PEER Research: Accomplishments & Impact Greg Deierlein, Stanford University and the PEER Research...
-
date post
15-Jan-2016 -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of PEER Research: Accomplishments & Impact Greg Deierlein, Stanford University and the PEER Research...
PEER Research:Accomplishments & Impact
Greg Deierlein, Stanford Universityand the PEER Research Committee
PEER Summative Meeting – June 13, 2007
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Base Shear
Deformation
Damage Threshold
CollapseOnset
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
FEMA 356 Performance LevelsIO LS CPPBEE yesterday
$, % replacement0 25% 50% 100%
Downtime, days0
1 7 30 180
Casualty risk0.00.0001 0.001 0.01 0.25
PBEE today
Evolution of PBEE
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
REF: Yang, Conte, Elgamal (UCSD)
Comprehensive System Simulation
S chemat ic of the F inite E lement M odel
2 D , 4 D
N o n - l in e a r p -y e le m e n t
N o n - l in e a r
N o n - lin e a r p -y e le m e n t
N o n - l in e a r F ib e r B e a m E le m e n t
D ra g
C lo s u re
P la s t ic E la s t ic
G a p
P ile N o d e
N e a r f ie ldP la s t ic R e s p o n s e
F a r - f ie ldE la s t ic
S te e l F ib e rs
U n c o n fin e d
C o n c re te F ib e rs
R e s p o n s e
C o n c re te F ib e rs
C o n fin e d C o re
F ib e r B e a m E le m e n t
= 1 4 D
1 4 E le m e n tsa t 1 .0 D o .c .
C o m p re s s io nA x ia l
E x te n d e d
G ro u n d L e v e l
PV
P ile S h a fto r 6 D
D is p la c e m e n t T im e h is to ry in p u tsfro m 1 -D n o n l in e a r s ite re s p o n s e
A
REF: Boulanger (UCDavis)
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
PEER’s Research Projects & Products
PBEE Methodology Technologies & Data Illustrative Examples Guidelines
SimulationSimulation
HazardHazard
MethodologyMethodologyModelsModels
ImpactImpact
t r a n s i t i o n s
Year 1 Year 5 Year 10
Methodology: Development ---- Application/PackagingData/Model: Creation ---- Implementation/ValidationDemonstrations: Evaluate/Synthesize ---- Impact of PBEE
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Engineering Demand Parameter
Engineering Demand Parameter
Intensity Measure Intensity Measure
Damage MeasureDamage Measure
Performance-Based Framework: Buildings
Decision VariableDecision Variable• Collapse & Casualties
• Direct Financial Loss
• Downtime
drift as an EDP
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Bridge and Transportation Systems
Damage Measure (DM)Damage Measure (DM)
Decision Variable (DV)Decision Variable (DV)
Engineering Demand Parameter (EDP)
Engineering Demand Parameter (EDP)
Intensity Measure Intensity Measure
Quality of Network Service
Restoration ($ and Time)
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Electric Utility Lifeline Systems
Damage Measure (DM)Damage Measure (DM)
Decision Variable (DV)Decision Variable (DV)Power
Transmission Lines
Engineering Demand Parameter (EDP)
Engineering Demand Parameter (EDP)
Intensity Measure Intensity Measure
Quality of ServiceRestoration ($ and Time)
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Performance Assessment Components
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Relating Performance to Risk Decision Making
Quantifying Damage Measures
Simulation of System Response
Earthquake Hazard Characterization
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
)(||| IMdIMEDPdGEDPDMdGDMDVGDVv
PBEE – Probability Framework Equation
Performance (Loss) Models and Simulation HazardImpact
IM – Intensity Measure
EDP – Engineering Demand Parameter
DM – Damage Measure
DV – Decision Variable
(DV) – Probabilistic Description of Decision Variable
(e.g., Mean Annual Probability $ Loss > 50% Replacement Cost)
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Hazard Characterization
PEER Ground Motion Database
Next Generation Attenuation Functions Hazard Mapping
Geotechnical Data Center
Selection & Scaling of Ground Motions
Spatial Hazard & Correlations (scenario)
Site Response and Effects
Utilization of GM Shaking Data
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
PEER Ground Motion Database Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
New Data Previous Data
0 . 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0Distance (km )
4
5
6
7
8
Mag
nitude
0 . 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0Distance (km )
4
5
6
7
8
Mag
nitude
-0.5
0.0
0.5
Ac
ce
l. (g
)
-0.5
0.0
0.5
Ac
ce
l. (g
)
PS10, 47 Deg.
