Simplified seismic loss functions for suspended ceilings and drywall partitions


Post-disaster reconnaissance reports frequently list non-structural components (NSCs) as a major source of financial loss in earthquakes. Moreover, minimizing their damage is also of vital significance to the uninterrupted functionality of a building. For efficient decision making, it is important to be able to estimate the cost and downtime associated with the repair of the damage likely to be caused at different hazard levels used in seismic design. Generalized loss functions for two important NSCs commonly used in New Zealand, namely suspended ceilings and drywall partitions are developed in this study. The methodology to develop the loss functions, in the form of engineering demand parameter vs. expected loss due to the considered components, is based on the existing framework for the storey level loss estimation. Nevertheless, exhaustive construction/field data are employed to make these loss functions more generic. In order to estimate financial losses resulting from the failure of suspended ceilings, generalized ceiling fragility functions are developed and combined with the cost functions, which give the loss associated with typical ceilings at various peak acceleration demands. Similarly, probabilities of different damage states in drywall partitions are combined with their associated repair/replacement costs to find the cumulative distribution of the expected loss due to partitions at various drift levels, which is then normalized in terms of the total building cost. Efficiencies of the developed loss functions are investigated through detailed loss assessment of case study reinforced concrete (RC) buildings. It is observed that the difference between the expected losses for ceilings, predicted by the developed generic loss function, and the losses obtained from the detailed loss estimation method is within 5%. Similarly, the developed generic loss function for partitions is able to estimate the partition losses within 2% of that from the detailed loss assessment. The results confirm the accuracy of the proposed generic seismic loss functions.


Taghavi S and Miranda E (2003). “Response Assessment of Non-Structural Building Elements”. PEER report 2003/05, College of Engineering, University of California Berkeley, USA.

Braga F, Manfredi V, Masi A, Salvatori A and Vona M (2011). “Performance of Non-Structural Elements in RC Buildings during the L’Aquila, 2009 Earthquake”. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 9(1): 307-324. DOI:

Bradley BA, Dhakal RP, Cubrinovski M, MacRae GA and Lee DS (2008). “Seismic Loss Estimation for Efficient Decision Making”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 42(2): 96-110. DOI:

Dhakal RP, Pourali A, Tasligedik S, Yeow T, Baird A, MacRae G, Pampanin S and Palermo A (2016). “Seismic Performance of Non-Structural Components and Contents in Buildings: An Overview of NZ Research”. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, (In-Press). DOI:

Freeman JR (1932). “Earthquake Damage and Earthquake Insurance: Studies of Rational Basis for Earthquake Insurance, Also Studies of Engineering Data for Earthquake Resisting Construction”. 1st edition, McGrawHill, NY, USA.

Scholl RE (1979). “Seismic Damage Assessment for High- Rise Buildings: Annul Technical Report”. URS/John A. Blume & Associates Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.

Steinburgge KV (1982). “Earthquakes, Volcanoes, and Tsunamis: An Anatomy of Hazards”. 1st edition, Skandia America Group, NY, USA.

Singhal A and Kiremidjian AS (1996). “A Method for Earthquake Motion-Damage Relationships with Application to Reinforced Concrete Frames”. Report No. 119, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Kircher CA, Reitherman RK, Whitman R, and Arnold C (1997). “Estimation of Earthquake Losses to Buildings”. Earthquake Spectra, 13(4): 703-720. DOI:

Moehle JP and Deirelein GG (2004). “A Framework Methodology for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering”. Proceedings of 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1-6 August.

Yang TY, Moehle JP, Stodjadinivic B and Kiureghian AD (2006). “An Application of the PEER Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Methodology”. Proceedings of 8th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA, US.

Aslani H and Miranda E (2005). “Probabilistic Earthquake Loss Estimation and Loss Disaggregation in Buildings”. Report No. 157, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Solberg KM, Dhakal RP, Mander JB and Bradley BA (2008). “Computational and Rapid Expected Annual Loss Estimation Methodologies for Structures”. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 37(1): 81-101. DOI:

Mitrani-Reiser J (2007). “An Ounce of Prevention: Probabilistic Loss Estimation for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering”. Ph.D. Dissertation, California Institute of Technology, California, USA.

Ramirez CM and Miranda E (2009). “Building-Specific Loss Estimation Methods & Tools for Simplified Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering”. Technical Report No. 171, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

FEMA (2012). “Next-Generation Methodology for Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings”. Report No. FEMA P-58, Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., USA.

