Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Despite significant progress made recently on simplifying the loss estimation procedures, they are not easy to use in engineering design practice. One of the reasons for this is insufficient information regarding the inevitable variations in the type and density of structural and non-structural components present in various building usages. This study aims to establish building usage groups with similar proportions of structural and non-structural components and compute the corresponding weighting factors. The methodology adopted in this study can be used in other regions; however, herein concluded values and building usage groups are based on New Zealand–specific information. The method involves extracting component construction/installation costs from construction handbooks for a range of different building usages, assembling components into three performance groups (structural, drift-sensitive non-structural, and acceleration-sensitive non-structural), then grouping the building types based on similar structural and non-structural component costs. Four different building usage groups are identified, and probabilistic distribution parameters of the performance group weighting factors for each group are proposed. A case study demonstrating the application of these weighting factors in seismic loss estimation is provided.

Keywords

Component cost building occupancy group performance group weighting factor seismic loss estimation loss optimization seismic design

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aslani

Miranda

(2005) Probability-based seismic response analysis. Engineering Structures 27(8): 1151–1163.

Bradley

Cubrinovski

Dhakal

, et al. (2010a) Probabilistic seismic performance and loss assessment of a bridge-foundation-soil system. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 30(5): 395–411.

Bradley

Dhakal

Cubrinovski

, et al. (2009) Seismic loss estimation for efficient decision making. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 42(2): 96–110.

Bradley

Dhakal

Cubrinovski

, et al. (2010b) Prediction of spatially distributed seismic demand in specific structures: Structural response to loss estimation. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 39(6): 591–613.

Bull

Brunsdon

(1998) Examples of Concrete Structural Design to New Zealand Standards 3101. Wellington, New Zealand: Cement and Concrete Association.

Deierlein

Krawinkler

Cornell

(2003) A framework for performance-based earthquake engineering. In: 7th Pacific conference on earthquake engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand, 13–15 February.

Dhakal

Mander

(2006) Financial risk assessment methodology for natural hazards. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 39(2): 91–105.

Dhakal

Saha

(2017) Loss optimization seismic design (LOSD): Beyond seismic loss assessment. In: 16th world conference on earthquake engineering, Santiago, 9–13 January.

Dhakal

Mander

(2010) Seismic financial loss estimation of steel moment frame buildings. International Review of Civil Engineering 1(2): 130–142.

10.

Dhakal

Pourali

Saha

(2016) Simplified seismic loss functions for suspended ceilings and drywall partitions. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 49(1): 64–78.

11.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2012) Next-generation methodology for seismic performance assessment of buildings. Report No. FEMA P-58. Washington, DC: FEMA.

12.

Khakurel

Yeow

Chen

, et al. (2019) Development of cladding contribution functions for seismic loss estimation. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 52(1): 23–43.

13.

NZS3101 (1995) Concrete structures standard.

14.

Papadopoulos

Vamvatsikos

Kazantzi

(2019) Development and application of FEMA P-58 compatible story loss functions. Earthquake Spectra 35(1): 95–112.

15.

QV costbuilder (2019). Available at: www.qvcostbuilder.co.nz (accessed 2 August 2019).

16.

Ramirez

Miranda

(2009) Building-specific loss estimation methods and tools for simplified performance-based earthquake engineering. Report No. 171. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

17.

Saha

Bong

Dhakal

(2017) Contribution of structural wall damage in seismic loss of RC buildings. In: 12th international conference on structural safety and reliability, Vienna, 6–10 August.

18.

Solberg

Dhakal

Mander

, et al. (2008) Computational and rapid expected annual loss estimation methodologies for structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 31(1): 81–101.

19.

Sullivan

(2016) Use of limit state loss versus intensity models for simplified estimation of expected annual loss. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 20(6): 954–974.

20.

Taghavi

Miranda

(2003) Response assessment of nonstructural building elements. PEER Report 2003/05. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.

21.

Wethey

(2011). Available at: https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2011/02/earthquake-in-new-zealand/100013/#img25 (accessed 18 June 2018).

22.

Yeow

Baird

Ferner

(2017) Which building components caused injuries in recent New Zealand earthquakes. In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering conference, Wellington, New Zealand, 27–29 April.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.15 MB

Performance group weighting factors for rapid seismic loss estimation of buildings of different usage

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material