PS10, Vertical
20 25 30 35 40
-0.5
0.0
0.5
Ac
ce
l. (g
)
PS10, 317 Deg.
2002 Denali (A laska) EQ, Pum p Station 10
0.01 0.1 1 10Period (sec)
0
0.5
1
1.5
Sp
ec
tra
l A
cc
ele
rati
on
(g
)
Over 10,000 recordsUniformly Processed Available On-Line“Google Inspired”
Ground motions Maps Damage Photos
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Attenuation Functions & Hazard MapsDecision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
NGA Attributes Long Period (0 to 10 sec.) Magnitude Range (5.0 to 8.5) Distance Range (0 to 200 km) Fault Mechanisms (SS, R, N)
More Accurate Lower intensity in many
places
Improved Understanding Spectral shape Spatial correlations
Influencing US national seismic hazard maps
Atten 805r, PEN, SS, Rrup=10.0 km, Vs30=760, D=1
0.01 0.1 1 10
Period (sec)
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
Sp
ectr
al
Ac
cele
rati
on
(g
)
M=7.5
6.5
5.5
4.5
C&B 2003
C&B 2005 NGA
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 20
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
Sa co
mpo
nent
[g]
Period [seconds]
BJF Prediction: MedianBJF Prediction: Median +/- 1.0 sigmaBJF Prediction: Median +/- 1.0 sigmaBJF Prediction: Median +/- 2.0 sigmaBJF Prediction: Median +/- 2.0 sigmaObserved Sa - Loma Prieta (ID 11022)
+1.7 at T = 1.0 sec.
-0.3 at T = 0.45 sec.
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Selection & Scaling of Ground Motions
the “+ effect”
• Spectral Shape of Extreme (Rare) Ground Motions
• Collapse Assessment at the MCE
Significance of +(SSF) effect
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 20
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
Period [seconds]
Sa co
mpo
nent
[g]
Set selected for 2% in 50 yrs ( > 1.0)Set selected without considering
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 40
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Sag.m.
[g]
P[c
olla
pse]
Non-Epsilon SetEpsilon Set ( > 1.0)
Average Response Spectra
(from bins of + and epsilon neutral records)
+
+
+22% increase in apparent collapse capacity
Building Collapse Fragility
(case study 4-story building from NL dynamic analyses)
Period (sec)Sa (T1)
Pro
b [
coll
apse
]
Sa/
gDecision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Structural & Geotechnical Simulation
Reinforced Concrete Structural Modeling Cyclic degradation and shear needed for
assessing damage and collapse potential
Continuum Soil Models Large ground deformations & Liquefaction
Soil-Foundation-Structure Interaction Site response, foundation interaction necessary
for system performance
Computational Reliability Consistent tracking of uncertainty from hazard
to model uncertainty
Advanced Computing and Simulation Integrating with NEESit and cyberinfrastructure
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Integrated Simulation/Assessment Platform
Algorithms,Solvers,Parallel/distributedcomputing
Simulation & Reliability Models for Materials, Components, and Systems
http://opensees.berkeley.edu
Computation InformationTechnology
Software framework,Databases, Visualization,Internet/grid computation
Models
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Simulating Non-Ductile RC Columns
Numerical Models
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Simulating Collapse of RC Buildings
Building Frame Definitions
-100 -50 0 50 100 150-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
Sh
ea
r F
orc
e (
kN)
Column Top Horizontal Deflection (mm)
Test 19 (kN, mm, rad): K
e = 3.1779e+007
Kinit
= 7.4024e+007
s = 0.02
c = -0.04 (ND = 1)
y = 0.0091
cap,pl
= 0.069 (LB = 1)
u,mono,pl = 0.116 (LB = 1)
= 85, c = 1.20 isPDeltaRemoved = 1
Experimental ResultsModel Prediction
Component Tests & Models
EQ: 11011, Sa: 4.39g EQ: 11012, Sa: 2.66g
EQ: 11021, Sa: 2.52g EQ: 11022, Sa: 2.12g
Collapse Mechanisms
0 1 2 3 4 50
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
[Sacomp
(T=1.0s)] / [MCE of 0.9g]
P[c
olla
ps
e]
Empirical CDFLognormal CDF (RTR Var.)Lognormal CDF (RTR + Modeling Var.)
