Developing data-driven surrogate models for holistic performance-based assessment of mid-rise RC frame buildings at early design

Abstract This paper presents a framework to develop generalizable surrogate models to predict seismic vulnerability and environmental impacts of a class of buildings at a particular location. To this end, surrogate models are trained on a performance inventory, here simulation-based seismic and environmental assessments of 720 mid-rise concrete office buildings of variable topology in Charleston, South Carolina. Five surrogate models of multiple regression, random forest, extreme gradient boosting, support vector machine and k-nearest neighbors were trained in a machine-learning pipeline including hyperparameter tuning and cross-validation. Variance-based sensitivity and accumulated local effect analysis were performed on the most accurate model to identify the most influential parameters and interpret the trained surrogate model. Support vector machines achieved the highest accuracy for total annual loss with an average 10-fold adjusted R2 of 0.96, whereas simpler linear regression was adequate to estimate the initial and seismic-induced embodied carbon emission. Floor area, building height, lateral-resisting frame weight, and average beam section sizes were found to be the most influential features. As these features may be approximated by an experienced structural engineer the results indicate that, with suitable performance inventories available, it should be possible to employ surrogate models in early design to narrow the initial design space to highly resilient and sustainable configurations.

[1]  Mehrdad Shokrabadi,et al.  A database of seismic designs, nonlinear models, and seismic responses for steel moment-resisting frame buildings , 2020 .

[2]  Jack W. Baker,et al.  Efficient Analytical Fragility Function Fitting Using Dynamic Structural Analysis , 2015 .

[3]  M. Banazadeh,et al.  The effect of design drift limit on the seismic performance of RC dual high‐rise buildings , 2018 .

[4]  G. Box Robustness in the Strategy of Scientific Model Building. , 1979 .

[5]  Jong-Su Jeon,et al.  Bridge fragilities to network fragilities in seismic scenarios: An integrated approach , 2021 .

[7]  Luca Caracoglia,et al.  Surrogate Model Monte Carlo simulation for stochastic flutter analysis of wind turbine blades , 2019, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics.

[8]  Luca Caracoglia,et al.  A neural network surrogate model for the performance assessment of a vertical structure subjected to non-stationary, tornadic wind loads , 2020 .

[9]  A. Horvath,et al.  Life-Cycle Assessment of Office Buildings in Europe and the United States , 2006 .

[10]  Henry V. Burton,et al.  Python-based computational platform to automate seismic design, nonlinear structural model construction and analysis of steel moment resisting frames , 2020, Engineering Structures.

[11]  Junwon Seo,et al.  Comparison of curved prestressed concrete bridge population response between area and spine modeling approaches toward efficient seismic vulnerability analysis , 2017 .

[12]  Michele Barbato,et al.  Performance-Based Hurricane Engineering (PBHE) framework , 2013 .

[13]  Jamie E. Padgett,et al.  Fragility and risk assessment of aboveground storage tanks subjected to concurrent surge, wave, and wind loads , 2019, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[14]  Frank McKenna,et al.  OpenSees: A Framework for Earthquake Engineering Simulation , 2011, Computing in Science & Engineering.

[15]  Junwon Seo,et al.  Horizontally curved steel bridge seismic vulnerability assessment , 2012 .

[16]  Alireza Farzampour,et al.  Probabilistic seismic performance and loss evaluation of a multi-story steel building equipped with butterfly-shaped fuses , 2020 .

[17]  Francesco Petrini Performance-based fire design of complex structures , 2013 .

[18]  Barry J. Goodno,et al.  Metamodel-based regional vulnerability estimate of irregular steel moment-frame structures subjected to earthquake events , 2012 .

[19]  Seong-Hoon Hwang,et al.  Machine learning-based approaches for seismic demand and collapse of ductile reinforced concrete building frames , 2020 .

[20]  Bruno Sudret,et al.  Comparative Study of Kriging and Support Vector Regression for Structural Engineering Applications , 2018, ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering.

[21]  Jesus M. de la Garza,et al.  A multi-objective reliability-based decision support system for incorporating decision maker utilities in the design of infrastructure , 2019, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[22]  Qindan Huang,et al.  Probabilistic prediction model for RC bond failure mode , 2021, Engineering Structures.

