结构抗倒塌易损性分析中地震动输入不确定性影响研究

THE IMPACT OF GROUND MOTION INPUTS ON THE UNCERTAINTY OF STRUCTURAL COLLAPSE FRAGILITY

  • 摘要: 在结构抗倒塌易损性分析中地震动输入的选取只是众多环节之一,其不确定性影响往往被忽视。该文基于PEER强震动记录数据库,按震级、距离和场地参数(M、RVS30)进行单变量控制将强震动记录分成9组,新定义指数ISa用以比较不同分组地震动的相对能量差异;对3层、8层以及15层三种不同自振周期的混凝土框架结构采用IDA方法进行抗倒塌易损性分析,比较不同M、RVS30工况地震动输入下的易损性结果,同时与ATC63推荐记录作为地震动输入的易损性结果进行了对比,结果表明:3种结构的倒塌性态点SaT1)均随着M增大、R增大以及VS30变小而减小;三种结构都体现了在大震、远场及软土场地的地震动作用下更加易损倒塌,与ISa指数体现的地震动蕴含能量的分布相一致;通过SISImax两个参数在不同工况下的对比,表明中长周期结构受距离的影响更为显著,以及震级对结构抗倒塌影响更敏感;以ATC63推荐的强震动记录随意用作地震输入被证实可引起结构抗倒塌易损性曲线较大的不确定性。为降低不确定性影响,建议在进行结构抗倒塌易损性分析时采用考虑场址危险一致性与结构自振特性的地震动输入选取方法。

     

    Abstract: The selection of ground motion input is one of the key procedures in the analysis of structural collapse fragility, but its impact on the uncertainty is usually ignored. The strong motion records from PEER database are divided into 9 groups by constraining the range of a single variable, which is one of the earthquake magnitude, distance and site parameters (M, R, VS30). A new index ISa is proposed to evaluate the difference of the relative energy of different groups of strong motion records. Incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) is conducted to analyze the collapse fragilities of three concrete frame structures, which are 3-floor, 8-floor and 15-floor with different natural periods, respectively. The fragilities derived from each group of the ground motion inputs are compared. They are also compared with the fragilities when the 22 records recommended by ATC63 are used as the ground motion inputs. The results show that the ground motion intensity representing the occurrence of collapse performance Sa(T1) decreases with the increase of earthquake magnitude, increase of epicentral distance and decrease of VS30, irrespective of the structures of concern. All three structures are more vulnerable to collapse if the strong-motion records at a far-field soft site in a large earthquake are selected as the seismic inputs, which is approximately consistent with the distribution of the relative energy of the ground motions represented by ISa. The comparisons of the two parameters SI and SImax among the different groups indicate that there is a relatively high sensitivity of epicentral distance for long-period structures, and the structural collapse fragility is more sensitive to the earthquake magnitude than to either the distance or the site condition. It is confirmed that a large uncertainty of the structural collapse fragility will be produced if the 22 records recommended by ATC63 are used as the ground motion inputs. For the sake of decreasing the uncertainty, it is suggested to use a method which can consider the seismic hazard of the site and the structural dynamic characteristics to select appropriate ground motion inputs when analyzing the collapse fragility of a structure.

     

/

返回文章
返回