Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Abstract: Long-period ground motions from large-magnitude distant earthquakes can cause serious damage to high-rise buildings, even to
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Louisiana Dept Trans & Dev on 06/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
those located in intraplate urban areas. Real-time monitoring and postearthquake performance assessment of high-rise buildings are therefore
essential. Using an integrated optimal sensor placement and response reconstruction scheme, this paper proposes a determinstic real-time
warning system and a probabilistic postearthquake performance assessment method for high-rise buildings during and after long-period
earthquakes, respectively. Both the warning system and the assessment method make good use of the accurate and complete estimation
of all the key structural responses reconstructed from the incomplete measurement data from limited sensors installed in the building.
The warning system monitors the building structural behavior in real-time and issues various levels of warning whenever it detects structural
responses exceeding the preset safety thresholds. The assessment method evaluates the structural component integrity after an earthquake in a
probabilistic manner, incorporating the extreme value distribution of the reconstructed structural responses with the structural component
fragility functions to determine the damage probabilities of the structural components. The proposed warning system and assessment method
were applied to a superhigh-rise building as a case study. The results from the case study showed that the proposed warning system and
assessment method are feasible and effective and have good potential for real application in high-rise buildings. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)
ST.1943-541X.0002323. © 2019 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Introduction engineers, and such an assessment can take a long time to be com-
pleted, causing considerable financial losses to the owners, particu-
High-rise buildings, even those located in intraplate regions, may larly to those of commercial buildings (Naeim 2013). The USGS
be subject to long-period ground motions from large-magnitude has developed tools, such as ShakeMap and ShakeCast, to provide
distant earthquakes. Because the long-period waves attenuate rel- rapid estimates of the impact of an earthquake on the built environ-
atively slowly along the traveling path and can be amplified by the ment. For example, ShakeCast enables estimating the damage to
soft soil site, they could cause considerable seismic damages to bridges in California following an earthquake using the stored fra-
high-rise buildings due to resonance. The impact of long-period gility curves (Mangalathu 2017). HAZUS, proposed by FEMA,
ground motions on high-rise buildings was shown by the 1985 can estimate the damage to buildings using built-in fragility curves
Michoacán earthquake (Beck and Hall 1986) and the 2011 Tohoku (HAZUS-MH 2003). However, these tools are more suitable to
earthquake (Takewaki et al. 2011), during which excessive vibra- general structures such as continuous girder bridges and low-rise
tions of high-rise buildings and serious damage to their nonstruc- buildings. The seismic performance of high-rise buildings sub-
tural components were observed in Mexico City and Tokyo, jected to long-period ground motion cannot be exactly quantified
respectively. However, because of the complex nature of long- by using these tools. With the recent development of sensor tech-
period ground motions and the lack of reliable long-period seismic nology, structural health monitoring (SHM) systems have been
records, the structural behaviors of high-rise buildings subjected installed on some high-rise buildings to provide real-time mea-
to long-period ground motions have not been fully understood. surements of earthquake-induced ground motions and dynamic re-
Therefore, there is a great need to develop real-time monitoring sponses of building structures. However, how to make good use of
systems for high-rise buildings so that ground motions and struc- SHM systems for real-time and postearthquake performance as-
tural responses can be recorded, real-time warning signals can be sessment of high-rise buildings is not clear.
issued during earthquakes, and postearthquake performance assess- Celebi et al. (2004) proposed quantifying the structural condi-
ment can be conducted immediately after earthquakes. tion using the interstory drift ratio (IDR) calculated by differencing
Traditionally, the postearthquake performance assessment of the relative displacement between two adjacent floors computed
a high-rise building requires a detailed evaluation by licensed through double integration of accelerometer measurement. Ulusoy
et al. (2012) designed and implemented a structural health moni-
1
Ph.D. Candidate, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, toring and alerting system consisting of sensing and analysis
Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ., Hung Hom, Kowloon 999077, Hong Kong modules to monitor the hospital buildings in high-seismic-hazard
(corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3293-2983. regions. Kaya and Safak (2015) developed a real-time data process-
Email: hu.rongpan@connect.polyu.hk ing and performance evaluation scheme which set three levels of
2
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hong Kong alarms in accordance with the interstory drift ratio thresholds of
Polytechnic Univ., Hung Hom, Kowloon 999077, Hong Kong. Email: three different damage states as defined in seismic design codes.
ceylxu@polyu.edu.hk
All the aforementioned works selected the interstory drift ratio as
Note. This manuscript was submitted on May 15, 2018; approved on
November 6, 2018; published online on March 19, 2019. Discussion period an indicator of the structural performance. The calculation of the
open until August 19, 2019; separate discussions must be submitted for interstory drift ratio requires the integration of the measured accel-
individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineering, eration responses and the subtraction of the displacement responses
© ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445. of two adjacent floors. The integration and subtraction processes,
however, significantly amplify the errors caused by the measure- did not address the OSP-RR issue, they took into consideration the
ment noise in the records and thus introduce tremendous uncertain- uncertainty in the estimation process and gave an analytical solu-
ties (Safak and Hudnut 2006). Furthermore, to obtain a complete tion of the extreme value distribution (EVD) prediction for struc-
estimation of structural performance, large numbers of accelerom- tural responses in terms of the measured acceleration responses.
eters should be deployed on each floor of the building, which However, their work used the Poisson assumption in analyzing the
greatly increases the cost of implementing a SHM system or makes peaks-over-threshold (POT) rates of the nonstationary process, and
it impossible to install the SHM system. the results tend to be too conservative when the threshold is low.
To deal with such issues, the authors proposed an integrated This is particularly true for superhigh-rise buildings subjected to
optimal sensor placement and response reconstruction (OSP-RR) long-period ground motion because their responses exhibit signifi-
method based on Kalman filtering algorithm, which enables an cant differences in duration and frequency characteristics from
accurate and complete estimation of structural responses using in- the structures discussed by Tien et al. (2016). Therefore, this study
complete measurement data from limited sensors installed on a proposes a probabilistic postearthquake performance assessment
long-span bridge or a high-rise building (Xu et al. 2016; Hu et al. (PPPA) method for high-rise buildings subjected to long-period
2018). In this method, the state of the structure can be estimated ground motion based on the OSP-RR method and the refined ex-
based on the incomplete structural response measurements from treme value distribution (EVD) prediction method. The extreme
multitype sensors (including GPS, inclinometers, and accelerome- values of the reconstructed structural responses are incorporated
ters) using the Kalman filtering algorithm, through which the with the structural component fragility functions to determine
unmeasured structural responses can be reconstructed. At the same the damage probabilities of the structural components. Fig. 1 is
time, the optimal placement of the multitype sensors can be ob- a flowchart of the RTW system and the PPPA method proposed
tained by minimizing the estimation errors of structural responses in this study and which are discussed in detail in the subsequent
to a target value. This study developed a real-time warning (RTW) sections. The proposed RTW system and PPPA method is applied
to a superhigh-rise building to demonstrate their feasibility and
system based on the OSP-RR method which can be used to monitor
effectiveness.
the performance and integrity of the building in real-time and issue
warning massages whenever the RTW system detects the structural
responses exceeding the preset safety thresholds.
