Loading menu…

Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Adamson University Buildings As Built using Fragility Curves

§ Manuel Luis Quezon University

Send Message

To: Author

Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Adamson University Buildings As Built using Fragility Curves

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

REORK62

Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Adamson University Buildings As Built using Fragility Curves Banner

Key Research Insights

Synthesized scholarly intelligence & interactive research assistant
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu
Reading Preferences
Font Size
Line Spacing
Background
This converted HTML version may contain rendering inconsistencies. Please refer to the PDF for the authoritative version, or click here to provide feedback.

Abstract

Adamson University buildings’ age ranges from 10 years to 86 years. The structures’ age can be one of the factors of their vulnerability to seismic hazard. Possibility of having different damages after the event of seismic activities can be measured through structural modeling and subjecting the latter to earthquake simulation. In the field of structural reliability, fragility analysis can be used in the assessment of structures. This type of analysis can be carried out by taking the structural performance using nonlinear analyses: Pushover Analysis and Time History Analysis. Five (5) buildings in Adamson University were analyzed and modeled in a structural analysis software based from the developed as-built plans with rebound hammer test results for the compressive strength of concrete. These structural models were subjected through a total of 22 ground motion data (from both Philippine and Japan), with each ground motion data normalized from 0.1g to 1.0g of peak ground acceleration (PGA). The result of fragility analysis has some limitations such as the use of as-built plan of each building assessed. The lowest probability of exceedance of 9% at a PGA of 0.4g as per National Structural Code of the Philippines specification is based from the fragility curve of FRC Building under a “Complete Damage” or damage rank of “As”.

