1. PEER Research: Accomplishments & Impact Greg Deierlein, Stanford University and the PEER Research Committee PEER Summative Meeting – June 13, 2007

2. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Base Shear Deformation Damage Threshold Collapse Onset OPENOPEN OPENOPEN OPENOPEN FEMA 356 Performance Levels IOLSCP PBEE yesterday $, % replacement 0 25% 50% 100% Downtime, days 0 1 7 30 180 Casualty risk 0.0 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.25 PBEE today Evolution of PBEE

3. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting REF: Yang, Conte, Elgamal (UCSD) Comprehensive System Simulation REF: Boulanger (UCDavis)

4. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting PEER’s Research Projects & Products PBEE Methodology Technologies & Data Illustrative Examples Guidelines Simulation Hazard Methodology Models Impact t r a n s i t i o n s Year 1 Year 5 Year 10 Methodology: Development ---- Application/Packaging Data/Model: Creation ---- Implementation/Validation Demonstrations: Evaluate/Synthesize ---- Impact of PBEE

5. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Engineering Demand Parameter Intensity Measure Damage Measure Performance-Based Framework: Buildings Decision Variable Collapse & Casualties Direct Financial Loss Downtime drift as an EDP

6. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Bridge and Transportation Systems Damage Measure (DM) Decision Variable (DV) Engineering Demand Parameter (EDP) Intensity Measure Quality of Network Service Restoration ($ and Time)

7. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Electric Utility Lifeline Systems Damage Measure (DM) Decision Variable (DV) Power Transmission Lines Engineering Demand Parameter (EDP) Intensity Measure Quality of Service Restoration ($ and Time)

8. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Performance Assessment Components Decision Variable Intensity Measure Damage Measure Engineering Demand Parameter Relating Performance to Risk Decision Making Quantifying Damage Measures Simulation of System Response Earthquake Hazard Characterization

9. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting PBEE – Probability Framework Equation Performance (Loss) Models and Simulation Hazard Impact IM – Intensity Measure EDP – Engineering Demand Parameter DM – Damage Measure DV – Decision Variable (DV) – Probabilistic Description of Decision Variable (e.g., Mean Annual Probability $ Loss > 50% Replacement Cost)

10. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Hazard Characterization PEER Ground Motion Database Next Generation Attenuation Functions Hazard Mapping Geotechnical Data Center Selection & Scaling of Ground Motions Spatial Hazard & Correlations (scenario) Site Response and Effects Utilization of GM Shaking Data

11. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting PEER Ground Motion Database New DataPrevious Data Over 10,000 records Uniformly Processed Available On-Line “Google Inspired” Ground motions Maps Damage Photos

12. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Attenuation Functions & Hazard Maps NGA Attributes Long Period (0 to 10 sec.) Magnitude Range (5.0 to 8.5) Distance Range (0 to 200 km) Fault Mechanisms (SS, R, N) More Accurate Lower intensity in many places Improved Understanding Spectral shape Spatial correlations Influencing US national seismic hazard maps

13. Selection & Scaling of Ground Motions the “+  effect” Spectral Shape of Extreme (Rare) Ground Motions Collapse Assessment at the MCE

14. Significance of +  (SSF) effect Average Response Spectra (from bins of +  and epsilon neutral records) ++  ++ +22% increase in apparent collapse capacity Building Collapse Fragility (case study 4-story building from NL dynamic analyses) Period (sec) Sa (T1) Prob [collapse] Sa/g

15. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Structural & Geotechnical Simulation Reinforced Concrete Structural Modeling Cyclic degradation and shear needed for assessing damage and collapse potential Continuum Soil Models Large ground deformations & Liquefaction Soil-Foundation-Structure Interaction Site response, foundation interaction necessary for system performance Computational Reliability Consistent tracking of uncertainty from hazard to model uncertainty Advanced Computing and Simulation Integrating with NEESit and cyberinfrastructure

16. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Integrated Simulation/Assessment Platform Algorithms, Solvers, Parallel/distributed computing Simulation & Reliability Models for Materials, Components, and Systems http://opensees.berkeley.edu Computation Information Technology Software framework, Databases, Visualization, Internet/grid computation Models

17. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Simulating Non-Ductile RC Columns Numerical Models

18. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Simulating Collapse of RC Buildings Building Frame Definitions Component Tests & Models  Collapse Mechanisms P[Collapse/MCE] = 16 % Collapse Fragility Curves Building System Simulation

19. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Geotechnical and Soil-Foundation Models 4 @ 11’ = 44’ 6’ Nodes Elastic beam- column elements 24’ 12’ Le Lm Force Disp Qz springs (Boulanger, 2000) Centrifuge Experiments (NEES-UC Davis) Soil-Foundation Model

20. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Soil-Structure-Foundation Interaction Behaviour of piles in liquefied soils using coupled fluid-soil models System performance analyses

21. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Damage Measures & Fragility Functions Reinforced Concrete Components columns & beam-column joints Nonstructural Components & Contents interior partitions laboratory equipment HVAC facilities Electric Utility Equipment Development of concepts, techniques and data applied to:

22. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Repair-Specific Damage Functions Damage State 0 Damage State 2 Damage State 4 Components Evaluated: RC Beam-Columns, Joints, Walls Interior Partitions Laboratory Equipment Ceiling & MEP Systems Electric Utility Components P[DM:EDP]

23. Testing Nonstructural Components & Equipment Lab Equipment Development of Damage (Fragility) Functions Design Improvements to Components and Equipment Development of Testing Standards -FEMA 461: Interim Protocols For Determining Seismic Performance Characteristics of Structural and Nonstructural Components -IEEE-693 standard for testing Electric Utility Equipment

24. Motion-Damage Pairs from Real Buildings 0.20.4 0.8 0.61.01.21.61.4 No Damage Heavy damage Moderate damage PFA (g) DM 161 97 25 17 1150 Insignificant damage 2 16 29 5 12 10 1 1 2 11 1 13 1 1 1 1 1 HVAC Systems EDP ( PFA g ) HVAC Systems 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 P (DM | EDP = PFA ) a model for systematically collecting & characterizing data from damaged buildings

25. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Translating Damage to Decision Variables

26. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Decision Making and PBEE Applications Tradeoffs in Decision Making quantifying benefits and costs Influencing practice “early adopters” codes and standards implementing new technologies Influencing policy benchmarking standards and practice collaborating with stakeholders regulatory models

27. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Integrative Testbeds Buildings - Van Nuys - UC Sciences UCB Campus Bridges - Humboldt Bay - I-880 Viaduct Bay Area Highway Network

28. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting High-priority Issues for Bridges Post-earthquake residual displacements are a primary contributor to bridge closure. Liquefaction hazards continue to cause widespread damage or drive huge foundation costs. After sixth repetition of Maximum Run - Olive View About 100 columns with more than 1.75% drift were demolished after 1995 Kobe Earthquake although they did not collapse.

29. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Bridge Testbed Model in OpenSees Modular design developed (Stojadinovic) Core Foundation Deck Columns Abutment Billington, Eberhard, Lehman, Mahin plus Kunnath Arduino & Kramer, Boulanger, Brandenberg, Bray, Martin plus Jeremic, Elgamal Ashford

30. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Bridges with lateral spreading / liquefaction Assessment of current approaches, improve understanding, and identification of benefits of nonlinear analysis: Current design and remediation methods, vs. coupled soil-pile-structure models in OpenSees

31. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting New Technologies: Self-Centering Columns Design method: Mild reinforcement reduced Prestressing force from a central unbonded tendon Same envelop Q-  Peak displacements within 10% of RC column Residual displacements less than 20% of RC column Q  ECC, Steel Jackets, Unbonded Rebars

32. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Building Benchmarking Studies multiple realizations “design uncertainty” Facility Definition PBEE Assessment IM-EDP-DM-DV DV’s: p(collapse) p($ > X) p(D.T. > Y) 2003 Code Compliant - Strength - Stiffness - Capacity Design - Detailing … …

33. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Benchmarking: 1967 vs. 2003 Designs 1960’s Vintage 2003 Design Codes BuildingCollapse Risk P col. /MCEMAF collapse 20035%1 x 10 -4 196740 to 80%20 to 50 x 10 -4

34. Effect of Design Parameters on Performance: Minimum Base Shear Strength Issue: What minimum base shear (if any) should be imposed in ASCE 7 Minimum Design Loads Standard? Design Spectra (SDC D, R=8) 0.044 minimum base shear T 4st T 20st

35. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting Building code, regulation and policy issues Benchmarking building codes Absolute safety and performance Relative safety and performance across:  systems/materials  building heights/configurations,  seismic hazard categories  use/occupancy Non-ductile RC Building Risks how bad is the problem? technologies to address it cost-effectively policy, incentives and regulation Residential High Rise structural systems not envisioned by code tenant & societal performance expectations New Innovative structural systems

36. NSF-PEER Summative Meeting PEER --- Making an IMPACT Tools for decision makers Cost-benefit, financial models Regulatory & implementation issues (IRCC) Packaging of PBEE Methodology Specificity & Simplification ! Demonstrate value/benefits of PBEE Building benchmarking Bridge systems (liquefiable soil, self-centering) Dissemination & Outreach Initiatives Research community (NEES researchers) Professional engineers Other design professionals & decision makers Implementation Initiatives Buildings - ATC 58, 63, NEHRP, Insurance, … Bridges – Caltrans, FHWA, …