Although the RTW system is very useful to issue warning mes-
Optimal Sensor Placement and Response
Reconstruction
sages for avoiding fatality, it is too conservative to use the design
value as a safety threshold, which reflects the overall structural
performance, for component level performance evaluation of a Modeling High-Rise Building Structure System in
high-rise building. The postearthquake performance evaluation (or State-Space
offline assessment) is therefore essential to provide the building Postdisaster investigations demonstrated that long-period ground
owners with reliable information for making decisions on mainte- motions from large-magnitude distant earthquakes can cause exces-
nance, repair, and occupancy. Miranda (2006) and Naeim et al. sive vibrations of high-rise buildings and serious damage to their
(2006) developed an automated post-earthquake damage assess- nonstructural components (Beck and Hall 1986; Takewaki et al.
ment of instrumented buildings in a probabilistic way by incorpo- 2011), but almost no partial or complete collaspe of high-rise build-
rating the fragility curves, through which the damage level of ing structures was observed. This is mainly because the seismic
specific structural components can be determined. However, their design requirements for high-rise buildings are strict and the
work did not address how to obtain a complete and accurate esti- high-rise building structure systems have great redundancy. Minor
mation of building responses, and also did not consider the uncer- damage to local structural components and serious damage to non-
tainty in the structural response measurement. Tien et al. (2016) structural components may not change the global dynamic proper-
developed a structural response estimation scheme based on the ties and behaviors significantly. In this regard, a high-rise building
Kalman smoothing algorithm that can make use of all the available is modeled as a linear-elastic structure system in this study. The
measurement data after the earthquake event. Although their work equation of motion for a linear structure with n degrees of freedoms
qðtÞ 0 I
zðtÞ ¼ ; Ac ¼ ;
q̇ðtÞ 2s×1 −ω20 −2ξω0 2s×2s zkþ1 ¼ Azk þ Bg̈k þ wk
0
k ¼ C zk þ D g̈k þ v k
ym ð6Þ
m m
Bc ¼ ð2Þ
−ΦT ML 2s×p
matrix, respectively; Φ ∈ ℜn×s = mode shape matrix of selected vk ∈ ℜm = measurement noise, which are modeled as zero-mean
mode sets; M ∈ ℜn×n = mass matrix of the dynamic system; and white processes with constant variance matrixes Q ∈ ℜ2s×2s and
L ∈ ℜn×p = mapping matrix that relates the excitations to the R ¼ EðvvT Þ ∈ ℜm×m , respectively.
corresponding DOFs.
The observation function can be expressed as
Dynamic Response Reconstruction Based on Kalman
Filtering
yðtÞ ¼ Cm zðtÞ þ Dm g̈ðtÞ ð3Þ
The building structure system described by Eq. (6) is a dynamically
evolving system with noise-contaminated measurements and sys-
where yðtÞ ∈ ℜm = observation vector, m = number of sensor tem uncertainties, and it can be modeled graphically as a dynamic
measurements; and Cm ∈ ℜm×2s and Dm ∈ ℜm×p = output and Bayesian network (DBN) (Fig. 2).
transmission matrixes, respectively, which consist of the mode The DBN is composed of a series of Bayesian networks (BNs),
shapes at the DOFs with sensors. which represents the system at a discrete time step k (k ¼ 0;
In this study, according to the types of sensor measurements, 1; : : : ; N), where k ¼ 0 indicates the initial values (Fig. 2). The
the displacement, inclination and acceleration responses at differ- DBN shows the evolution of the system state z over time under
ent levels of a high-rise building are included in the observation the input stochastic process u (referred to as the ground accelera-
vector yðtÞ tion g̈ in this study) and the process noise w. The observation of z is
taken as the measurement vector y with measurement noise v. If the
2 3 DBN is a linear-Gaussian system in state space, one of the widely
Φm qðtÞ
used methods for finding its solution is the Kalman filtering.
