Earthquake risk assessment of historical structures [Elektronische Ressource] / by Marcel Urban

Earthquake Risk Assessment of Historical Structures
Dissertation
submittedtoa nd approvedb
theD epartment of Architecture, CivilE ngineering andE nvironmentalS ciences
of theT echnische Universitä
Carolo-Wilhelmin
zu Braunschwei
an
theFaculty of Engineering
Department of CivilEngineering
of theUniversityofF lorenc
in candidacy forthe degree of
Doktor-Ingenieur (Dr.-Ing.)
*)
Dottore di Ricerca in Risk Management on theBuilt Enviroment
by
Marcel Urba
fromWickede,Germany
Submittedon2 2O ctober2006
Oral examinationon1 5D ecember 2006
Professorala dvisors Prof.U do Peil
Prof.G ianni Bartol
2007
*) Either theG ermanort he Italianf ormofthe title maybeu sed.
aantig/edyThed issertationisp ublished in an electronic form by theBraunschweigu niversitylibrary at theaddres
http://www.biblio.tu-bs.de/ediss/data
/sAcknowlegdement
It has becomeat rueh abit andas mall masterpiecetow ritet he acknowlegdements fors uchaw orka nd
Ic annot withstandtoo ffer my humble contribution. Writing this work has been al ongw ay to go
Nearly four yearsh avep assed since Is tarted to work on this topic. Thesey earsw eref illedw itha
extremei ntensity on both levels,ascientific and am orep ersonal pointofv iew. Throughout this time,
eachd ay had itso wn little episodeg rowing into history. Consequently,alargen umberofs tories,
whicha re most certainlyw orth to remember,r emains.Int he very beginning,Iwouldt husl iket
thankeverybody warmly whocontributed in some wayora nother to thel astf oury ears.
Iw ouldl iketoe specially express my deepestg ratitude to my tutors,P rofessor Peil from th
TechnischeU niversität Braunschweig andP rofessor Bartoli from theU niversitàd egli studidiF irenze.
Both offeredmet he opportunity to performmyw orkint hise xcitingf ield of research,bys upportin
me with informativea dvicea nd challengingd iscussions.Myw orkw as strongly enhanced by thei
expertise ande verfriendlysupport
Furthermore,Iwouldl iketot hank allm embersoft he examinationc ommittee. ProfessorB udelman
forc hairingt he sessiona nd ProfessorO umeraci forb eing thee xaminer.P rofessor Gioffrè, Professo
Fachini, Professor Hossera nd ProfessorB orri also contributed by stimulatingq uestions to thes ucces
of this work.Ijudgeitasagreat characteristic of thee xaminationd ay that –d espite thel arge number
of participants–thea tmospherer emained comfortablet hroughout thes ession.Istillf eelh onoured by
your interest in my work
This work wasp erformed duringmyt imeasamember of theI nternationalR esearch Training Group
(InternationalesG raduiertenkolleg) “RiskM anagementofN atural andC ivilizationH azards on
Buildings andI nfrastructure” hostedbyt he Institute forS teel Structures,TUB raunschweig.Myw or
benefitedf rome ncouragementa nd discussions with allmyc olleagues.N exttot he professiona
support, Ir eally enjoyedmyt imew ith you. Thee xaminationd ay will always remain memorablef or
me,because of thef antastic goodbyeIreceived. Ihope that youwillk eep thep arty–asw ellasatl east
one more –inm ind. More than ever,Ihave to thankS ilvio Sperbeck andT imm Pliefkef or thei
remarksonmyp rojects. Some of your advicesf ound theirw ay into my work.C ertainly,itw as oneo
then iceste xperiences to perform parts of my researchatt he University of Florence.Iam grateful that
this wase nabledbyP rofessor Borria nd ProfessorP eil, whoa re thec hairmen of theT rainingG roup
whichisf undedbythe German ResearchF oundation( Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG)
Iw oulda lsol iketot hank then umerous researchersw ho havep ublished in some casesf antastic work
in thef ield of hazarda ssessment, structural modelling, materialm odelsa nd descriptionofr isks.Itried
to mentiona ll them ajor worksp erformed in these fields,b ut Iamp retty sure that Ihavem issed some
due to thevast andi ncreasingamount of work publishedinthese areas. This wasnot donebypurpose.
To my family,myp arents andmys ister, Ia pologizef or thoset imes Iw as absent or tooc oncerne
with my ownw ork. Despite this,y ou always offeredmes upport andrest.
ossnkrfelg.r..nr.d,Andf inally,t here wasnog reater motivationtof inisht hisw orkint imet han to move finally whereI
want to be, whichisclose to you, Marion.
Cologne, April2 007M arcel UrbanTableofc ontent
Tableofc ontents
Chapter
Introductio
1.1 Introduction...........................................................................................................
1.2 Motivation .............................................................................................................
1.3 Defining theproblem.............................................................................................
1.4 Scope andobjectiveofthe research......................................................................
1.5 Overview...............................................................................................................
Chapter
The conceptofr iskmanagement in civilengineerin
2.1 Theprocess of risk management ...........................................................................7
2.1.1I ntroduction............................................................................................................
2.1.2R iskm anagement framework.................................................................................8
2.1.3R iska ssessment......................................................................................................
2.1.4R isktreatment....................................................................................................... 11
2.1.5 Calculations of risk .............................................................................................. 12
2.2 Background data on catastrophe occurrence .......................................................12
2.2.1 Naturalc atastrophes............................................................................................ 12
2.2.2 Technicalc atastrophes......................................................................................... 15
2.2.3 Other causes of death........................................................................................... 16
2.3 Measuringand comparingrisks...........................................................................18
2.3.1 General remarks................................................................................................... 18
2.3.2 Probability of collapsea nd target reliabilities .................................................... 21
2.3.3 Mortalityr ateort he probability of death ............................................................ 22
2.3.4 FatalA ccidentR ates ............................................................................................2
2.3.5 LostL ifeE xpectancy andYears of Life Lost ........................................................ 25
2.3.6 Probability-Damage diagrams............................................................................. 26
2.3.6.1 Introduction............................................................................................. 26
2.3.6.2 Target values........................................................................................... 28
2.3.7 Life Quality Index.................................................................................................3
2.3.8T he valueofahuman life ..................................................................................... 32
2.4 Concluding remarks.............................................................................................33
2.5 Implications forthe chosen approach..................................................................33
14g394n4117s12Chapter
Hazard assessmen
3.1 Problemstatement ...............................................................................................35
3.2 Describing andc haracterizing earthquakes.........................................................35
3.2.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................3
3.2.2G lobal measures................................................................................................... 36
3.2.3 Time domain......................................................................................................... 38
3.2.4 Frequency domain................................................................................................ 40
3.3 Naturala nd artificialearthquake records. ...........................................................41
3.3.1N atural records....................................................................................................4
3.3.2A rtificialr ecords .................................................................................................. 41
3.3.2.1 Random phasea ngle ............................................................................... 41
3.3.2.2 Modulatedw hite noise. .......................................................................... 43
3.3.2.3 Nonstationaryapproach.......................................................................... 44
3.3.3C omparison .......................................................................................................... 44
3.4 Damage correlated intensitymeasures ................................................................45
3.4.1 Overview.................................................................................................