Fragility analysis of a subway station structure by incremental dynamic analysis

Fragility analysis constitutes the basis in seismic risk assessment and performance-based earthquake engineering during which the probability of a structure response exceeding a certain limit state at a given seismic intensity is sought to relate seismic intensity and structural vulnerability. In this article, the seismic vulnerability assessment of a subway station structure is investigated using a probabilistic method. The Daikai subway station was selected as an example structure and its seismic responses are modeled according to the nonlinear incremental dynamic analysis procedure. The limit states are defined in terms of the deformation and waterproof performance of the subway station structure based on the central column drift angle and the structural tension damage distribution obtained from the incremental dynamic analysis. Fragility curves were developed at those limit states and the probability of exceedance at the limit states of operational, slight damage, life safety, and collapse prevention was determined for the two seismic hazard levels. Results reveal that the proposed fragility analysis implementation procedure to the subway station structure provides an effective and reliable seismic vulnerability analysis method, which is essential for these underground structural systems considering their high potential risk during seismic events.

[1]  E. Oñate,et al.  A plastic-damage model for concrete , 1989 .

[2]  Jeeho Lee,et al.  Plastic-Damage Model for Cyclic Loading of Concrete Structures , 1998 .

[3]  C. Allin Cornell,et al.  Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures , 1999 .

[4]  Birger Schmidt,et al.  SEISMIC DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF UNDERGROUND STRUCTURES , 2001 .

[5]  Dimitrios Vamvatsikos,et al.  Incremental dynamic analysis , 2002 .

[6]  Pacific Earthquake A Technical Framework for Probability-Based Demand and Capacity Factor Design (DCFD) Seismic Formats , 2003 .

[7]  Antonio Bobet,et al.  Load Transfer Mechanisms between Underground Structure and Surrounding Ground: Evaluation of the Failure of the Daikai Station , 2005 .

[8]  A. Bobet,et al.  Evaluation of Soil-Structure Interaction and Structural Collapse in Daikai Subway Station During Kobe Earthquake , 2006 .

[9]  A. Elnashai,et al.  Fundamentals of earthquake engineering , 2008 .

[10]  Jinkoo Kim,et al.  Fragility analysis of steel moment frames with various seismic connections subjected to sudden loss of a column , 2010 .

[11]  Zhiyi Chen,et al.  Correlation between ground motion parameters and lining damage indices for mountain tunnels , 2013, Natural Hazards.

[12]  Mohammad Alembagheri,et al.  Damage assessment of a concrete arch dam through nonlinear incremental dynamic analysis , 2013 .

[13]  Wei Chen,et al.  Seismic Performance Upgrading for Underground Structures by Introducing Shear Panel Dampers , 2014 .

[14]  Jingbo Liu,et al.  Pushover analysis of underground structures: Method and application , 2014 .

[15]  Roberto Nascimbene,et al.  Evaluation of the shear capacity of precast-prestressed hollow core slabs: numerical and experimental comparisons , 2015 .

[16]  E. Brunesi,et al.  Numerical web-shear strength assessment of precast prestressed hollow core slab units , 2015 .

[17]  Nicola Augenti,et al.  Progressive collapse fragility of reinforced concrete framed structures through incremental dynamic analysis , 2015 .

[18]  Babak Mansouri,et al.  Fragility curves for typical steel frames with semi-rigid saddle connections , 2016 .

[19]  N. N. Pujari,et al.  Seismic fragility analysis of a typical Indian PHWR containment: Comparison of fragility models , 2016 .

[20]  Kyriazis Pitilakis,et al.  “Time-building specific” seismic vulnerability assessment of a hospital RC building using field monitoring data , 2016 .

[21]  Mohammad Alembagheri,et al.  Seismic performance evaluation of a jointed arch dam , 2016 .

[22]  Rana Roy,et al.  Seismic structural fragilities: Proposals for improved methodology per spectral matching of accelerogram , 2016 .