Data‐driven post‐earthquake rapid structural safety assessment

Earthquake prone cities are exposed to important societal and financial losses. An important part of these losses stems from the inability to use structures as shelters or for generating economic activity after the event of an earthquake. The inability to use structures is not only due to collapse or damage; it is also due to the lack of knowledge about their safety state, which prohibits their normal use. Because a diagnosis is required for thousands of structures, city-scale safety assessment requires solutions that are economically sustainable and scalable. Data-driven algorithms supported by sensing technologies have the potential to solve this challenge. Several ambient vibration monitoring studies of buildings, before and after earthquakes, have shown that the extent of damage in a building is correlated with a decrease in the natural frequency. However, the observed worldwide data may not be representative of specific cities due to factors such as construction type, quality, material, age, etc. In this paper we propose a framework that is able to progressively learn the relationship between frequency shift and damage state as a small number of buildings in a city are inspected after an earthquake, and to use that information to predict the safety state of uninspected but monitored buildings. The capacity of the proposed framework to learn and perform prognosis is validated by applying the methodology to a city with 1000 buildings having simulated frequency shifts and damage states.

[1]  Iunio Iervolino,et al.  Closed‐form aftershock reliability of damage‐cumulating elastic‐perfectly‐plastic systems , 2014 .

[2]  E. Peter Carden,et al.  Vibration Based Condition Monitoring: A Review , 2004 .

[3]  Alberto Bernardini,et al.  Field Manual for post-earthquake damage and safety assessment and short term countermeasures ( AeDES ) , 2007 .

[4]  Jerome P. Lynch,et al.  A summary review of wireless sensors and sensor networks for structural health monitoring , 2006 .

[5]  Joshua M. Pearce Open-Source Lab: How to Build Your Own Hardware and Reduce Research Costs , 2013 .

[6]  James L. Beck,et al.  Smarter Structures: Real-time Loss Estimation for Instrumented Buildings , 2006 .

[7]  Jerome P. Lynch,et al.  Smart Wireless Sensor Technology for Structural Health Monitoring of Civil Structures , 2009 .

[8]  Thomas H. Heaton,et al.  The Observed Wander of the Natural Frequencies in a Structure , 2006 .

[9]  Giuseppe D'Anna,et al.  Suitability of Low‐Cost Three‐Axis MEMS Accelerometers in Strong‐Motion Seismology: Tests on the LIS331DLH (iPhone) Accelerometer , 2013 .

[10]  Raimondo Betti,et al.  Rapid evaluation and damage assessment of instrumented highway bridges , 2012 .

[11]  M. Navarro,et al.  Changes in dynamic characteristics of Lorca RC buildings from pre- and post-earthquake ambient vibration data , 2014, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[12]  Billie F. Spencer,et al.  Risk monitoring of buildings with wireless sensor networks , 2005 .

[13]  Angelo Masi,et al.  Analysis of RC Building Dynamic Response and Soil-Building Resonance Based on Data Recorded during a Damaging Earthquake (Molise, Italy, 2002) , 2004 .

[14]  Joshua M. Pearce,et al.  Building Research Equipment with Free, Open-Source Hardware , 2012, Science.

[15]  Andreas Krause,et al.  Community Seismic Network , 2012 .

[16]  M. Celebi,et al.  Real-Time Seismic Monitoring Needs of a Building Owner—and the Solution: A Cooperative Effort , 2004 .

[17]  Ian F. C. Smith,et al.  Hybrid probabilities and error-domain structural identification using ambient vibration monitoring , 2013 .

[18]  Jerome P. Lynch,et al.  Long-term assessment of an autonomous wireless structural health monitoring system at the new Carquinez Suspension Bridge , 2011, Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[19]  François Dunand Pertinence du bruit de fond sismique pour la caractérisation dynamique et l'aide au diagnostic sismique des structures de génie civil , 2005 .

[20]  Ramsés Rodríguez,et al.  Damage detection in instrumented structures without baseline modal parameters , 2010 .

[21]  J. Regnier,et al.  Contribution of ambient vibration recordings (Free-field and buildings) for post-seismic analysis: the case of the Mw 7.3 MARTINIQUE (French lesser ANTILLES) earthquake, november 29, 2007 , 2013 .

[22]  F. Dunand,et al.  Utilisation du bruit de fond pour l'analyse des dommages des bâtiments de Boumerdes suite au séisme du 21 mai 2003 , 2004 .

[23]  James L. Beck,et al.  Synergistic combination of systems for structural health monitoring and earthquake early warning for structural health prognosis and diagnosis , 2012, Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[24]  Robert G. Walmsley,et al.  An ultra-low noise MEMS accelerometer for seismic imaging , 2011, 2011 IEEE SENSORS Proceedings.

[25]  Justin D. Marshall,et al.  Post-Earthquake Building Safety Inspection: Lessons from the Canterbury, New Zealand, Earthquakes , 2013 .

[26]  Tiziana Rossetto,et al.  Comparison of building damage scales and damage descriptions for use in earthquake loss modelling in Europe , 2008 .