A comparative study of construction methods for seismic fragility curves using numerical simulations

¹ Institut Pascal – Institut Français de Mécanique Avancée, Campus de Clermont-Ferrand, BP 265, 63175 Aubière Cedex, France
² Université Paris-Est, Laboratoire Navier (ENPC/IFSTTAR/CNRS), École des Ponts ParisTech, 6 & 8 av. Blaise Pascal, Champs-sur-Marne, 77455 Marne-la-Vallée Cedex 2, France
³ Danang University of Science and Technology, 54 Nguyen Luong Bang, Hoa Khanh, Lien Chieu, Danang, Vietnam

^a Corresponding author: thien-phu.le@ifma.fr

Received: 1 November 2014
Accepted: 16 December 2015

Abstract

A seismic fragility curve of a structure or a mechanical system, presenting its failure probability versus seismic intensity, can be established by an engineering judgment approach, an empirical approach or a numerical approach. In the numerical approach, there exist three popular methods: the scaled seismic intensity method, the maximum likelihood estimation method, and the probabilistic seismic demand/capacity models. This paper is focused on a comparison of these numerical methods. Linear/non-linear oscillators and an eight-storey frame structure were used to derive fragility curves for different tests. The results obtained show a discrepancy of fragility curves between the methods, and their quality is commented in comparison with results of the Monte-Carlo method with a high number of simulations. The maximum likelihood estimation method is in general the recommended method, due to its good accuracy in both numerical examples.