References

56 Cites in Article
  1. 1. A Cinitha,P Umesha,Nagesh Iyer (2014). An overview of corrosion and experimental studies on corroded mild steel compression members. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 18(6), 1735-1744.
  2. 2. Afp (2017). Strong 6.2 magnitude earthquake rocks Philippines. Strong 6.2 magnitude earthquake rocks Philippines
  3. 3. A Ang,W Tang (2007). Probability Concepts in Engineering: Emphasis on Applications to Civil and Environmental Engineering. Probability Concepts in Engineering: Emphasis on Applications to Civil and Environmental Engineering, 1
  4. 4. K Ang,R Valentin,A Naval,J Manabat (2018). Seismic vulnerability assessment of Father Regis Clet (FRC) in Adamson University based from As-Built Plan. Seismic vulnerability assessment of Father Regis Clet (FRC) in Adamson University based from As-Built Plan
  5. 5. B Arago,C Calipusan,J Ornido,M Vitug (2018). Seismic vulnerability assessment of Meralco Building in Adamson University based on As-Built Plan. Seismic vulnerability assessment of Meralco Building in Adamson University based on As-Built Plan
  6. 6. D Arandia,N Rosete,J Santos,C Sarmiento (2018). Seismic vulnerability assessment of Saint Vincent Building in Adamson University based from developed As-Built Plans. Seismic vulnerability assessment of Saint Vincent Building in Adamson University based from developed As-Built Plans
  7. 7. M Baylon (2015). Seismic assessment of transportation lifeline in Metro Manila. 2nd CAMANAVA Studies Conference, 1-7.
  8. 8. M Baylon (2017). Developing seismic fragility curves in assessing bridge pier. Developing seismic fragility curves in assessing bridge pier
  9. 9. M Baylon (2017). Seismic assessment of LRT Line 1 Monumento to 5th Avenue carriageway pier using fragility curve. International journal of real estates studies, 49-59.
  10. 10. Renjun Orain,Mark Cezar,Merlin Marfa,Ian Tiao,Pepito Guerrero,Milagros Ortega,Fanny Almeniana (2012). Optimizing Customer Decision-Making with Enhanced Product Evaluation Using Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis and Naïve Bayes Algorithm. Business, Education, Social Sciences, and Technology, 1(2), 159-166.
  11. 11. Michael Baylon,Lessandro Garciano,Takeshi Koike (2012). Assessing the performance of a transportation lifeline in the Philippines, the Light Rail Transit (LRT) System, under a large magnitude earthquake. IABSE Congress Reports, 18, 1710-1717.
  12. 12. Huseyin Bilgin (2013). Fragility-based assessment of public buildings in Turkey. Engineering Structures, 56, 1283-1294.
  13. 13. J Brooks-Bartlett (2018). Unknown Title.
  14. 14. C Charlottesville (2014). Guideline for AS-Built Plans. Guideline for AS-Built Plans
  15. 15. Eunsoo Choi,Reginald Desroches,Bryant Nielson (2004). Seismic fragility of typical bridges in moderate seismic zones. Engineering Structures, 26(2), 187-199.
  16. 16. & Chopra,Goel (2001). Evaluation of Nonlinear Static Analysis for Special Moment Resisting. Evaluation of Nonlinear Static Analysis for Special Moment Resisting, 529-533.
  17. 17. & Chopra,Goel (2012). Nonlinear to Static Analysis to Assess Seismic Performance and Vulnerability of Code-Conforming RC BUILDING. Reinforced Concrete Building, 529-533.
  18. 18. A Chopra (2012). Existing air sparging model and literature review for the development of an air sparging optimization decision tool. Dynamic of Structures (Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering
  19. 19. A Cinitha,P Umesh,N Iyer (2012). Nonlinear to Static Analysis to Assess Seismic Performance and Vulnerability of Code-Conforming. RC Building, 39-46.
  20. 20. G Deirlein,A Reinhorn,M Wilford (2010). NEHRP Seismic Technical Brief. Nonlinear Structural Analysis: A Guide for Practicing Engineers, 2-3.
  21. 21. G Deodatis,M Tantala (2002). Development of seismic fragility curves for tall buildings. 15th ASCE Engineering Mechanics Conferene, 1-8.
  22. 22. Amr Elnashai,Luigi Di Sarno (2008). Fundamentals of Earthquake Engineering. Fundamentals of Earthqake Engineering
  23. 23. J Evers (2015). Ring of Fire. Ring of Fire
  24. 24. F Hosseinpour,A Abdelnaby (2017). Fragility curves for RC frames under multiple earthquakes. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 98, 222-234.
  25. 25. L Garciano,T Koike (2006). Managing the risks of a wind farm in typhoon-prone areas. Proceedings of the 10 th East Asia-Pacific Conference on Strctural Engineering & Construction, 219-224.
  26. 26. Jayadipta Ghosh,Jamie Padgett (2010). Aging Considerations in the Development of Time-Dependent Seismic Fragility Curves. Journal of Structural Engineering, 136(12), 1497-1511.
  27. 27. Gregory Deierlein,Andrei Reinhorn,Carl Willford (2010). Assessing and Retrofitting. Assessing and Retrofitting
  28. 28. Hazus (2003). Multi-hazard Loss Estimation Methodology.
  29. 29. Hazus (2013). Quantitative Relationship Between Pieris brassicae Population and Damage in Cauliflower. Quantitative Relationship Between Pieris brassicae Population and Damage in Cauliflower
  30. 30. Hazus-Mh (2013). Retrieved from A Federal Emergency Management Agency: HAZUS-MH. Retrieved from A Federal Emergency Management Agency: HAZUS-MH
  31. 31. Mh (2013). Hazus Loss Estimation Software Earthquake Model revised Utah database updated through 2013-Prepared for the Utah Division of Emergency Management. Hazus Loss Estimation Software Earthquake Model revised Utah database updated through 2013-Prepared for the Utah Division of Emergency Management