P[Collapse/MCE] = 16 %
Collapse Fragility Curves
beam-column joint
column
beam
foundation
MWtrib
Wlean
bay size
H1
st-s
tory
n-s
torie
s a
t H
leaning (P-D)
column
Building System Simulation
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Geotechnical and Soil-Foundation Models
4 @
11’
= 4
4’
6’
Nodes
Elastic beam-column elements
24’
12’ 12’Le Lm
-0.8 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8Norm alized settlem ent (s/z50)
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
No
rmal
ized
ver
tica
l lo
ad (
Q/Q
ult
)
Fo
rce
Disp
Qz springs (Boulanger, 2000)
Centrifuge Experiments (NEES-UC Davis)
Soil-Foundation Model
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Soil-Structure-Foundation Interaction
Behaviour of piles in liquefied soils using coupled fluid-soil models
System performance analyses
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Damage Measures & Fragility Functions
Reinforced Concrete Components columns & beam-column joints
Nonstructural Components & Contents interior partitions laboratory equipment HVAC facilities
Electric Utility Equipment
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
ParameterDevelopment of concepts, techniques and data applied to:
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Repair-Specific Damage Functions
Damage State 0
Damage State 2
Damage State 4
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.000.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91
Drift (%)
MOR 0MOR 1MOR 2MOR 3MOR 4
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.000.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91
Drift (%)
MOR 0MOR 1MOR 2MOR 3MOR 4
MOR 0MOR 1MOR 2MOR 3MOR 4
MOR 0MOR 1MOR 2MOR 3MOR 4Pr
obab
ility
of
Req
uiri
ng a
MO
R
Components Evaluated:
• RC Beam-Columns, Joints, Walls• Interior Partitions• Laboratory Equipment• Ceiling & MEP Systems• Electric Utility Components
P[DM:EDP]
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Testing Nonstructural Components & Equipment
Lab Equipment• Development of Damage (Fragility) Functions• Design Improvements to Components and Equipment• Development of Testing Standards
- FEMA 461: Interim Protocols For Determining Seismic Performance Characteristics of Structural and Nonstructural Components
- IEEE-693 standard for testing
Electric Utility Equipment
Motion-Damage Pairs from Real Buildings
0.2 0.4 0.80.6 1.0 1.2 1.61.4
No Damage
Heavy damage
Moderate damage
PFA (g)
DM
161 97 25 171150
Insignificant damage
2 16 29 51210 112
1 1 113 111 1 1
HVAC Systems
P [ DM | EDP = PGA ]
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
EDP [ PGA (g) ]
DM1
DM2
HVAC systems
EDP ( PFA g )
HVAC Systems1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.00.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
P (DM | EDP = PFA )a model for systematically collecting & characterizing data from damaged buildings
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Translating Damage to Decision Variables
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Decision Making and PBEE Applications
Tradeoffs in Decision Making quantifying benefits and costs
Influencing practice “early adopters” codes and standards implementing new technologies
Influencing policy benchmarking standards and practice collaborating with stakeholders regulatory models
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Decision Variable
Decision Variable
Intensity Measure
Intensity Measure
Damage Measure
Damage Measure
Engineering Demand
Parameter
Engineering Demand
Parameter
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Integrative Testbeds
Buildings - Van Nuys - UC Sciences
UCB Campus
Bridges - Humboldt Bay - I-880 Viaduct
Bay Area Highway Network
0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Miles
Map 8.2Building Downtime in Months from a Rare Earthquake
StreetsHayward FaultTopo LinesNon-core Buildings
Downtime for Building in Months0 - 12 - 45 - 1213 - 2425 - 40
N
EW
S
#
OXFORD
#
HEARSTBarker Hall Tolman Hall
Giannini Hall
Hesse Hall
Warren Hall
Mulford Hall
Campbell Hall
McLaughlin Hall
Latimer Hall
Lewis Hall
Hildebrand Hall
Wurster Hall
2251 COLLEGE AVE
Berkeley Art Musuem
Art Gallery
Barrows Hall
2223 Fulton
2111 BANCROFT WAY
Doe Annex
0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Miles
Map 8.2Building Downtime in Months from a Rare Earthquake
StreetsHayward FaultTopo LinesNon-core Buildings
Downtime for Building in Months0 - 12 - 45 - 1213 - 2425 - 40
N
EW
S
#
OXFORD
#
HEARSTBarker Hall Tolman Hall
Giannini Hall
Hesse Hall
Warren Hall
Mulford Hall
Campbell Hall
McLaughlin Hall
Latimer Hall
Lewis Hall
Hildebrand Hall
Wurster Hall
2251 COLLEGE AVE
Berkeley Art Musuem
Art Gallery
Barrows Hall
2223 Fulton
2111 BANCROFT WAY
Doe Annex
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
High-priority Issues for Bridges
Post-earthquake residual displacements are a primary contributor to bridge closure.
Liquefaction hazards continue to cause widespread damage or drive huge foundation costs.
After sixth repetition of Maximum Run - Olive View
About 100 columns with more than
1.75% drift were demolished after
1995 Kobe Earthquake although
they did not collapse.
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Bridge Testbed Model in OpenSees
Modular design developed
(Stojadinovic)
Core
Foundation
Deck
Columns
Abutment
Billington, Eberhard, Lehman,
Mahin plus Kunnath
Arduino & Kramer, Boulanger,
Brandenberg, Bray, Martin plus Jeremic,
Elgamal Ashford
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Bridges with lateral spreading / liquefactionAssessment of current approaches, improve understanding, and identification of benefits of nonlinear analysis:
Current design and remediation methods, vs. coupled soil-pile-structure models in OpenSees
Columns
Deck
CL
Wing wall
Bearing padsBack wall
Exterior shear keysSuperstructure
Expanded Polystyrene
Stem wallFooting
Piles
3
Columns
Deck
CL
Wing wall
Bearing padsBack wall
Exterior shear keysSuperstructure
Expanded Polystyrene
Stem wallFooting
Piles
3
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
New Technologies: Self-Centering Columns
0
-0.8 0 0.8
-30 -15 0 15 30
-400
-200
0
200
400
Design method: Mild reinforcement reduced Prestressing force from a
central unbonded tendon Same envelop Q- Peak displacements within
10% of RC column Residual displacements
less than 20% of RC column
Q
ECC, Steel Jackets, Unbonded Rebars
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Building Benchmarking Studies
multiple realizations
“design uncertainty”
Facility Definition
PBEE Assessment
IM-EDP-DM-DV
DV’s:
p(collapse)
p($ > X)
p(D.T. > Y)
2003 Code Compliant- Strength- Stiffness- Capacity Design- Detailing
… …
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Benchmarking: 1967 vs. 2003 Designs
1960’s Vintage 2003 Design Codes
Building
Collapse Risk
Pcol./MCE MAFcollapse
2003 5% 1 x 10-4
1967 40 to 80%
20 to 50 x 10-4
Effect of Design Parameters on Performance: Minimum Base Shear Strength
0 5 10 15 200
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Number of StoriesP
[Col
laps
e|S
a2
/50]
Space FramesPerimeter Frames
Issue: What minimum base shear (if any) should be imposed in ASCE 7 Minimum Design Loads Standard?
EQ: 121231, Sag.m.
(T=0.87sec): 2.26g EQ: 121232, Sag.m.
(T=0.87sec): 1.66g
EQ: 121321, Sag.m.
(T=0.87sec): 3.06g EQ: 121322, Sag.m.
(T=0.87sec): 2.99g
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0 2 4 6 8
Period (Sec)
Vd/W
Design Spectra(SDC D, R=8)
0.044 minimum base shear
T4stT20st
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
Building code, regulation and policy issues
Benchmarking building codes Absolute safety and performance Relative safety and performance across:
systems/materials building heights/configurations, seismic hazard categories use/occupancy
Non-ductile RC Building Risks how bad is the problem? technologies to address it cost-effectively policy, incentives and regulation
Residential High Rise structural systems not envisioned by
code tenant & societal performance
expectations
New Innovative structural systems
NSF-PEER Summative Meeting
PEER --- Making an IMPACT Tools for decision makers
Cost-benefit, financial models Regulatory & implementation issues (IRCC)
Packaging of PBEE Methodology Specificity & Simplification !
Demonstrate value/benefits of PBEE Building benchmarking Bridge systems (liquefiable soil, self-centering)
Dissemination & Outreach Initiatives Research community (NEES researchers) Professional engineers Other design professionals & decision makers
Implementation Initiatives Buildings - ATC 58, 63, NEHRP, Insurance, … Bridges – Caltrans, FHWA, …