180.

  9. DEIERLEIN G G, KRAWINKLER H, CORNELL C A. A framework for performance-based earthquake engineering [C]// Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Christchurch, New Zealand, 2003: 140.

  10. BAKER J W, CORNELL C A. Vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon [J]. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2005, 34(10): 1193–1217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. TOTHONG P, LUCO N. Probabilistic seismic demand analysis using advanced ground motion intensity measures [J]. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2007, 36(13): 1837–1860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. ALAVI B, KRAWINKLER H. Behavior of moment-resisting frame structures subjected to near-fault ground motions [J]. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2004, 33(6): 687–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. LUCO N, CORNELL C A. Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions [J]. Earthquake Spectral, 2007, 23(2): 357–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. BAKER J W, CORNELL C A. Vector-valued intensity measures for pulse-like near-fault ground motions [J]. Engineering Structures, 2008, 30: 1048–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. DHAKAL R P, MANDER J B. Financial risk assessment methodology for natural hazards [J]. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society of Earthquake Engineering, 2006, 39(2): 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  16. JGJ 3-2002, Technical specification for concrete structures of tall building [S].

  17. GB 50011-2001, Code for seismic design of buildings [S].

  18. VAMVATSIKOS D, CORNELL C A. Developing efficient scalar and vector intensity measures for IDA capacity estimation by incorporating elastic spectral shape information [J]. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2005, 34(13): 1573–1600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. ERBERIK M A, ELNASHAI A S. Fragility analysis of flat-slab structures [J]. Engineering Structures, 2004, 26: 937–948.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. VAMVATSIKOS D, CORNELL C A. Incremental dynamic analysis [J]. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2002, 31: 491–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. SHOME N, CORNELL C A, BAZZURRO P, CARBALLO J E. Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear responses [J]. Earthquake Spectra, 1998, 14(3): 469–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. OPENSEES. Open system for earthquake engineering simulation [EB/OL]. 2009, http://opensees.berkeley.edu.

  23. MANDER J B, DHAKAL R P, MASHIKO N, SOLBERG K M. Incremental dynamic analysis applied to seismic financial risk assessment of bridges [J]. Engineering Structures, 2007, 29: 2662–2672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. MARTINEZ M E. Performance-based seismic design and probabilistic assessment of reinforced concrete moment resisting frame structures [D]. New Zealand: Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  25. ZAREIAN F, KRAWINKLER H. Assessment of probability of collapse and design for collapse safety [J]. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2007, 36(13): 1901–1914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. KENNEDY R P, CORNELL C A, CAMPBELL R D, KAPLAN S, PERLA H F. Probabilistic seismic safety study of an existing nuclear power plant [J]. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 1980, 59(2): 315–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Federal emergency management agency (FEMA). Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment-frame buildings [R]. Rep. No. FEMA-350. Washington (DC): SAC Joint Venture, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hong-ping Zhu  (朱宏平).

Additional information

Foundation item: Project(2011CB013804) supported by the National Basic Research Program of China; Project(50925828) supported by the National Natural Science Funds for Distinguished Young Scholars of China

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wu, Qy., Zhu, Hp. & Fan, J. Performance-based seismic financial risk assessment of reinforced concrete frame structures. J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. 19, 1425–1436 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-012-1159-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-012-1159-2

Key words

Navigation