The state-of-the-practice in seismic network reliability assessment of highway bridges often ignores bridge failure correlations imposed by factors such as the network topology, construction methods, and present-day condition of bridges, among others. Additionally, aging bridge seismic fragilities are typically determined simply using historical estimates of deterioration parameters. This research presents a methodology to estimate bridge fragilities using spatially interpolated and updated deterioration parameters from a limited set of instrumented bridges in the network, while incorporating the impacts of overlooked correlation factors in bridge fragility estimates. Simulated samples of correlated bridge failures are used in an enhanced Monte Carlo method to assess bridge network reliability, and the impact of different correlation structures on the network reliability is discussed. The presented methodology aims to provide more realistic estimates of seismic reliability of aging transportation networks and to potentially help network stakeholders to more accurately identify critical bridges for maintenance and retrofit prioritization.
AlipourA., ShafeiB., and ShinozukaM., 2011. Performance evaluation of deteriorating highway bridges located in high seismic areas, Journal of Bridge Engineering16, 597–611.
3.
BakerJ. W., and CornellC. A., 2005. A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics34, 1193–1217.
4.
BocchiniP., and FrangopolD. M., 2011. Generalized bridge network performance analysis with correlation and time-variant reliability, Structural Safety33, 155–164.
5.
BoxG. E. P., and WilsonK. B., 1951. On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Ser. B13, 1–45.
6.
BucherC. G., and BourgundU., 1990. A fast and efficient response surface approach for structural reliability problems, Structural Safety7, 57–66.
7.
ChoeD.-E., GardoniPaolo, RosowskyD., and HaukaasT., 2008. Probabilistic capacity models and seismic fragility estimates for RC columns subject to corrosion, Reliability Engineering & System Safety93, 383–393.
8.
ChoeD.-E., GardoniPaolo, RosowskyD., and HaukaasT., 2009. Seismic fragility estimates for reinforced concrete bridges subject to corrosion, Structural Safety31, 275–283.
9.
CongdonP., 2007. Bayesian Statistical Modelling, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 596 pp.
10.
CressieN. A. C., 1993. Statistics for Spatial Data, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 928 pp.
11.
EmrichL. J., and PiedmonteM. R., 1991. A method for generating high-dimensional multivariate binary variates, The American Statistician45, 302–304.
12.
EnrightM. P., and FrangopolD. M., 1998. Probabilistic analysis of resistance degradation of reinforced concrete bridge beams under corrosion, Engineering Structures20, 960–971.
13.
EnrightM. P., and FrangopolD. M., 1999. Condition prediction of deteriorating concrete bridges using Bayesian updating, Journal of Structural Engineering125, 1118–1125.
14.
GassmanS. L., and TawhedW. F., 2004. Nondestructive assessment of damage in concrete bridge decks, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities18, 220–231.
15.
GhoshJ., and PadgettJ. E., 2010. Aging considerations in the development of time-dependent seismic fragility curves, Journal of Structural Engineering136, 1497–1511.
16.
GhoshJ., and PadgettJ. E., 2012. Impact of multiple component deterioration and exposure conditions on seismic vulnerability of concrete bridges, Earthquakes and Structures, in press.
17.
GoosP., and JonesB., 2011. Optimal Design of Experiments: A Case Study Approach, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 304 pp.
18.
GuanX. L., and MelchersR. E., 2001. Effect of response surface parameter variation on structural reliability estimates, Structural Safety23, 429–444.
19.
HuangQ., GardoniPaolo, and HurlebausS., 2009. Probabilistic capacity models and fragility estimates for reinforced concrete columns incorporating NDT data, Journal of Engineering Mechanics135, 1384–1392.
20.
JayaramN., and BakerJ. W., 2009. Correlation model for spatially distributed ground-motion intensities, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics38, 1687–1708.
21.
JayaramN., and BakerJ. W., 2010. Efficient sampling and data reduction techniques for probabilistic seismic lifeline risk assessment, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics39, 1109–1131.
22.
KangW.-H., SongJ., and GardoniP., 2008. Matrix-based system reliability method and applications to bridge networks, Reliability Engineering and System Safety93, 1584–1593.
23.
KazmerD. O., 2009. Plastics Manufacturing Systems Engineering, Hanser Publishers, Cincinnati, OH, 502 pp.
24.
KieferJ., and WolfowitzJ., 1959. Optimum designs in regression problems, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics30, 271–294.
25.
KiremidjianA., StergiouE., and LeeR., 2007. Issues in seismic risk assessment of transportation networks, Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering6, 461–480.
26.
KoutsourelakisP. S., 2010. Assessing structural vulnerability against earthquakes using multidimensional fragility surfaces: A Bayesian framework, Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics25, 49–60.
27.
