China 
Africa 
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Definition of out-of-plane fragility curves for masonry infills subject to combined in-plane and out-of-plane damage
Published in Jan Kubica, Arkadiusz Kwiecień, Łukasz Bednarz, Brick and Block Masonry - From Historical to Sustainable Masonry, 2020
F. Di Trapani, M. Malavisi, P.B. Shing, L. Cavaleri
Incremental Dynamic Analysis (IDA) (Vamvatsikos and Cornell, 2002) has been used many times in recent years for the assessment of seismic fragility of structures (Basone et al. 2017, Di Trapani & Malavisi 2019, Di Trapani et al. 2020b). In the current case IDA has been carried out using the peak ground acceleration (PGA) as intensity measure (IM) and the out-of-plane net displacement (ΔOOP) as damage measure (DM). 26 ground motions records have been considered. The spectra of the selected ground motion are shown in Figure 4. The choice of PGA as IM instead of the usual spectral acceleration at of the first vibration period is due to the fact that, as explained in the previous section, different combinations of periods are considered. The choice of PGA allows using the same ground motion scaling to analyse the different combinations of periods. In detail the ground motions are first scaled so that their respective spectra have the same PGA. The subsequent scaling during IDA uniformly increases/decreases the amplitude. For each ground motion IDA are stopped in correspondence of the achievement of dynamic instability (which represents the OOP failure of the infill). After this point, a constant flatline is conventionally represented.
A stochastic dynamics approach for efficient incremental dynamic analysis
Published in Túlio Nogueira Bittencourt, Dan M. Frangopol, André T. Beck, Maintenance, Monitoring, Safety, Risk and Resilience of Bridges and Bridge Networks, 2016
K.R.M. dos Santos, I.A. Kougioumtzoglou, A.T. Beck
Incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) (Vamvatsikos & Cornell 2002) has been a well-established methodology in earthquake engineering for assessing the performance of structural systems under a suite of ground motion records, each scaled to several levels of seismic intensity. Nevertheless, the need for performing nonlinear dynamic analyses both for various excitation magnitudes and for a large number of seismic records renders the IDA methodology a computationally highly demanding task potentially (Vamvatsikos 2013).
Design Ground Motions for Earthquake Engineering of Structures
Published in P.E. Tim Huff, A Practical Course in Advanced Structural Design, 2021
For the seismic analysis and evaluation of structures, incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) has been proposed as a valuable tool, and justifiably so. In IDA, the structure is subjected to a suite of ground motions, each initially normalized in some fashion to a particular intensity measure (IM), at various levels of ground shaking by scaling each of the records progressively and determining some damage measure (DM).
Seismic Performance and Fragility Analysis of Precast Concrete Sandwich Wall Structure
Published in Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2023
Most experimental researches focused on the uncertainty of structural performance; however, the input loads of the structure are also uncertain when the disaster occurs. Risk analysis, especially seismic fragility analysis of civil engineering structures, has become a main measure of disaster prevention and mitigation (Sasani, Der Kiureghian, and Bertero 2002). The incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) is always used to obtain the structural responses under different intensities of seismic actions. The fragility assessment based on IDA was first proposed by Bertero (1977). Since then, Bazzurro and Cornell (1994a, 1994b), Mehanny and Deierlein (2000) had all perfected it. Research institutions such as ATC (FEMA P695 2009) have also done a lot of pioneering work. Vamvetsikos and Cornell (2002) systematically discussed the selection principles of the assessment indicators and the physical meaning of the results. Song et al. (2020) conducted seismic fragility evaluation of self-centering RC frame structures based on IDA, through which exceedance probabilities of various limit states were calculated.
Seismic reliability and limit state risk evaluation of plain concrete arch bridges
Published in Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2021
Vahid Jahangiri, Mahdi Yazdani
Masonry arch bridges are important lifeline structures in the railway transportation system. There are about 9000 of these infrastructures in the railway network of Iran constructed over 80 years before. The bridges have not been calculated for seismic loads and considering the high seismicity of Iran, their seismic performance assessment seems essential. Linear and nonlinear methods are used to analysis of structures for seismic loading. It is evident that the majority of structures have a nonlinear response under strong ground motions. Therefore, nonlinear static analysis (pushover) and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) are frequently used in the seismic assessment of structures. Pushover procedure is used for a rapid seismic evaluation of structures. In the following, two examples of the use of this method in the masonry arc bridges are mentioned.
Use of Spectrum-matched versus Scaled Records to Evaluate Seismic Responses of a Latticed Shell
Published in Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2020
Linear and nonlinear dynamic analyses, including the incremental dynamic analysis (IDA), are frequently used to check new designs and to evaluate the safety of existing structures subjected to seismic demand. For a given ground motion record, the main task is to model the structure with sufficient fidelity in a well-accepted structural analysis package and carry out the analysis. However, the selection of the ground motion records for the analysis is complicated due to the lack of real ground motion records that are representative of identified scenario events or are compatible with a prescribed design response spectra. To overcome this, two approaches are frequently used to assign modified real records for design checking and structural response analysis. The first one is to scale the amplitude of records to a target ground motion intensity measure, such as the peak ground acceleration (PGA) or spectral acceleration (SA) at a target period. The other is to modify the seed or parent records such that the modified records have response spectra very close to a target response spectrum.