Volume 11 - Winter and Spring 2019                   ijmt 2019, 11 - Winter and Spring 2019: 33-40 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Soltani M, Amirabadi R. Sensitivity Analysis of Pile Supported Wharves against Directional Uncertainty of Earthquakes Using Fragility Curves. ijmt. 2019; 11 :33-40
URL: http://ijmt.ir/article-1-661-en.html
1- University of Qom
Abstract:   (651 Views)
This paper aims to tackle an important uncertainty which extremely affects seismic performance of wharf structures in earthquake events. According to previous studies performed for structures on land, it is shown that structures on land are highly susceptible to unknown orientation of earthquakes called as the directional uncertainty. However, for marine structures, especially pile supported wharves, research efforts are rare to assess the effect of directional uncertainty of earthquakes. Therefore, to show this effect on pile supported wharves, fragility analysis is performed based on methodology suggested by Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) for the modeled pile supported wharf located in Maah-shahr port as a case study. As the first phase of this methodology, nonlinear static pushover analyses are performed for randomly chosen incident angles in order to quantitatively measure damage states suggested by marine design code. After damage states are obtained, IDA analysis are conducted in the selected incident angles to obtain nonlinear structural responses which are supposed to be used for fragility analysis as inputs. Finally, once fragility curves have been developed according to the last phase of PEER methodology, the more vulnerable directions of wharf are represented.
Full-Text [PDF 1039 kb]   (133 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research Paper | Subject: Marine Structures and near shore
Received: 2019/02/18 | Accepted: 2019/03/13

References
1. Brunet, S., de la Llera, J.C., Jacobsen, A., Miranda, E. and Meza, C., (2012), Performance of port facilities in Southern Chile during the 27 February 2010 Maule earthquake. Earthquake Spectra, 28(S1), pp. S553-S579. [DOI:10.1193/1.4000022]
2. SEAOC Vision 2000 Committee, (1995), Performance-Based Seismic Engineering, Report prepared by Structural Engineers Association of California, Sacramento, California.
3. Dong, Y. and Frangopol, D.M., (2016), Performance‐based seismic assessment of conventional and base‐isolated steel buildings including environmental impact and resilience. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 45(5), pp.739-756. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.2682]
4. Ferritto, J.M., (1997), Design Criteria for Earthquake Hazard Mitigation of Navy Piers and Wharves (No. NFESC-TR-2069-SHR). Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center Port Hueneme Ca. [DOI:10.21236/ADA325316]
5. Lee, W.K., and Billington, S.L., (2009) simulation and performance-based earthquake engineering assessment of self-centering post-tensioned concrete bridge systems, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.1065]
6. Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C., (2002), Incremental Dynamic Analysis, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 491-514. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.141]
7. Dezvareh, R., (2019), Upgrading the Seismic Capacity of Pile-Supported Wharfs Using Semi-Active Liquid Column Gas Damper. Journal of Applied and Computational Mechanics.
8. Lee, T.H. and Mosalam, K.M., (2006), Probabilistic seismic evaluation of reinforced concrete structural components and systems, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) report, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley.
9. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, (2002), Estimation of Uncertainty in Geotechnical Properties for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering, University of Washington.
10. Na, U.J. and Shinozuka, M., (2009), Simulation-based Seismic Loss Estimation of Seaport Transportation System, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 9, No.3, pp. 722-731. [DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2008.07.005]
11. Na, U.J., S.R., Chaudhuri, and Shinozuka, M., (2009), performance evaluation of pile supported wharf under seismic loading, Proc., TCLEE, p.1032-1041. [DOI:10.1061/41050(357)98]
12. Torkamani, H., Bargi, K., and Amirabadi, R., (2013), Fragility curves derivation for a pile-supported wharf, International Journal of Maritime Technology, 1:1-10.
13. Lagaros, Nikos D., (2010), Multicomponent incremental dynamic analysis considering variable incident angle, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 77-94. [DOI:10.1080/15732470802663805]
14. Rupali, J. and Jaiswal, J., (2017), Study of Effect of Seismic Excitation Angle for the Analysis of Regular and Irregular RC Frame, Mechanical and Civil Engineering, 80-83. [DOI:10.9790/1684-1402078083]
15. Shafieezadeh, A., (2011), seismic vulnerability assessment of wharf structure, in Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology.
16. Chiou, J.S., Chiang, C.H., Yang, H.H, and Hsu, S.Y., (2011), Developing fragility curves for a pile-supported wharf, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/soildyn. [DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.01.011]
17. Thomopoulos, C., and Lai, C., (2012), Preliminary definition of fragility curves for pile supported wharves, Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 16(sup1): p.83-106. [DOI:10.1080/13632469.2012.675839]
18. Yang, C.-S.W., Desroches, R., and Rix, G.J., (2012), Numerical fragility analysis of vertical pile-supported wharves in the western United States, Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 16(4): p.579-594 [DOI:10.1080/13632469.2011.641063]
19. Heidary-Torkamani, H., Bargi, K., Amirabadi, R., and McCllough, N.J., (2014), Fragility estimation and sensitivity analysis of an idealized pile supported wharf with batter piles, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 61-62(0): p. 92-106. [DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.01.024]
20. Banayan-Kermani, A., Bargi. Kh., and Heidary-Torkamani. H., (2016), Seismic performance assessment of pile-supported wharves retrofitted by carbon fiber-reinforced polymer composite considering aging effect, Advances in Structural Engineering. DOI: 10.1177/1369433216630187. [DOI:10.1177/1369433216630187]
21. Kermani. A, and Bargi. K., (2016), Fragility curves: a powerful tool for seismic vulnerability assessment of pile-supported wharves, International Journal of Science and Engineering. ISSN:2454.
22. SAP2000 V19.0, (2017), CSI Analysis Reference Manual for SAP 2000, Computers and Structures, Inc., Berkley, California.
23. American Petroleum Institute (API), (2000) Recommended practice for planning, designing, and constructing offshore platforms: API recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th ed. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
24. PIANC., (2001), Seismic Design Guidelines for Port Structures, Permanent International Navigation Association, A.A. Balkema Publishers, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
25. Amirabadi, R., Bargi, K., Dolatshahi Piroz, M., Heydari Torkamani, H., Mccllough, N., (2012), Probabilistic seismic demand model of PEER-PBEE framework for pile and deck structure, International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering. [DOI:10.6088/ijcser.00202030007]
26. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), (2107) Data from: PEER Ground Motion Database. Retrieved from http://ngawest2.berkeley.edu/users/sign_in.

Send email to the article author


Creative Commons License
International Journal of Maritime Technology is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.