Performance-Based Evaluation Techniques for Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Structures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22399/ijcesen.2839Keywords:
Performance, Seismic vulnerability assessment, Reinforced concrete structures, Seismic hazard analysis, Retrofitting techniques, Structural resilienceAbstract
Performance-based evaluation methods are the key to determining the seismic resistance of reinforced concrete structures, to make them able to withstand seismic events. This study aims to develop advanced techniques for the seismic assessment of the structures, where structural integrity, deformation capacity, and energy dissipation mechanisms are key parameters. The entire study will be based on comprehensive analysis and simulation so that the behavior of the structure under the seismic load can be understood effectively and mitigation strategies can be developed. Through the integrated use of advanced computational models and seismic hazard scenarios, the study rates the performance of reinforced concrete structures in terms of displacement capacity, ductility, and overall structural response. Through the application of probabilistic seismic hazard assessment and fragility analysis, the research quantifies the seismic vulnerability of structures which in turn offers these insights for risk management and decision making. Besides, the research is carried out to develop novel retrofitting methods that improve the seismic resistance of existing RC structures considering parameters like material characteristics, structural geometry, and construction practices. The testing of the experiments and the numerical simulations are used to determine the effectiveness of the retrofitting techniques in the improvement of the seismic performance of the structures and to validate the effectiveness. These performance-based evaluation techniques offer a systematic method of assessing and reducing seismic vulnerability of reinforced concrete structures which is also a great contribution to the development of resilient infrastructure and enhancing the safety of the communities in earthquake-prone areas.
References
[1] Hasheminejad, S. M., & Kazemirad, S. (2008). Dynamic response of an eccentrically lined circular tunnel in poroelastic soil under seismic excitation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 28(4), 277–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2007.06.007.
[2] FEMA. (2009). Hawkins, N. M., & Ghosh, S. K. (2000). Proposed Revisions to 1997 NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for Precast Concrete Structures Part 3 Diaphragms. PCI Journal, 45(6), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.11012000.50.59.
[3] Aesthetic-based conflict in highway planning: Federal Highway Administration putting planners at risk. (1996). Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 30(1), 79–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/0965-8564(96)81165-7.
[4] Ramírez, W., Mayacela, M., Contreras, L., Iza, N., Quishpe, E., & Rentería, L. (2023). Economic Seismic Performance of Buildings with Peer Methodology and Fema P-58. Buildings, 13(9), 2259. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13092259.
[5] Del Gobbo, G. M., Williams, M. S., & Blakeborough, A. (2018). Seismic performance assessment of Eurocode 8-compliant concentric braced frame buildings using FEMA P-58. Engineering Structures, 155, 192–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.11.016.
[6] Cremen, G., & Baker, J. W. (2019). A Methodology for Evaluating Component-Level Loss Predictions of the FEMA P-58 Seismic Performance Assessment Procedure. Earthquake Spectra, 35(1), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1193/031618eqs061m.
[7] Afefy, H. M., Kassem, N. M., & Mahmoud, M. H. (2019). Retrofitting of faulty reinforced concrete frame structures using two strengthening techniques. Magazine of Concrete Research, 71(6), 309–324. https://doi.org/10.1680/jmacr.17.00441.
[8] 8 Hancher, A. (2017). 9.1 The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Youth Preparedness Council. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 56(10), S14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2017.07.053.
[9] ACI Committee 318. (2014). Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-14). American Concrete Institute.
[10] Miranda, E., & Bertero, V. V. (1994). Evaluation of Strength Reduction Factors for Earthquake-Resistant Design. Earthquake Spectra, 10(2), 357–379. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585778.
[11] FEMA. (2015). Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings (FEMA 547). Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[12] Paulay, T., & Priestley, M. J. N. (1992). Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. John Wiley & Sons.
[13] Hopkins, D. C. (1992). Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 25(4), 362. https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.25.4.362.
[14] Gwalani, P., & Singh, Y. (2022). Performance-Based Seismic Design of RC Structures. Springer Tracts in Civil Engineering, 309–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2324-1_13.
[15] FEMA. (2019). Seismic design of cast-in-place concrete diaphragms, chords, and collectors: A guide for practicing engineers (FEMA P-807). Federal Emergency
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Computational and Experimental Science and Engineering
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
