Analytical versus observational fragilities: the case of Pettino (L’Aquila) damage data database
Analytical versus observational fragilities: the case of Pettino (L’Aquila) damage data database
复制标题
分析脆弱性与观察脆弱性：佩蒂诺（拉奎拉）损坏数据数据库的案例
DOI：
10.1007/s10518-014-9658-1
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
G. Manfredi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
F. Luca;G. Verderame;G. Manfredi
2009年拉奎拉（意大利）地震后收集的131座钢筋混凝土（RC）建筑物的损坏数据数据库，用于评估观察到的脆弱性曲线。损伤数据的具体解释允许进行轻微、中度和重度损伤的脆性曲线，（即，DS 1、DS 2和DS 3），根据EMS 98宏观地震标度定义。然后采用观测脆性曲线对FAST分析方法进行校准。FAST方法是一种基于谱的方法，用于估计DS 3以下填充RC建筑物的易损性曲线，再次根据EMS 98进行评估。采用Kullback-Leibler分歧来检查分析脆弱性和观测脆弱性之间的匹配性。FAST输入变量可以在相当大的范围内变化，校准提供了一个有价值的建议，在其他情况下，现场损坏数据不可用的方法的应用。结果表明，对于标定的输入变量，优化值与文献中假定的典型值吻合较好。分析结果表明，DS 2和DS 3的观测数据非常令人满意的协议，而系统的低估的情况下，DS 1。
A damage data database of 131 reinforced concrete (RC) buildings, collected after 2009 L’Aquila (Italy) earthquake, is employed for the evaluation of observational fragility curves. The specific interpretation of damage data allowed carrying out fragility curves for slight, moderate, and heavy damage, (i.e., DS1, DS2, and DS3), defined according to EMS 98 macroseismic scale. Observational fragility curves are then employed for the calibration of FAST analytical methodology. FAST method is a spectral based approach, meant for the estimate of fragility curves of infilled RC buildings up to DS3, evaluated, again, according to EMS98. Kullback–Leibler divergence is employed to check the matching between analytical and observational fragilities. FAST input variables can vary in quite large ranges and the calibration provides a valuable suggestion for the application of the method in other cases in which field damage data are not available. Results showed that optimizing values, for the input variables calibrated, are in good agreement with typical values assumed in literature. Analytical results showed a very satisfactory agreement with observational data for DS2 and DS3, while systematical underestimation was found for the case of DS1.