12.07.2015 Views

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

where σ 2 ( L T |C ) is the variance <strong>of</strong> the total loss in the building given that collapse has2occurred and σ ( L T | NC,IM ) is the variance <strong>of</strong> the total loss in the building given thatcollapse has not occurred at intensity level im which can be computed as a function <strong>of</strong>the dispersion in the losses <strong>of</strong> individual components as followsN N[ ]∑∑2 LT| NC,IM = ai⋅ aj⋅L L NC IM⋅i , j|,σ σLi| NC,IM L j|NC , IMi= 1 j=1σ ρ (6)where σ is the dispersion <strong>of</strong> the loss in the ith component when collapse hasL i | NC,IMnot occurred at intensity level im, and ρ is the correlation coefficient betweenLi , L j|NC,IMthe losses in the ith and jth components conditioned on IM when collapse has notoccurred.The correlation between the losses in two individual components conditioned onthe ground motion intensity level, ρ , can be computed asρ =Li, L j | NC,IMσσLiL j | NC,IMLi| NC,IMσL j | NC,IMLi,L j|NC , IMwhere σ L i L j | NC,IM is the covariance <strong>of</strong> the loss between the ith and jth componentsconditioned on IM , when collapse has not occurred. As will be explained later, thiscorrelation is a function <strong>of</strong> three correlations: (1) the correlation <strong>of</strong> the engineeringdemand parameters EDP (i.e., response parameters) that have an influence on thecomponents; (2) the correlation <strong>of</strong> the damages in the components conditioned on theEDP; and (3) the correlation between the repair/replacement costs <strong>of</strong> the componentsassociated with a given damage state. The proposed approach not only takes intoaccount the correlation between losses in individual components but also the variation<strong>of</strong> this correlation with changes in the ground motion intensity level.3.1 Structural Response Estimation3. BUILDING-SPECIFIC LOSSIn the proposed approach the mean annual frequency <strong>of</strong> exceedance <strong>of</strong> the intensitymeasure, IM, (i.e., the seismic hazard curve) is from a conventional probabilisticseismic hazard analysis. For the United States this information is readily available atclosely spaced grid points, that permit to obtain seismic hazard curves for any zipcode or any geographical coordinates in the country.The selection <strong>of</strong> the parameter to be used to characterize the ground motionintensity for the structure (i.e., the intensity measure IM) depends on a number <strong>of</strong>aspects such as the fundamental period <strong>of</strong> vibration <strong>of</strong> the structure, the responseparameters <strong>of</strong> interest, location <strong>of</strong> interest within the structure, level <strong>of</strong> nonlinearity,etc.(7)152

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!