[23]  Yongle Li,et al.  Stochastic response of a cable-stayed bridge under non-stationary winds and waves using different surrogate models , 2020 .

[24]  Melissa M. Bilec,et al.  Review of approaches for integrating loss estimation and life cycle assessment to assess impacts of seismic building damage and repair , 2018, Engineering Structures.

[25]  Manolis Papadrakakis,et al.  Developing fragility curves based on neural network IDA predictions , 2011 .

[26]  Jamie E. Padgett,et al.  Fragility surrogate models for coastal bridges in hurricane prone zones , 2015 .

[27]  Giuliano Augusti,et al.  Performance-Based Wind Engineering: Towards a general procedure , 2011 .

[28]  Carmine Galasso,et al.  Gaussian process regression for seismic fragility assessment of building portfolios , 2019, Structural Safety.

[29]  John W. van de Lindt,et al.  Performance-Based Tsunami Engineering methodology for risk assessment of structures , 2017 .

[30]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  The effect of material and ground motion uncertainty on the seismic vulnerability curves of RC structure , 2006 .

[31]  Upmanu Lall,et al.  Copula-based reliability and sensitivity analysis of aging dams: Adaptive Kriging and polynomial chaos Kriging methods , 2021, Appl. Soft Comput..

[32]  Richard Gagnon,et al.  Performance of a sequential versus holistic building design approach using multi-objective optimization , 2019, Journal of Building Engineering.

[33]  Pinar Okumus,et al.  Surface crack detection in concrete structures using video processing techniques , 2021, Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[34]  Khalid M. Mosalam,et al.  PEER Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Methodology, Revisited , 2013 .

[35]  Carmine Galasso,et al.  Gaussian process regression for fatigue reliability analysis of offshore wind turbines , 2021, Structural Safety.

[36]  Junwon Seo,et al.  Response Surface Metamodel-based Performance Reliability for Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP sheets , 2015 .

[37]  Al Mouayed Bellah Nafeh,et al.  Displacement-Based Framework for Simplified Seismic Loss Assessment , 2020, Journal of Earthquake Engineering.

[38]  Ricardo O. Foschi,et al.  SEISMIC STRUCTURAL RELIABILITY USING DIFFERENT NONLINEAR DYNAMIC RESPONSE SURFACE APPROXIMATIONS , 2009 .

[39]  Asif Usmani,et al.  An application of the PEER performance based earthquake engineering framework to structures in fire , 2014 .

[40]  Ronald O. Hamburger,et al.  THE ATC-58 PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT OF NEXT- GENERATION PERFORMANCE-BASED EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING DESIGN CRITERIA FOR BUILDINGS , 2006 .

[41]  Henry Burton,et al.  Seismic Drift Demand Estimation for Steel Moment Frame Buildings: From Mechanics-Based to Data-Driven Models , 2021 .

[42]  Jamie E. Padgett,et al.  Investigation of multivariate seismic surrogate demand modeling for multi-response structural systems , 2020 .

[43]  Keith Porter,et al.  An Overview of PEER's Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Methodology , 2003 .

[44]  Daniel W. Apley,et al.  Visualizing the effects of predictor variables in black box supervised learning models , 2016, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology).

[45]  Gian Michele Calvi,et al.  Quantifying seismic risk in structures via simplified demand–intensity models , 2020, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[46]  Wei-Chiang Hong,et al.  Application of the Weighted K-Nearest Neighbor Algorithm for Short-Term Load Forecasting , 2019, Energies.

[47]  Wei-Xin Ren,et al.  Risk-informed sensitivity analysis and optimization of seismic mitigation strategy using Gaussian process surrogate model , 2020 .

[48]  Rasmus Lund Jensen,et al.  Building simulations supporting decision making in early design – A review , 2016 .

[49]  A. Varma,et al.  Post-earthquake fire behavior and performance-based fire design of steel moment frame buildings , 2020 .

[50]  Hussam Mahmoud,et al.  Framework for a performance-based analysis of fires following earthquakes , 2018 .

[51]  Jeonghyun Lee,et al.  INSSEPT: An open-source relational database of seismic performance estimation to aid with early design of buildings , 2020 .

[52]  Thomas Gernay,et al.  Recommendations for performance-based fire design of composite steel buildings using computational analysis , 2020 .

