Pre- & Post-Earthquake Applications of Large-Scale Dynamic - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
pre post earthquake applications of large scale dynamic
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Pre- & Post-Earthquake Applications of Large-Scale Dynamic - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 29, 2023 192 likes •510 views

ICRM Symposium 2018, 7 August 2018 Pre- & Post-Earthquake Applications of Large-Scale Dynamic Analysis of Cities Xin-Zheng LU Institute of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University Email:

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Xin-Zheng LU

Institute of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University Email: luxz@tsinghua.edu.cn Website: www.luxinzheng.net

Pre- & Post-Earthquake Applications of Large-Scale Dynamic Analysis of Cities

ICRM Symposium 2018, 7 August 2018

1

slide-2
SLIDE 2

What?

◼ What is Large-Scale Dynamic Analysis of Cities?

2

Earthquake ground motion Input Input Structural dynamics Seismic damage Building City Structural dynamics

slide-3
SLIDE 3

How?

◼ How to do Dynamic Analysis of Cities?

3

The ground motion (recorded or simulated) Structural dynamic models (multi-scale models) Dynamic response

Structural dynamic models (Physics driven model)

Advantage

  • Strictly following the fundamental of structural dynamics
  • Accurately represent the features of individual buildings
  • Accurately represent the characteristics of earthquakes
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Typical example

◼ Beijing CBD under M8.0 Sanhe-Pinggu Earthquake (1679)

Beijing CBD

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Typical example

World Trade Center-3 Z-15 Tower CCTV Tower

5 ◼ Beijing CBD under M8 Sanhe-Pinggu Earthquake (1679)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Typical example

◼ Beijing CBD under M8 Sanhe-Pinggu Earthquake (1679) 6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Typical example

◼ Beijing CBD under M8 Sanhe-Pinggu Earthquake (1679) 7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Why?

8

Conventional method

EQ magnitude EQ Intensity Fragility curve Loss Building info.

Significant Uncertainty Significant Uncertainty Significant Uncertainty Uncertainty

Urban planning, Disaster preparation Emergency response

Pre-EQ Post-EQ

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Why?

9

Conventional method

EQ magnitude EQ Intensity

Significant Uncertainty

1 2 1

ln( ) I a a M a R R = + − +

Significant Uncertainty

Significant uncertainty:

Magnitude vs. Intensity

Intensity magnitude distance

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Why?

10

Conventional method

EQ magnitude EQ Intensity Fragility curve Building info.

Significant Uncertainty Significant Uncertainty Uncertainty

Ground motion intensity measure ln (IM) Correlation coefficient r Structural seismic response demand measure ln(DM) b b

( ln(DMi), ln(IMi) ) (ln(DM) = ln(a)+ b ln(IM)

2 1

(ln( ) ln( )) 2

n b i i i

DM aIM n b

=

− = −

Significant uncertainty:

Intensity measure vs. Structural response

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 2 4 6 8 10 12 T 1 (s) Correlation coefficientr

PGA S

a(T 1)

Maximum drift

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Significant uncertainty of intensity measure

11

  • 4.00
  • 3.00
  • 2.00
  • 1.00

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00

t/s a/ g

2.9g!

2011 Japan, Tohoku EQ Limited damage

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Why?

12

Conventional method

EQ magnitude EQ Intensity Fragility curve Loss Building info.

Significant Uncertainty Significant Uncertainty Significant Uncertainty Uncertainty

(Gao MT, 2015)

Lack of historical seismic damage data

Epicenter in recent 40 years

ATC-13

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Significant uncertainty of fragility curve

13

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Damage proportion None Slight Moderate Severe Complete

RC Frame Reinforced Masonry Unreinforced Masonry

Moderate damage Extensive damage Complete damage

Ludian Earthquake, 2014, China

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Proposed method

14

EQ Magnitude Building Info.

Uncertainty

Building seismic loss Nonlinear dynamic analysis Urban planning / Emergency response

Multi-Hazard

Secondary disasters

Complete EDP

Limited Uncertainty

Post EQ: Strong motion network

Determinate

Pre EQ: Wave propagation

Limited Uncertainty Determinate Determinate

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Proposed method

15

Proposed method

EQ magnitude Ground motion Strong motion network 3D ground motion simulation

Courtesy USGS

Recorded ground motion time-history Simulated ground motion time-history

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Proposed method

16

Proposed method

EQ magnitude Ground motion Nonlinear dynamic analysis Building info.

Uncertainty Determinate

m

F(x)

) ( x m x F x c x m      − = + +

Nonlinear Dynamics The MOST ACCURATE method

Entire ground motion Detailed structural model

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Proposed method

17

Proposed method

EQ magnitude Ground motion Loss Nonlinear dynamic analysis Building info.

Limited Uncertainty Uncertainty Determinate

Nonlinear THA Structural response Structural damage Seismic damage Secondary disaster Next Generation of PBEE

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Post EQ application: Emergency response

18

Strong motion network Real-time ground motion Real-time damage evaluation Occurrence of earthquake

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Post EQ application: Emergency response

◼ 08/08/2017 Jiuzhaigou M7.0 EQ

19

Raise a lot of concern Prediction by some agencies

“hundreds casualties”, “tens of thousands of collapse”

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Post EQ application: Emergency response

◼ < 2 h after get ground motion ◼ < 5 h after earthquake ◼ Collapse prediction agree well with actual

situation

Prediction: “Very small possibility of collapse” Actual situation: 73671 damaged, 76 collapsed

20

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Post EQ application: Emergency response

21

12/08/2016, M6.2 12/18/2016, M4.3 09/30/2017, M5.4 08/08/2017, M7.0 03/27/2017, M5.1 02/12/2018, M4.3 05/28/2018, M5.7

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Scenario simulation: San Francisco Bay Area

22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Scenario simulation: San Francisco Bay Area

Story

Construction period

1,843,351 buildings

in San Francisco Bay Area *Provided by UC Berkeley and UrbanSim

23

M 7.0 Earthquake of

Hayward Fault 100 ╳ 80 ╳ 30 km *By Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

slide-24
SLIDE 24

PGA (m/s2) Hayward Fault

Scenario simulation: San Francisco Bay Area

◼ Ground motion inputs

  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Acceleration/(m/s2) time/s

S_27_28 Point S_28_28 Point

24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Scenario simulation : San Francisco Bay Area

Loss ratio

26

Repair time/ Rebuilt time

Function Time

Resilience

slide-27
SLIDE 27

201

Karamay, population=0.4M Taiyuan, population=4.2M Xi’an, population=8.7M Tangshan, population=7.5M Beijing, population=21.7M Weihai, population=2.8M

Pre EQ application: Urban planning

27

Beijing 2nd Adm Center Xiong’An Tangshan New Beichuan Taiyuan

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Beijing’s 2nd Administrative Center

Original planning Revised planning

Change the location of the potential fire ignition buildings

28

◼ Change the design of the hospital (to base isolation) ◼ Change the location of potential fire ignition

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Xiong’An New District

29

The People’s Daily

Design Intensity: 0.1g → 0.2g

  • ~100 km

south of Beijing

  • A new city for

millions

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Conclusions and Discussions

30

Computer Mobile phone Seismic loss prediction

Fragility curve,

(Risk Analysis, 1986)

1980s 2018 1990s

Fragility curve,

(MCEER, 1999)

Fragility curve,

(EESD, 2015)

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Thank you for your attentions! Any questions?

www.luxinzheng.net luxz@tsinghua.edu.cn

31

Large-Scale Dynamic Analysis of Cities

ACCURATE EFFICIENT REALISTIC