Cutfield M, Ryan K and Ma Q (2015). “Comparative Life Cycle Analysis of Conventional and Base Isolated Buildings”. Earthquake Spectra. (In-Press) DOI:

Dhakal RP (2010). “First Step towards Loss Optimization Seismic Design (LOSD)”. Proceedings of Asian Conference on Earthquake Engineering (ACEE), Bangkok, Thailand, 1-3 December.

Bradley BA (2008). “SLAT: Seismic Loss Assessment Tool, Version 1.12 User Manual”. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Farokhnia K and Porter K (2012). “Estimating the Non- Structural Seismic Vulnerability of Building Categories”. Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 20-24 September.

Hamburger RO, Rojahn C, Heintz JA and Mahoney MG (2012). “FEMA P58: Next-Generation Building Seismic Performance Assessment Methodology”. Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 20-24 September.

NZS1170.5 (2004). “Structural Design Actions Part 5: Earthquake Actions”. Standards New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand.

Miranda E and Taghavi S (2009). “A Comprehensive Study of Floor Acceleration Demands in Multi-Story Buildings”. Proceedings of ATC and SEI Conference on Improving the Seismic Performance of Existing Buildings and Other Structures, San Francisco, California, USA, 9- 11 December. DOI:

Sullivan TJ, Calvi PM and Nascimbene R (2013). “Towards Improved Floor Spectra Estimates for Seismic Design”. Earthquakes and Structures, 4(1): 109-132. DOI:

Armstrong (2013). “Seismic Design Guide New Zealand Version, Suspended Ceiling Systems”. Armstrong, Auckland, New Zealand.

Dhakal RP (2010). “Damage to Non-Structural Components and Contents in 2010 Darfield Earthquake”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 43(4): 404-411. DOI:

Dhakal RP, MacRae GA and Hogg K (2011). “Performance of Ceilings in the February 2011 Christchurch Earthquake”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 44(4): 377-387. DOI:

MacRae G, Hair J and Dhakal R (2011). “Ceiling Damage in the 2010 Canterbury Earthquake”. Proceedings of Joint 8th Center for Urban Earthquake Engineering (CUEE) and 8th International Conference on Earthquake Engineering (ICEE) Conference, Tokyo, Japan, 7-8 March.

Paganotti G, MacRae G and Dhakal R (2011). “Development of Typical NZ Ceiling System Seismic Fragilities”. Proceedings of the Ninth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering: Building an Earthquake- Resilient Society, Auckland, New Zealand, 14-16 April.

Dhakal RP, MacRae GA, Pourali A and Paganotti G (2016). “Seismic Fragility of Suspended Ceiling Systems Used in NZ Based on Component Tests”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering: Special Issue on the Seismic Performance of Non-Structural Elements in Buildings, 49(1): 45-64. DOI:

IFI 114: American Standard Blind Rivet. “Break Mandrel Rivets, Industrial Fasteners Institute”. USA.

Badillo-Almaraz H, Whittaker AS, Reinhorn AM (2007). “Seismic Fragility of Suspended Ceiling Systems”. Earthquake Spectra, 23(1): 21-40. DOI:

USG Australia (2012). “Generic Seismic Design for USG DONN Exposed Grid Suspended Ceilings”. USG, Auckland, New Zealand.

Giddens C (2013). “Rawlinsons New Zealand Construction Handbook”. Rawlinsons Media Limited, Auckland, New Zealand.

Tasligedik AS, Pampanin S and Palermo A (2014). “Low Damage Seismic Solutions for Non-Structural Drywall Partitions”. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 13(4): 1029-1050.

Tasligedik AS, Pampanin S and Palermo A (2012). “Damage States and Cyclic Behaviour of Drywalls Infilled Within RC Frames”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 45(2): 84-94. DOI:

Lee TH, Kato M, Matsumiya T, Suita K and Nakashima M (2007). “Seismic Performance Evaluation of Non-Structural Components: Drywall Partitions”. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 36(3): 367-382. DOI:

Porter KA and Kiremidjian AS (2001). “Assembly-Based Vulnerability of Buildings and Its Uses in Seismic Performance Evaluation and Risk Management Decision-Making”. Report No. 309, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Rihal SS (1982). “Behaviour of Non-Structural Building Partitions during Earthquakes”. Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium on Earthquake Engineering, Roorkee, India, 10-12 November.

Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission (2012). “Final Report Volume 2: The Performance of Christchurch CBD Buildings”. Christchurch, New Zealand.

How to Cite
Dhakal, R. P., Pourali, A., & Saha, S. K. (2016). Simplified seismic loss functions for suspended ceilings and drywall partitions. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 49(1), 64-78.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 > >>