Computation of bridge seismic fragility by large‐scale simulation for probabilistic resilience analysis
Computation of bridge seismic fragility by large‐scale simulation for probabilistic resilience analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/eqe.2567
复制
发表时间：
2015-09
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Aman Karamlou;P. Bocchini
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Aman Karamlou;P. Bocchini
结构和基础设施系统的地震弹性是灾害管理领域中一个快速发展的概念，它促进了社区在极端事件下的抵抗和快速恢复。在这场竞赛中，概率地震需求和易损性分析是大多数拟议方法中地震弹性评估的两个关键要素。计算不同类型结构的脆性曲线有几种方法。特别是，为了评估区域交通基础设施的抗震性能，需要整类桥梁的易损性曲线估计方法。这些方法通常依赖于一组假设，部分原因是信息有限。当计算资源不足以用于纯数值方法时，引入了其他假设，而封闭形式的解决方案是一种方便的替代方案。例如，其中一些流行的假设旨在简化工程需求模型。在本文中，提出了一种基于模拟的方法，以利用当今广泛可用的计算资源，并避免对需求的这种假设。由此产生的精度提高是在典型的桥梁（多跨简支）上估计的。最重要的是，在生命周期损失估计分析和恢复力分析的背景下评估了假设的定量影响。结果表明，一些假设保持了可接受的精度水平，但其他假设在易损性曲线中引入了相当大的误差，进而在结构的预期弹性和生命周期损失中引入了相当大的误差。版权所有©2015 John Wiley & Sons， Ltd
Seismic resilience of structures and infrastructure systems is a fast developing concept in the field of disaster management, promoting communities that are resistant and quickly recoverable in case of an extreme event. In this contest, probabilistic seismic demand and fragility analyses are two key elements of the seismic resilience assessment in the majority of the proposed methodologies. Several techniques are available to calculate fragility curves for different types of structures. In particular, to assess the seismic performance of the regional transportation infrastructure, methods for the fragility curve estimation for entire classes of bridges are required. These methods usually rely on a set of assumptions, partially because of the limited information. Other assumptions were introduced at the time when computational resources were inadequate for a purely numerical approach and closed‐form solutions were a convenient alternative. For instance, some of these popular assumptions are aimed at simplifying the model of the engineering demand. In this paper, a simulation‐based methodology is proposed, to take advantage of the computational resources widely available today and avoid such assumptions on the demand. The resulting increase in accuracy is estimated on a typical class of bridges (multi‐span simply supported). Most importantly, the quantitative impact of the assumptions is assessed in the context of a life‐cycle loss estimation analysis and resilience analysis. The results show that some assumptions preserve an acceptable level of accuracy, but others introduce a considerable error in the fragility curves and, in turn, in the expected resilience and life‐cycle losses of the structure. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.