New Zealand specific consequence functions for seismic loss assessment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.1642Abstract
Quantitative seismic loss assessment has become an increasingly popular tool for evaluating the seismic performance of structures. The growth in popularity is largely in response to a desire to look beyond the traditional life safety performance objective and instead consider also economic losses and downtime due to earthquakes. A key step in the loss assessment calculation process is relating damage in both structural and nonstructural components to appropriate repair strategies and subsequently repair costs and repair times. This is achieved through the use of so-called consequence functions, which in this paper are derived specifically for the New Zealand context. Furthermore, a framework is established for other researchers and professional engineers to continue to build on and improve the initial dataset. It is shown that using New Zealand specific consequence functions can have a noticeable effect on estimates of expected annual loss when compared to a benchmark case using consequence functions from FEMA P-58. The opportunity is also taken to evaluate the impact of recent updates to the New Zealand National Seismic Hazard Model, with the results for a case-study building in Wellington indicating that the change in hazard has a far more significant effect on estimates of loss when compared to the choice of different consequence functions.
References
Hamburger RO (1996). “Implementing performance based seismic design in structural engineering practice”. Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico.
Porter KA (2003). “An overview of PEER’s performance-based earthquake engineering methodology”. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering (ICASP9), San Francisco.
Yeow TJ, Sullivan TJ and Elwood KJ (2018). “Evaluation of fragility functions with potential relevance for use in New Zealand”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 51(3): 127-144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.51.3.127-144
FEMA (2018). “FEMA P-58-3: Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings Volume 3 — Supporting Electronic Materials and Background Documentation, 3rd Edition”. Washington, DC.
FEMA (2018). “FEMA P-58-1: Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings Volume 1 — Methodology, 2nd Edition”. Washington, DC.
Sullivan TJ, Arifin FA, MacRae GA, Kurata M and Takeda T (2018). “Cost-effective consideration of non-structural elements: lessons from the Canterbury earthquakes”. Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Arifin FA, Sullivan TJ, MacRae G, Kurata M and Takeda T (2021). “Lessons for loss assessment from the Canterbury earthquakes: a 22-storey building”. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 19: 2081-2104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01055-7
Gardiner S, Clifton GC and MacRae GA (2013). “Performance, damage assessment, and repair of a multistorey eccentrically braced framed buildings following the Christchurch earthquake series”. Proceedings of the Steel Innovations Conference 2013, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Shegay A (2019). “Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Walls Designed for Ductility”. PhD Thesis, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
SESOC, NZSEE and NZCS (2009). Seismic Performance of Hollow Core Floor Systems, Preliminary Draft.
Arafin F, Sullivan TJ and Dhakal RP (2020). “Experimental investigations into the fragility of commercial glazing systems in New Zealand”. Proceedings of the 17th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Sendai, Japan.
Dhakal RP, Pourali A and Saha SK (2016). “Simplified seismic loss functions for suspended ceilings and drywall partitions”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 49(1): 64–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.49.1.64-78
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: https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.44.4.377-387
Lignos DG, Kolios D and Miranda E (2010). “Fragility assessment of reduced beam moment connections”. Journal of Structural Engineering, 136(9): 1140-1150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000214
Gulec CK, Gibbons B, Chen A and Whittaker AS (2011). “Damage states and fragility functions for link beams in eccentrically braced frames”. Journal of Construction Steel Research, 67(9): 1299-1309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2011.03.014
Han SW, Koh H and Lee CS (2020). “Fragility functions of different groups of diagonally reinforced concrete coupling beams (DRCBs)”. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 18: 165–187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00693-2
Memari AM, Behr RA and Kremer PA (2003). “Seismic behaviour of curtain walls containing insulating glass units”. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 9(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0431(2003)9:2(70)
Retamales R, Davies R, Mosqueda G and Filiatrault A (2013). “Experimental seismic fragility of cold-formed steel framed gypsum partition walls”. Journal of Structural Engineering, 139(8): 1285-1293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000657
McMullin KM and Merrick DS (2007). “Seismic damage thresholds for gypsum wallboard partition walls”. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 13(1): 22-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0431(2007)13:1(22)
Elwood KJ, Marquis F and Kim JH (2015). “Post-earthquake assessment and reparability of RC buildings: Lessons from Canterbury and emerging challenges”. Proceedings of the 10th Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Sydney, Australia.
McKenzie DJ (1969). “Behaviour of lifts: The Wellington earthquake of November 1, 1968”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering. 2(3), 278–281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.2.3.278-281
Khakurel S, Yeow TZ, Chen F, Wang Z, Saha SK and Dhakal RP (2019). “Development of cladding contribution functions for seismic loss estimation”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 52(1): 23-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.52.1.23-43
Yeow TJ, Orumiyehei A, Sullivan TJ, MacRae GA, Clifton GC and Elwood KJ (2018). “Seismic performance of steel friction connections considering direct-repair costs”. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16: 5963-5993. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0421-x
Bradley BA (2011). SLAT: Seismic Loss Assessment Tool (Version 1.16). Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
Stirling M, McVerry G, Gerstenberger M, Litchfield N, Van Dissen R, Berryman K, Barnes P, Wallace L, Villamor P, Langridge R, Lamarche G, Nodder S, Reyners M, Bradley B, Rhoades D, Smith W, Nicol A, Pettinga J, Clark K and Jacobs K (2012). “National seismic hazard model for New Zealand: 2010 update”. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 102(4): 1514–1542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1785/0120110170
Bradley BA (2013). “A New Zealand-specific pseudospectral acceleration ground-motion prediction equation for active shallow crustal earthquakes based on foreign models”. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103(3): 1801–1822. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120021
Gerstenberger M, et al. (2021). “The 2022 New Zealand National Seismic Hazard Model Revision”. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference, Christchurch.
https://nshm.gns.cri.nz/ (last accessed 20/3/2023).