6 7
yðtÞ ¼ ½ dðtÞ θðtÞ aðtÞ T ¼ 4 Ψm qðtÞ 5 ð4Þ The Kalman filtering approximates the filtering distribution by a
Φ q̈ðtÞ
m Gaussian distribution and results in the best linear estimator in the
m×1
sense of minimizing the mean-square error. Given the measurement
y 1∶k and external force g1∶k from the first step up to time step k, the
where Ψm and Φm = rotation and displacement modal shapes at estimated system state zk through the Kalman filtering follows a
measured DOFs, respectively; and dðtÞ, θðtÞ, and aðtÞ = vectors Gaussian distribution expressed as
representing the displacement, inclination, and acceleration re-
sponses, respectively pðzk jy 1∶k ; g1∶k Þ ¼ Nðẑk ; Pk Þ ð7Þ
w1 wk wk+1 wN
u0 uk-1 uk uN
z0 z1 zk zk+1 zN
v1 vk vk+1 vN
y1 yk yk+1 yN
Fig. 2. Dynamic system modeled as a DBN. (Adapted from Tien et al. 2016.)
are too conservative for component-level performance evaluation. The KS algorithm is performed through a forward-backward
At present, the fragility curves of different structural components process in which the forward recursion uses the observations from
are commonly adopted as an indicator of the component-level dam- y 1 to y k and is known as the Kalman filter, whereas the backward
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Louisiana Dept Trans & Dev on 06/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
age state as suggested by Naeim et al. (2006). Furthermore, to avoid recursion works backward using the measurement from y N to y kþ1 .
time lags in the online operation, the RTW system does not con- The mean vector and covariance matrix of the state vector at
sider the uncertainties inherent in the structural state estimation pro- time step k þ 1 are first predicted by
cess, but uses only the mean value ẑk of the posterior distribution of
ẑkþ1jk ¼ Aẑk þ Bgk ð21Þ
the estimated response state.
To account for the uncertainties and to facilitate more reasonable
and detailed decision for the postevent repair and maintenance of a Pkþ1jk ¼ APk AT þ Q ð22Þ
building structure, a probabilistic postevent performance assess-
The smoother gain matrix is obtained by
ment (PPPA) method is also proposed in this study. For the post-
event assessment of the structural performance, all the measured Jk ¼ Pk AT ðPkþ1jk Þ−1 ð23Þ
information during the earthquake are available and a smoothing
algorithm [Kalman smoother (KS)] can be used to obtain a more The updated estimation of the mean state vector and covariance
accurate and stable state estimation. One of the well-recognized matrix of the state vector at time step k then becomes
schemes for structural performance assessment and structural reli-
ability evaluation during/after an extreme event is to calculate the ẑkjN ¼ ẑk þ Jk ðẑkþ1jN − ẑkþ1jk Þ; k ¼ N − 1; : : : ; 0 ð24Þ
probability of the structural response up-crossing a certain thresh-
old, or the so-called peaks-over-threshold rates. The estimated re- PkjN ¼ Pk þ Jk ðPkþ1jN − Pkþ1jk ÞJTk ð25Þ
sponses can be regarded as a time-varying mean nonstationary
process in which the posterior distribution parameters of the where Jk = smoother gain matrix; N = final time step; and ẑkjN =
dynamically evolving structural responses can be quantified. Thus, smoothed estimation of the mean state vector at the kth time step.
