Evaluating seismic retrofitting efficiency through ambient vibration tests and analytical models

Abstract

Economic and environmental imperatives lead to an ever growing need to extend the service life of the existing building stock without putting the users at risk. In zones prone to moderate seismic hazard, many buildings were built without considering seismic actions. The design and assessment of efficient seismic retrofitting rely on physical models of the buildings. However, model errors resulting from simplifications and other assumptions might lead to a biased and thus unreliable diagnosis. Therefore, structural measurements are interpreted to reduce the uncertainty related to the ambiguous task of inferring the real structural response of existing buildings, even in the linear elastic range.This contribution includes the assessment of the retrofitting of an existing masonry building through ambient vibration field measurements. Measured frequencies and mode shapes are interpreted using an error-domain model-falsification framework that allows explicit representation of uncertainties related to modelling and measurement errors. A simple continuous Timoshenko cantilever beam, characterizing the linear elastic dynamic response of the building, is used to model the building. It is concluded that such interpretation of ambient vibration data is useful to assess the efficiency of seismic retrofitting.

Data-Interpretation Methodologies for Non-Linear Earthquake Response Predictions of Damaged Structures

“…8. Model errors expressed in terms of modal displacement can be transformed into MAC values using a similar procedure (Reuland et al, 2015). If multi-source uncertainties are identified for mode-shapes, the n ϵ sources are combined using Eq.…”

Methodology Maps for Model-Based Sensor-Data Interpretation to Support Civil-Infrastructure Management

“…Residual capacity is defined as the ability of an infrastructure to resist aftershocks and subsequent earthquake events. While EDMF has been used for post-earthquake evaluation of many case studies (Reuland 2018;Reuland et al, 2015Reuland et al, , 2017, due to limitations in data available from real earthquakes, validation with data from aftershocks could not be performed for every case study. However, data-interpretation results from the shake table test were validated to show that EDMF provided the accurate identification (Reuland et al, 2019b).…”