  32. 32. Luis Ibarra,Ricardo Medina,Helmut Krawinkler (2005). Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 34(12), 1489-1511.
  33. 33. R Ignacio,M Santos,P Ulibas,E Fenix (2018). Seismic vulnerability assessment of Cardinal Santos Building in Adamson University based on Developed As-Built Plan. Seismic vulnerability assessment of Cardinal Santos Building in Adamson University based on Developed As-Built Plan
  34. 34. (2013). Republic of the Philippines Department of Public Works, Transportation and Communications BUREAU OF POSTS Manila. Philippine Political Science Journal, 8(12), 107-107.
  35. 35. C Kafali,M Grigoriu (2004). ASCE specialty conference on probabilistic mechanics and structural & geotechnical reliability. Structural Safety, 11(1), 79.
  36. 36. Kazi Karim,Fumio Yamazaki (2001). Effect of earthquake ground motions on fragility curves of highway bridge piers based on numerical simulation. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 30(12), 1839-1856.
  37. 37. Helmut Krawinkler,G Seneviratna (1998). Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation. Engineering Structures, 20(4-6), 452-464.
  38. 38. B Nielson (2005). Analytical fragility curves for highway bridgesi in moderate seismic zones. Analytical fragility curves for highway bridgesi in moderate seismic zones
  39. 39. A Nowak,K Collins (2013). Reliability of structures. Reliability of structures
  40. 40. Young‐ji Park,Alfredo Ang (1985). Mechanistic Seismic Damage Model for Reinforced Concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering, 111(4), 722-739.
  41. 41. Deo Llamas,Jeffrey Perez,Crystel Legaspi,Jonard Acid,John Naing,Kathleen Papiona (2001). Stress releases and seismic gaps: Earthquake sequences strike Eastern Mindanao, Philippines. Temblor
  42. 42. Deo Llamas,Jeffrey Perez,Crystel Legaspi,Jonard Acid,John Naing,Kathleen Papiona (2006). Stress releases and seismic gaps: Earthquake sequences strike Eastern Mindanao, Philippines. Temblor
  43. 43. Mary Fatima D. Lompot,Rodel C. Pomentil (2018). USING SOCIAL MEDIA AS A MARKETING TOOL FOR TRAVELLERS. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 593-613.
  44. 44. A Quereshi,J Raju (2013). Lima, Peru: Inca earthquake-resistant construction and a bogus American earthquake prediction. Earthquake Time Bombs, 251-261.
  45. 45. Karthik Ramanathan,Jamie Padgett,Reginald Desroches (2012). Temporal evolution of seismic fragility curves for concrete box-girder bridges in California. Engineering Structures, 97, 29-46.
  46. 46. Requiso (2013). Research Design. Research Design
  47. 47. D Requiso (2013). Seismic Fragility of Transportation Lifeline Piers in the Philippines, under Shear Failure, Relationship between the damage index (DI) and the damage rank (DR). Earthquake Engineering, 20, 38.
  48. 48. Jason Ongpeng,Cheryl Roxas,Iona Rubinos,Andrew Escleto,Sherie Tan,Erica Bolivar,Martin Kalaw,Michael Promentilla (2013). Reinforced alkali-activated concrete with induced corrosion. Sustainable Construction Materials and Technologies (SCMT), 2, 578-586.
  49. 49. D Requiso,A Balili,L Garciano,(n.D Development of Seismic Fragility Curves of a Transport Lifeline Pier in the Philippines for Flexure. Development of Seismic Fragility Curves of a Transport Lifeline Pier in the Philippines for Flexure
  50. 50. Roison Narvaez,Marilane Ferrer,Ralph Peco,Neil Sangilan,Ronalyn Topacio (2013). Uses of Telehealth in Elderly Patients during COVID-19 Pandemic: An Integrative Review. International Journal of Computing Sciences Research, 6, 893-912.
  51. 51. Masanobu Shinozuka,M Feng,Jongheon Lee,Toshihiko Naganuma (2003). Statistical Analysis of Fragility Curves. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 126(12), 1224-1231.
  52. 52. Siti Nur,Aqilah Saruddina,F (2015). Fragility curves for low-and mid-rise buildings in Malaysia. The 5th International Conference of Euro Asia Civil Engineering Forum (EACEF-5), 873-878.
  53. 53. J Sorensen (2004). Notes in Structural Reliability Theory and Risk Analysis. Notes in Structural Reliability Theory and Risk Analysis
  54. 54. S Stefanidou,A Kappos (2013). OPTIMUM SELECTION OF RETROFIT MEASURES FOR R/C BRIDGES USING FRAGILITY CURVES. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2013), 894-911.
  55. 55. N Ufuk Hancilara (2014). Earthquake vulnerability of school buildings: Probabilistic structural fragility analyses. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 169-178.
  56. 56. D Yap (2012). Metro Manila Water Security Study. What if 7.6 quake hit Metro Manila? Retrieved from Inquirer

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Baylon, Michael B. 2018. "Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Adamson University Buildings As Built using Fragility Curves". Global Journal of Research in Engineering GJRE-E Volume 18 (GJRE Volume 18 Issue E1).

More Citation Formats

Download Citation

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/gjre

Print ISSN 0975-5861

e-ISSN 2249-4596

Keywords
Classification
GJRE-E Classification FOR Code: 290899
Version of record
v1.2

Issue date
July 4, 2018

Language
English
Order Article Reprint
Experience in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 1.1K
Total Downloads: 77
All Trends

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Adamson University Buildings As Built using Fragility Curves

Baylon, B
Baylon, B Manuel Luis Quezon University