it becomes possible to predict the extreme value distribution (EVD) The posterior distribution of the estimated state vector based on
in terms of POT rates based on the Kalman smoother inference. the Kalman smoother, given the measurement y 1∶N and external
Tien et al. (2016) proposed an analytical solution of the ex- force g1∶N from the first step to time step k, can be expressed by
treme value distribution prediction for structural responses based on pðzk jy 1∶N ; g1∶N Þ ¼ NðẑkjN ; PkjN Þ ð26Þ
the measured acceleration. They adopted the Poisson assumption
in analyzing the POT rates of the nonstationary process, and the The corresponding covariance matrix for the estimated state
results tend to be too conservative when the threshold is low. To vector z ¼ ½ q q̇ T can be described by
overcome the potential conservativeness induced by the Poisson
assumption, the Vanmarcke assumption is used in this study as an Pzz Pzż
Pk ¼ ¼ Covðzk ; zk Þ
alternative. The EVD predictions based on both the Poisson as- Pżz Pż ż k
sumption and Vanmarcke assumption are computed and compared
Covðq; qÞ Covðq; q̇Þ
with the results of Monte Carlo (MC) simulation (MCS). Moreover, ¼ ð27Þ
the fragility curves of structural components under slight damage Covðq̇; qÞ Covðq̇; q̇Þ k
scenario are incorporated with the calculated EVD results to give
the corresponding probability of the damage state. To convert the state covariance to the response covariance, the
following transformation can be used:
Vanmarcke approximation of a random process can be determined. A high-rise building with a structural height of 580 m was used as a
case study to examine the feasibility and accuracy of the RTW sys-
tem proposed in section “SHM-Based Real-Time Warning System”
Definition of Fragility Function and Probabilistic and the PPPA method proposed in section “SHM-Based Probabi-
Damage State listic Postevent Performance Assessment Method.” Because both
In the framework of PPPA, the damage state of the structural the RTW system and the PPPA method are built on the multi-type
component is represented in a probabilistic way by adopting the sensor placement and response reconstruction method presented in
fragility function, which describes the conditional probability of section “Optimal Sensor Placement and Response Reconstruction,”
a structure component being or exceeding a specific damage state, the building model, the long-period ground motion, the optimal
such as slight, moderate, or severe damage, given the intensity of multitype sensor placement, and the response reconstruction of the
an earthquake. Unlike deterministic values recommended in high-rise building are discussed first.
FEMA-356 (FEMA 2000), fragility functions can consider the
structural, material, and geometric uncertainties and also can take
Building Model and Optimal Sensor Placement
into account the uncertainty of the structural motions that trigger
different levels of damage. In particular, a fragility function sup- The high-rise building had a megacolumn–core tube–outrigger
plies the probability that the structure component reaches or ex- truss structural system, and the building was divided into eight
ceeds a particular damage level. Available experimental data on zones along the height by the two-story outrigger truss. The core-
various types of structural components permit the development wall tube shrank gradually from the bottom to the top, with
of fragility functions. According to the research by Cornell et al. the cross section varying from 5,300 × 3,700 mm to 2,400 ×
(2002), the fragility functions for many structural components can 1,900 mm. Because it is still difficult to apply the Kalman filter
be modeled by a lognormal distribution and smoother algorithms to a structural system with a large num-
ber of DOFs, and to facilitate implementing the proposed method,
Fdm ðEDP ¼ IDRÞ ¼ P½DM ≥ dmjIDR a simplified two-dimensional (2D) finite-element (FE) model
developed by Lu et al. (2014) for the high-rise building, was
ln dm − ln ηIDR adopted in this study. The 2D planar FE model consisted of
¼1−Φ ð40Þ
σln IDR 2,382 elements and 2,416 nodes with a total of 7,248 DOFs
(Fig. 5). The dynamic characteristics and modal information in
where Fdm ðEDPÞ = fragility function for damage state DM, and is translational direction of simplified 2D model are the same with
defined as the probability that the component reaches or exceeds those of the three-dimensional (3D) model. Thus, the 2D model
a given damage state dm given a particular engineering demand was adopted as a case study to implement the optimal sensor
parameter (EDP) value; ηIDR and σln IDR are the median and loga- placement and reconstruction the structural responses of the entire
rithmic standard deviation of DM, and these two parameters can be building.
determined from the test data; and Φð·Þ = cumulative standard nor- Inclinometers and accelerometers are usually installed on the
mal distribution. columns and core tube walls, which are regarded as candidate sen-
The fragility function serves as an effective tool for postearth- sor locations. Considering the symmetry of the 2D model about
quake structural performance assessment. Once the EDP is ob- the vertical axis, sensors were supposed to be placed on half of
tained by the response reconstruction based on the imcomplete the model. A total of 472 candidate sensor locations were selected,
sensor measurement, damage to specific components can be esti- including 236 for placing accelerometers and 236 for placing incli-
mated by using corresponding fragility functions. In this study, the nometers. Given the limited number of GPS, we only consider one
estimated extreme value distribution of the interstory drift ratio is GPS in this study, and the optimal location for the GPS was deter-
incorporated with the fragility curve to achieve a fast assessment mined together with those of the other sensors.
