2015
DOI: 10.1080/15732479.2015.1064967
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Structural damage accumulation and control for life cycle optimum seismic performance of buildings

Abstract: Seismic reliability and expected performance functions of structural systems are sensitive to the process of damage accumulation associated with the random sequences of ground motion excitations that those systems may experience. Optimum life cycle-based engineering decisions must examine the influence of concepts related to both the target safety level of the initial system and the eventual repair and maintenance actions that may be undertaken during the life of the system. This study includes an overview of … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
1
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Also, despite being thoroughly standardized (through codes such as ATC20 in America and AeDES in Italy (Baggio et al, 2007)), visual inspection outcomes are prone to much subjectivity (Galloway et al, 2014;Goretti & Di Pasquale, 2002;Goretti, Hutt, & Hedelund, 2017). In addition, slightly damaged buildings may have significantly increased vulnerability during aftershocks (Esteva, Díaz-López, Vásquez, & León, 2016;Ghosh, Padgett, & Sánchez-Silva, 2015;Jalayer, Asprone, Prota, & Manfredi, 2011;Jalayer & Ebrahimian, 2017;Raghunandan, Liel, & Luco, 2015). Such increased vulnerability is not easily captured by visual inspections that mainly provide estimations of structural performance during the main shock (Marshall et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, despite being thoroughly standardized (through codes such as ATC20 in America and AeDES in Italy (Baggio et al, 2007)), visual inspection outcomes are prone to much subjectivity (Galloway et al, 2014;Goretti & Di Pasquale, 2002;Goretti, Hutt, & Hedelund, 2017). In addition, slightly damaged buildings may have significantly increased vulnerability during aftershocks (Esteva, Díaz-López, Vásquez, & León, 2016;Ghosh, Padgett, & Sánchez-Silva, 2015;Jalayer, Asprone, Prota, & Manfredi, 2011;Jalayer & Ebrahimian, 2017;Raghunandan, Liel, & Luco, 2015). Such increased vulnerability is not easily captured by visual inspections that mainly provide estimations of structural performance during the main shock (Marshall et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Esteva et al (2015) presentan un estudio para la estimación del daño estructural en edificios regulares de seis y diez niveles, con la finalidad de evaluar de manera general la magnitud de la influencia de la acumulación de daño. En la investigación se considera la interacción suelo-estructura y el uso de dispositivos de disipación de energía; expresando el daño estructural en términos de un indicador global de daño.…”
unclassified