Predicting Dynamic Response of Structures under Earthquake Loads Using Logical Analysis of Data

In this paper, logical analysis of data (LAD) is used to predict the seismic response of building structures employing the captured dynamic responses. In order to prepare the data, computational simulations using a single degree of freedom (SDOF) building model under different ground motion records are carried out. The selected excitation records are real and of different peak ground accelerations (PGA). The sensitivity of the seismic response in terms of displacements of floors to the variation in earthquake characteristics, such as soil class, characteristic period, and time step of records, peak ground displacement, and peak ground velocity, have also been considered. The dynamic equation of motion describing the building model and the applied earthquake load are presented and solved incrementally using the Runge-Kutta method. LAD then finds the characteristic patterns which lead to forecast the seismic response of building structures. The accuracy of LAD is compared to that of an artificial neural network (ANN), since the latter is the most known machine learning technique. Based on the conducted study, the proposed LAD model has been proven to be an efficient technique to learn, simulate, and blindly predict the dynamic response behaviour of building structures subjected to earthquake loads.

[1]  C. Harris,et al.  Harris' Shock and Vibration Handbook , 1976 .

[2]  Gang Yu,et al.  Bi-Parameters Method For Structural Vulnerability Analysis , 2010, Intell. Autom. Soft Comput..

[3]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  The WEKA data mining software: an update , 2009, SKDD.

[4]  Joseph C. Chen,et al.  The development of an in-process surface roughness adaptive control system in turning operations , 2007, J. Intell. Manuf..

[5]  Hong Seo Ryoo,et al.  MILP approach to pattern generation in logical analysis of data , 2009, Discret. Appl. Math..

[6]  Robert Jankowski,et al.  Earthquake-induced pounding between equal height buildings with substantially different dynamic properties , 2008 .

[7]  Ricardo A. Medina,et al.  Conceptual Seismic Design of Regular Frames Based on the Concept of Uniform Damage , 2007 .

[8]  Xiaojun Chen,et al.  Implicit Runge-Kutta Methods for Lipschitz Continuous Ordinary Differential Equations , 2008, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[9]  Y. Crama,et al.  Cause-effect relationships and partially defined Boolean functions , 1988 .

[10]  Andrew W. Smyth,et al.  New Approach to Designing Multilayer Feedforward Neural Network Architecture for Modeling Nonlinear Restoring Forces. I: Formulation , 2006 .

[11]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  A Modal Pushover Analysis Procedure to Estimate Seismic Demands for Buildings: Theory and Preliminary Evaluation , 2001 .

[12]  Juan Felix Avila-Herrera,et al.  Logical analysis of multi-class data , 2015, 2015 Latin American Computing Conference (CLEI).

[13]  J. Lambert Numerical Methods for Ordinary Differential Equations , 1991 .

[14]  Peter L. Hammer,et al.  Logical analysis of data—An overview: From combinatorial optimization to medical applications , 2006, Ann. Oper. Res..

[15]  Toshihide Ibaraki,et al.  An Implementation of Logical Analysis of Data , 2000, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[16]  Chyuan Hwan Jeng,et al.  Quick Seismic Response Estimation of Prestressed Concrete Bridges Using Artificial Neural Networks , 2004 .

[17]  Mohammad ParsaeiMaram,et al.  Anartificial Neural Network for Prediction of Seismic Behavior in RC Buildings with and Without Infill Walls , 2013 .

[18]  Roberto Villaverde,et al.  Methods to Assess the Seismic Collapse Capacity of Building Structures: State of the Art , 2007 .

[19]  Shigeyuki Okada,et al.  CLASSIFICATIONS OF STRUCTURAL TYPES AND DAMAGE PATTERNS OF BUILDINGS FOR EARTHQUAKE FIELD INVESTIGATION , 1999 .

[20]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .