Seismic fragility functions for a pervasive unique form of construction with very high potential for social losses in Trinidad and Tobago: Two-story houses

Abstract

The twin-island republic of Trinidad and Tobago is fortunate to have a long history of abundance of natural resources resulting in its being a major source of economic support for the English-speaking sovereign states of the Caribbean. The economic stability of the Caribbean is threatened, via a domino effect, by the current prevalent form of residential structures in Trinidad and Tobago because of a lack of conformity with proper seismic design in an earthquake-prone region (S_S of 1.1 g–1.8 g). Continuing from a previous study of single-story houses in Trinidad and Tobago, fragility functions for three types of typical two-story residential structures were derived using Incremental Dynamic Analysis considering both aleatory and epistemic uncertainties. The selected ground motion records are compatible with spectra derived for Trinidad and Tobago. Fragility functions for the structures are with respect to limit states of slight, moderate, extensive, and complete damage as well as out-of-plane dynamic instability. These fragility functions can be used for regional risk assessment hence the derivation of disaster mitigation and management plans thereby avoiding a major crisis in the Caribbean.

Keywords

Fragility vulnerability nonlinear dynamics houses Caribbean

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2008) Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary (ACI 318-08). Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2010) Standard Specification for Structural Clay Load-Bearing Wall Tile, C34-10. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2007) Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, ASCE 41-06. Reston, VA: ASCE.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2017) Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7–16. Reston, VA: ASCE.

Applied Technology Council (ATC) (2007) Guidelines for Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings, ATC-58. Redwood City, CA: ATC.

Cavalieri

(2013) SYNER-G Reference Report-4: Guidelines for Deriving Seismic Fragility Functions of Elements at Risk: Buildings, Lifelines, Transportation Networks and Critical Facilities. Brussels: European Commission.

Clarke

(1998) The hysteretic behavior of ferrocement-retrofitted clay block masonry walls under in-plane reversed cyclic lateral loads: Experimental investigations and graphical computer models. PhD Thesis, The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago.

Clarke

(2011) Seismic structural vulnerability—A presentation to the global earthquake model workshop, Trinidad. Available at: http://uwiseismic.com/Downloads/STRUCTURAL%20VULNERABILITY%20-%20GEM%20Workshop%20-%20Clarke.pdf (accessed 24 June 2021).

Clarke

(2017) Seismic fragility functions for light unreinforced masonry single-story residential structures in Trinidad and Tobago. West Indian Journal of Engineering 39(2): 137–145.

10.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2003) HAZUS MR4 Technical Manual: Multi-hazard Loss Estimation Methodology. Washington, DC: DHS.

11.

Dolsek

(2009) Incremental dynamic analysis with consideration of modeling uncertainties. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 38: 805–825.

12.

Elnashi

Papanikolaou

Lee

(2009) Zeus NL—A System for Inelastic Analysis of Structures (Version 1.8.7). Champaign, IL: Mid-America Earthquake Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, p. 115.

13.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1997) NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (FEMA 273). Washington, DC: FEMA.

14.

International Code Council (ICC) (2009) International Building Code 2009 (IBC 2009). Lenexa, KS: ICC.

15.

Kumar

(2006) Software for generation of spectrum compatible time history having same phase as of a given time history, Paper 172. In: Proceedings of the 8th U.S. national conference on earthquake engineering, San Francisco, CA, 18–22 April. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI). ISBN 9781615670444.

16.

Kwon

Kim

(2010) Case study: Analytical investigation on the failure of a two-story RC building damaged during the 2007 Pisco-Chincha earthquake. Engineering Structures 32(7): 1876–1887.

17.

McKenna

Fenves

(2004) Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.

18.

Pacific Earthquake Engineer Research Center (PEER) (2009) PEER strong motion database. Available at: https://apps.peer.berkeley.edu/publications/peer_reports/reports_2013/webPEER-2013-03-Ancheta.pdf (accessed 16 November 2009).

19.

Priestley

MJN

(1985) Seismic behavior of unreinforced masonry walls. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 18(2): 191–205.

20.

Seismic Research Centre (SRC) of The University of the West Indies (UWI) (2009) Seismic hazard maps. Available at: http://uwiseismic.com/Maps.aspx (accessed 12 November 2009).

21.

Seismic Research Centre (SRC) of The University of the West Indies (UWI) (2017) Eastern Caribbean earthquakes. Available at: http://uwiseismic.com/General.aspx?id=16 (accessed 18 August 2017).

22.

Shome

Cornell

Bazzurro

Carballo

(1998) Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear responses. Earthquake Spectra 14(3): 469–500.

23.

United States Geological Survey (USGS) (2010) Seismic hazard maps. Available at: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000h60h/executive (accessed 12 March 2010).

24.

Vamvatsikos

Cornell

(2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 31: 491–514.