KrigeD. G., 1951. A Statistical Approach to Some Mine Valuation and Allied Problems on the Witwatersrand, University of the Witwatersrand, 272 pp.
28.
LeeR., and KiremidjianA. S., 2007. Uncertainty and correlation for loss assessment of spatially distributed systems, Earthquake Spectra23, 753–770.
29.
LeischF., WeingesselA., and HornikK., 1998. On the generation of correlated artificial binary data, Working Paper No. 13, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, Vienna, Austria.
30.
LiuW., and LiJ., 2012. An improved cut-based recursive decomposition algorithm for reliability analysis of networks, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration11, 1–10.
31.
LunnA. D., and DaviesS. J., 1998. A note on generating correlated binary variables, Biometrika85, 487–490.
32.
MackanessW., and BeardK., 1993. Visualization of interpolation accuracy, in Proceedings, Auto Carto, 228–237.
33.
MarshP. S., and FrangopolD. M., 2008. Reinforced concrete bridge deck reliability model incorporating temporal and spatial variations of probabilistic corrosion rate sensor data, Reliability Engineering & System Safety93, 394–409.
34.
MazzoniS., McKennaF., ScottM. H., and FenvesG. L., 2009. OpenSees Command Language Manual, Command Language Manual, University of California, Berkeley.
35.
MoncmanováA., 2007. Environmental Deterioration of Materials, WIT Press, Southampton, UK.
36.
MountN., AplinP., and PriestnallG., 2008. Representing, Modeling, and Visualizing the Natural Environment, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 416 pp.
37.
MyersJ. C., 1997. Geostatistical Error Management: Quantifying Uncertainty for Environmental Sampling and Mapping, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 571 pp.
38.
NielsonB. G., 2005. Analytical Fragility Curves for Highway Bridges in Moderate Seismic Zones, Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
39.
NielsonB. G., and DesRochesR., 2007. Analytical Seismic Fragility Curves for Typical Bridges in the Central and Southeastern United States, Earthquake Spectra23, 615–633.
40.
OleaR. A., 1999. Geostatistics for Engineers and Earth Scientists, Springer, New York, 303 pp.
41.
PadgettJ. E., and DesRochesR., 2007. Bridge Functionality Relationships for Improved Seismic Risk Assessment of Transportation Networks, Earthquake Spectra23, 115–130.
42.
ParkC. G., ParkT., and ShinD. W., 1996. A simple method for generating correlated binary variates, The American Statistician50, 306–310.
43.
R Development Core Team, 2010. The R Project for Statistical Computing, available at http://www.r-project.org/ (last accessed 30 December 2011).
44.
RajashekharM. R., and EllingwoodB. R., 1993. A new look at the response surface approach for reliability analysis, Structural Safety12, 205–220.
45.
ReimannC., 2008. Statistical Data Analysis Explained: Applied Environmental Statistics with R, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 362 pp.
RokneddinK., GhoshJayadipta, Dueñas-OsorioL., and PadgettJ., 2011. Bridge retrofit prioritization for aging transportation networks subject to seismic hazards, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, in press.
48.
SimpsonT. W., PoplinskiJ. D., KochP. N., and AllenJ. K., 2001. Metamodels for computer-based engineering design: Survey and recommendations, Engineering With Computers17, 129–150.
49.
StewartM. G., 2004. Spatial variability of pitting corrosion and its influence on structural fragility and reliability of RC beams in flexure, Structural Safety26, 453–470.
50.
StewartM. G., and SuoQ., 2009. Extent of spatially variable corrosion damage as an indicator of strength and time-dependent reliability of RC beams, Engineering Structures31, 198–207.
51.
StraubD., and Armen Der KiureghianM., 2010. Bayesian network enhanced with structural reliability methods: Methodology, Journal of Engineering Mechanics136, 1248–1258.
52.
StraussA., FrangopolD. M., and KimS., 2008. Use of monitoring extreme data for the performance prediction of structures: Bayesian updating, Engineering Structures30, 3654–3666.
53.
The MathWorks, 2004. MATLAB, The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA.
54.
TowashirapornP., 2004. Building Seismic Fragilities Using Response Surface Metamodels, Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
55.
TrauthM. H., GebbersR. (CON), and MarwanN. (CON), 2010. MATLAB® Recipes for Earth Sciences, Springer, New York.
56.
WenY. K., and WuC. L., 2001. Uniform hazard ground motions for Mid-America cities, Earthquake Spectra17, 359–384.
57.
WessonR. L., PerkinsD. M., LucoN., and KaracaE., 2009. Direct calculation of the probability distribution for earthquake losses to a portfolio, Earthquake Spectra25, 687–706.
58.
WessonR. L., and PerkinsD. M., 2001. Spatial correlation of probabilistic earthquake ground motion and loss, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America91, 1498–1515.
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.
