- Nonstructural vulnerability functions for building categories
- K. Farokhnia
- Book Title / Journal: Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering University of Colorado
- Year: 2013 , Volume: , Series:
- Earthquake engineering
- Description
- There is a rich literature of seismic vulnerability information, only exceeded
by the vast need for more. Methods to derive new seismic vulnerability functions
can be categorized into three types. In generally decreasing order of credibility they
are empirical method, analytical method, and expert opinion. Particular
implementations often include elements of two or more of these categories. The empirical approach represents the best standard of seismic vulnerability.
In this method, historical loss data are grouped by asset type (e.g., stone masonry
buildings), data for a group are plotted on a graph with loss on the y-axis and
estimated excitation on the x-axis, and a regression analysis is performed to fit a
curve to the mean or median value, and quite often to the residual error. The second
approach, analysis by engineering principles, provides insight that empirical
methods do not, but can be costly and can lack the built-in validation of empirical
methods. The third approach, expert opinion, is the most efficient of the three,
requiring little analysis but offering little in the way of validation. The present
research addresses the second approach, or rather a subset of it: vulnerability of
non-structural building components. Non-structural components constitute the majority of the construction cost of
buildings, contributing around 60% (Whittaker and Soong, 2003). By non-structural
components, one means any component in a building that does not significantly 2
contribute to resisting lateral or vertical loads. Nonstructural components include:
terminal and package units, plumbing fixtures, lighting and branch wiring,
partitions, doors, window etc.
PDF |