informing the probability of the structural component experiencing Fig. 6 shows the maximum and average estimation errors as the
what level of damage. Only slight and local damage scenarios are number of deleted sensors increased; 427 sensor location candi-
considered in this study such that the structural responses can be dates were deleted when the normalized maximum reconstruction
regarded as linear elastic, because the KF/KS-based Bayesian filter- error reached the predesignated threshold value of 1.0, indicating
ing method assumes the dynamic evolving system to be a linear that at least 46 sensors should be selected in this case (subtracting
Gaussian process. As mentioned previously, it is reasonable to the number of deleted sensors from the number of total candidate
make such an assumption because strict seismic design is required sensors). Finally, 1 GPS, 19 inclinometers, and 26 accelerometers
for the high-rise buildings and the high-rise building structure sys- were selected, and the corresponding optimal placement scheme for
tems have great redundancy. The joint probability of the damage each sensor is illustrated in Fig. 7. The optimized location for plac-
state can be rewritten ing the one GPS is on top of the building.
Fig. 8. Accelerogram of the simulated ground motion. Fig. 10. Accelerogram of the 1985 Michoacán Earthquake.
Fig. 9. Accelerogram of the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake. Fig. 11. Accelerogram of the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake.
the simulated earthquake were larger than those of the other effectiveness and accuracy of the response reconstruction methods.
three ground motions at each of the four natural frequencies, Fig. 14 shows the close-up view of the peak interstory drift ratio
and the Michoacán earthquake had abundant frequencies of obtained from Fig. 13. The estimated peak interstory drift ratio us-
Modes 1, 3, and 4. ing the Kalman smoother was closer to the real ratio than was that
using the Kalman filter.
Response Reconstruction
Implementation of RTWS
The actual seismic responses of the 2D building model subjected to
the selected input ground motions were computed. The so-called The maximum IDR responses of the 2D model subjected to the four
measured responses were then obtained by adding 5% root-mean- ground motions are illustrated in Fig. 15. The maximum IDR re-
squared randomly generated noise to the computed responses at the sponses under all four seismic excitations were below the IDR lim-
sensor locations. The KF-based response reconstruction scheme its for minor damage specified by the seismic design code, which
was used to obtain the complete estimation of structural responses shows that the high-rise building was well designed. The maximum
based on the measured responses. The complete estimation based IDR responses in Zones 1–6 almost lay within the no damage area,
on the Kalman smoother algorithm was also obtained for compari- whereas the IDR responses in the upper zones (Zones 7–8) lay be-
son. The accuracy of the proposed optimal sensor placement and tween the no damage and minor damage areas. The maximum IDR
response reconstruction method was validated though the compari- responses along the whole structure occurred in Zone 8, which is
son of the estimated (reconstructed) responses with the real (com- consistent with the nonlinear finite element analysis results by
puted) responses. Jiang et al. (2011). Furthermore, comparing the IDR responses
The time histories of interstory drift ratio of the 110th story in of the four scenarios suggests that the long-period components
Zone 8 are illustrated in Fig. 13. The estimated response obtained have a significant impact on the seismic response of the high-rise
by both the KF-based and KS-based response reconstruction building. The different IDR responses are attributed to the differ-
methods matched well with the real response, thus verifying the ent frequency characteristics of the four ground motion excitations.
