JDR Vol.5 No.4 pp. 407-416
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2010.p0407


Vector-Valued Fragility Analysis Using PGA and PGV Simultaneously as Ground-Motion Intensity Measures

Sei’ichiro Fukushima

Disaster Reduction Engineering Group, Tokyo Electric Power Services Co., Ltd., 3-3-3 Higashi-Ueno, Taito, Tokyo 110-0015, Japan

March 15, 2010
May 7, 2010
August 1, 2010
risk analysis, fragility, ground-motion measure, PGA, PGV
Seismic risk analysis usually expresses ground-motion intensity using a single index such as peak ground acceleration (PGA), spectral acceleration for a specified period, or peak ground velocity (PGV). Limiting the number of indices, however, adds greater uncertainty when estimating annual failure probability given by convolving seismic hazard and fragility curves. This is because information other than ground-motion intensity is missing. Author proposed seismic hazard analysis using PGA and PGV simultaneously as groundmotion input measures. After analyzing the correlation coefficient between PGA and PGV using K-NET and KiK-net databases, probabilistic seismic hazard for seven sites in Kanto district in Japan was evaluated. In this study, seismic fragility analysis using PGA and PGV is conducted followed by advantage of vector-valued fragility analysis.
Cite this article as:
S. Fukushima, “Vector-Valued Fragility Analysis Using PGA and PGV Simultaneously as Ground-Motion Intensity Measures,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.5 No.4, pp. 407-416, 2010.
Data files:
  1. [1] Y. Sato, S. Fukushima, and K. Yashiro, “Study on the index of seismic motion for fragility analysis,” Summaries of technical papers of Annual Meeting AIJ, B-1, pp. 21-22, 1995 (in Japanese).
  2. [2] Y. Sakai, S. Yoshioka, K. Koketsu, and T. Kabeyasawa, “Investigation on indices of representing destructive power of strong ground motions to estimate damage to buildings based on the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake, Taiwan,” J. of structural and construction engineering, Trans. of AIJ. pp. 43-50, 2001 (in Japanese).
  3. [3] P. Bazzurro and C. A. Cornell, “Vector-valued probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (VPSHA),” Proc. 7th U.S. National Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Boston. MA, 2001.
  4. [4] T. Shimomura, and T. Takada, “Joint pdf of ground motion intensity and duration time based on PSHA,” 13th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No.1233, 2004.
  5. [5] S. Fukushima, T. Hayashi, and H. Yashiro, “Seismic hazard analysis based on the joint probability density function of PGA and PGV,” Trans. of 19th SMiRT, Paper No.M03/1, 2007.
  6. [6] T. Hayashi, S. Fukushima, and H. Yashiro, “A probabilistic seismic hazard analysis using PGA and PGV as ground motion intensity measures,” J. of structural and construction engineering, Trans. of AIJ. No.617, pp. 185-192, 2007 (in Japanese).
  7. [7] AIJ (Architectural Institute of Japan), “AIJ Recommendations for Loads on Buildings,” 2004 (in Japanese).
  8. [8] I. Sato, H. Yashiro, K. Ota, and S. Fukushima, “Fragility curves for any damage state based on capacity index,” Proc. of 100th Anniversary Earthquake Conf., CD-ROM, 2006.
  9. [9] S. Fukushima and T. Hayashi, “Seismic risk analysis utilizing the PGA and PGV simultaneously as ground motion measures,” Trans. of 20th SMiRT, Paper No.2389, 2009.
  10. [10] H. Omine, T. Hayashi, H. Yashiro, and S. Fukushima, “Fragility analysis method using both PGA and PGV,” Proc. Of the annual conference of the Institute of Social Safety Science, No.21, pp. 119-112, 2007 (in Japanese).
  11. [11] S. Fukushima, H. Omine, T. Hayashi, and I. Sato, “Fragility analysis method using both PGA and PGV, Part 1 and Part 2,” Trans. of AIJ annual meeting, B-1, pp. 309-312, 2007 (in Japanese).

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Jul. 12, 2024