[53]  Tianqi Chen,et al.  XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System , 2016, KDD.

[54]  Jack P. Moehle,et al.  Seismic design of reinforced concrete special moment frames :: a guide for practicing engineers , 2008 .

[55]  Andrew S. Whittaker,et al.  Multihazard Design and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Buildings with Special Moment–Resisting Steel Frames , 2019, Journal of Structural Engineering.

[56]  Jason Brown,et al.  A new approach to performance-based building design exploration using linear inverse modeling , 2018, Journal of Building Performance Simulation.

[57]  I. G. Capeluto,et al.  Advice tool for early design stages of intelligent facades based on energy and visual comfort approach , 2009 .

[58]  Curt B. Haselton,et al.  Expected earthquake damage and repair costs in reinforced concrete frame buildings , 2012 .

[59]  Deierlein Gg,et al.  Quantifying the impacts of modeling uncertainties on the seismic drift demands and collapse risk of buildings with implications on seismic design checks , 2016 .

[60]  Vitelmo V. Bertero,et al.  Performance‐based seismic engineering: the need for a reliable conceptual comprehensive approach , 2002 .

[61]  Alice Alipour,et al.  Surrogate models for high performance control systems in wind-excited tall buildings , 2020, Appl. Soft Comput..

[62]  Nicola Pedroni,et al.  Seismic fragility analysis with artificial neural networks: Application to nuclear power plant equipment , 2018 .

[63]  Nicolas Luco,et al.  Effects of different sources of uncertainty and correlation on earthquake-generated losses , 2007 .

[64]  Jong-Su Jeon,et al.  Artificial neural network based multi-dimensional fragility development of skewed concrete bridge classes , 2018 .

[65]  G. O’Reilly,et al.  Integrating expected loss and collapse risk in performance-based seismic design of structures , 2021, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[66]  A. O'Hagan,et al.  Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of complex models: a Bayesian approach , 2004 .

[67]  A. Rodriguez-Marek,et al.  The Impact of Hazard-Consistent Ground Motion Scenarios Selection on Structural Seismic Risk Estimation , 2021, Geo-Extreme 2021.

[68]  Jesus M. de la Garza,et al.  Sustainable Infrastructure Multi-Criteria Preference Assessment of Alternatives for Early Design , 2018, Automation in Construction.

[69]  T. M. Leung,et al.  A review on Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Energy Assessment and Life Cycle Carbon Emissions Assessment on buildings , 2015 .

[70]  Alexandros A. Taflanidis,et al.  Kriging metamodeling in seismic risk assessment based on stochastic ground motion models , 2015 .

[71]  Gian Michele Calvi,et al.  Conceptual seismic design in performance‐based earthquake engineering , 2019 .

[72]  Jinkoo Kim,et al.  Computationally efficient framework for probabilistic collapse analysis of structures under extreme actions , 2018, Engineering Structures.

[73]  Alice Alipour,et al.  Multiple-Surrogate Models for Probabilistic Performance Assessment of Wind-Excited Tall Buildings under Uncertainties , 2020 .

[74]  Junwon Seo,et al.  Probabilistic seismic restoration cost estimation for transportation infrastructure portfolios with an emphasis on curved steel I-girder bridges , 2017 .

[75]  Gregory G. Deierlein,et al.  Seismic Collapse Safety of Reinforced Concrete Buildings. II: Comparative Assessment of Nonductile and Ductile Moment Frames , 2011 .

[76]  Junwon Seo,et al.  Use of response surface metamodels to generate system level fragilities for existing curved steel bridges , 2013 .

[77]  C. Chau,et al.  Corrigendum to ""A review on life cycle assessment, life cycle energy assessment and life cycle carbon emissions assessment on buildings"" [Appl. energy 143 (2015) 395-413] , 2015 .

[78]  Anuj Karpatne,et al.  A Data-Driven Approach to Full-Field Damage and Failure Pattern Prediction in Microstructure-Dependent Composites using Deep Learning , 2021, ArXiv.

[79]  Ahmed Ghobarah,et al.  Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: state of development , 2001 .

[80]  Jack W. Baker,et al.  Uncertainty propagation in probabilistic seismic loss estimation , 2008 .