Table 4. Fourier amplitudes of four ground motions for first four modes “Kalman Smoothing and Evolutionary Probability Density.” The
Fourier amplitude (m=s) samples generated by this Monte Carlo method yielded empirical
EVD of the responses which were used to validate the analytical
First Second Third Fourth function of the EVD prediction proposed in section “Extreme Value
mode mode mode mode
Prediction of Structural Response.” Fig. 16 shows the Monte Carlo
Earthquake scenario (0.11 Hz) (0.3 Hz) (0.63 Hz) (1 Hz)
simulation based on the posterior PDF of the estimated state using
Simulated earthuqake 0.71 1.12 1.35 1.02 the Kalman smoother.
San Fernando Earthquake 0.18 0.32 0.73 0.78 The CDFs of Zmax > α were calculated based on the Poisson
Michoacán Earthquake 0.62 0.32 0.8 0.47
and Vanmarcke assumptions, respectively, and then compared with
Tohoku Earthquake 0.32 0.33 0.65 0.78
the CDF obtained by the Monte Carlo simulation of 500 samples.
The comparison showed a good match between the analytical and
simulated extreme value distribution of the target response in the
In conclusion, the alert signal for minor damage would be issued high-threshold range (IDR > 2.5 × 10−3 ), whereas in the middle-
for the building subjected to the simulated ground motion and the threshold range (1.0 × 10−3 < IDR < 2.5 × 10−3 ), the results based
1985 Michoacán Earthquake, and the signal for no damage would on the Poisson assumption were relatively conservative compared
be issued for the building subjected to the 1971 San Fernando with the results based on the Vanmarcke assumption and the MC
Earthquake and the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake. simulation. The CDF of the extreme IDR responses based on the
Poisson assumption, the Vanmarcke assumption, and the MC sim-
ulation for the 110th story are shown in Fig. 17.
Implementation of PPPA With the CDF of the extreme IDR responses of the building, the
The maximum IDR responses of the building structure subjected damage state probablity of structural components of the building
to the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake and the 2011 Tohoku can be calculated using Eq. (41). According to the design detail
Earthquake did not exceed the threshold for minor damage, which of the high-rise building, the shear wall layout for Zone 8 is shown
indicates that the building structure remained intact, without dam- in Fig. 18. The sizes and reinforcement details for each type of
age. Thus, the PPPA was applied only to the cases of the simulated shear walls are listed in Tables 5 and 6 respectively. And the cor-
earthquake and the 1985 Michoacán Earthquake to evaluate the responding fragility curves as shown in Fig. 19 are given by the
corresponding damage of structural components of the building. To Performance Assessment Calculation Tool (PACT) FEMA
implement the PPPA method, the PDF/CDF of the extreme re- (2012) according to the sizes and reinforcement ratios.
sponse of the building was determined based on KS inference. The The damage probabilities (probability of the selected structural
system state trajectories can be easily sampled from the DBN component experiencing the defined damage) based on the EVD of
shown in Fig. 2 by using the forward filtering backward sampling the estimated responses (Tables 7 and 8, EVD of estimation) for
approach (Tien et al. 2016). The Monte Carlo method was also used each type of shear wall in the 110th story were calculated using
to generate samples corresponding to the posterior PDF inferred Eq. (41). For comparison, the damage probabilities were also
from DBN by the Kalman smoother formulas proposed in section calculated based on the mean value of the estimated responses
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig. 13. Comparison of real and estimated IDR responses at 110th story subjected to (a) simulated ground motion; (b) 1971 San Fernando
Earthquake; (c) 1985 Michoacán Earthquake; and (d) 2011 Tohoku Earthquake.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig. 14. Close-up view of the real and estimated peak IDR responses at 110th story subjected to (a) simulated ground motion; (b) 1971 San Fernando
Earthquake; (c) 1985 Michoacán Earthquake; and (d) 2011 Tohoku Earthquake.
(a) (b)
Fig. 16. Monte Carlo simulation based on the KS estimated IDR responses under (a) simulated ground motion; and (b) 1985 Michoacán Earthquake.
(a) (b)
Fig. 17. CDF of the extreme IDR responses at 110th story under (a) simulated ground motion; and (b) 1985 Michoacán Earthquake.
Acknowledgments
Performance assessment calculation tool (PACT) version 2.9.65. post-earthquake damage assessment of instrumented buildings.” In
Rep. FEMA P-58-3.1. Washington, DC: FEMA. Vol. 66 of Advances in earthquake engineering for urban risk reduction
HAZUS-MH. 2003. Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology: Earth- NATO science series IV: Earth and environmental sciences, 117–134.
quake model. Washington DC: Dept. of Homeland Security, FEMA. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Hu, L., and Y. L. Xu. 2014. “Extreme value of typhoon-induced Safak, E., and K. Hudnut. 2006. “Real-time structural monitoring and
non-stationary buffeting response of long-span bridges.” Probab. damage detection by acceleration and GPS sensors.” In Proc., 8th US
Eng. Mech. 36 (7): 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech National Conf. on Earthquake Engineering. San Francisco.
.2014.02.002. Takewaki, I., S. Murakami, K. Fujita, S. Yoshitomi, and M. Tsuji. 2011.
Hu, R. P., Y. L. Xu, and X. Zhao. 2018. “Long-period ground motion sim- “The 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku earthquake and response
ulation and its impact on seismic response of high-rise buildings.” of high-rise buildings under long-period ground motions.” Soil Dyn.
J. Earthquake Eng. 22 (7): 1285–1315. https://doi.org/10.1080 Earthquake Eng. 31 (11): 1511–1528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn
/13632469.2017.1286617. .2011.06.001.
Idriss, I. M., and J. I. Sun. 1992. User’s manual for SHAKE91: A computer Tien, I., M. Pozzi, and A. Der Kiureghian. 2016. “Probabilistic framework
program user’s manual. Davis, CA: Center for Geotechnical Modeling. for assessing maximum structural response based on sensor measure-
Jiang, H., L. He, X. Lu, J. Ding, and X. Zhao. 2011. “Analysis of seismic ments.” Struct. Saf. 61: 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2016
performance and shaking table tests of the Shanghai Tower.” J. Build. .03.003.
Struct. 32 (11): 55–63. Ulusoy, H., E. Kalkan, J. Fletcher, P. Friberg, W. Leith, and K. Banga.
Kaya, Y., and E. Safak. 2015. “Real-time analysis and interpretation of 2012. “Design and Implementation of a structural health monitoring
continuous data from structural health monitoring (SHM) systems.” and alerting system for hospital buildings in the United States.” In
Bull. Earthquake Eng. 13 (3): 917–934. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518 Proc., 15th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering. Lisbon, Portugal:
-014-9642-9. Sociedade Portuguesa de Engenharia Sismica.
Kim, K., and H. Sohn. 2017. “Dynamic displacement estimation by fusing Wang, Y. 2008. “A new round of updation of seismic design code of
LDV and LiDAR measurements via smoothing based Kalman filtering.” China.” In Proc., 14th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering.
Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 82: 339–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j Beijing: Chinese Association for Earthquake Engineering.
.ymssp.2016.05.027. Xu, Y. L., X. H. Zhang, S. Zhu, and S. Zhan. 2016. “Multi-type sensor
Lu, X., X. Lu, H. Sezen, and L. Ye. 2014. “Development of a simplified placement and response reconstruction for structural health monitoring
model and seismic energy dissipation in a super-tall building.” Eng. of long-span suspension bridges.” Sci. Bull. 61 (4): 313–329. https://doi
Struct. 67: 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.02.017. .org/10.1007/s11434-016-1000-7.
Mangalathu, S. 2017. “Performance based grouping and fragility analysis Zhu, S., X. H. Zhang, Y. L. Xu, and S. Zhan. 2013. “Multi-type sensor
of box girder bridges in California.” Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of placement for multi-scale response reconstruction.” Adv. Struct. Eng.
Technology. 16 (10): 1779–1797. https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.16.10.1779.