MS23 Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis Procedures for Seismic Risk Assessment of Civil Infrastructure: Progress and Challenges

Assistant Prof. Hossein Ebrahimian: ebrahimian.hossein@unina.it

Session Chairs:
Hossein Ebrahimian, Assistant Professor, Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture (DIST), University of Naples Federico II, Italy, ebrahimian.hossein@unina.it
Andrea Miano, Post-doctoral Scholar, Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture (DIST), University of Naples Federico II, Italy, andrea.miano@unina.it
Fatemeh Jalayer, Associate Professor, Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture (DIST), University of Naples Federico II, Italy, fatemeh.jalayer@unina.it
Dimitrios Vamvatsikos, Assistant Professor, School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University, Athens, Greece, divamva@central.ntua.gr

Abstract of the special session:
The Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis Procedures (NDAP) are arguably the best means for evaluating the structural response to seismic actions. The improvements in our computational capacities have made them more and more accessible for applications in practice. These procedures can be implemented in a straightforward manner in both performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE) procedures and simulation-based reliability methods. In the past two decades, several research efforts have been dedicated to the challenges in the implementation of (NDAP) in the seismic reliability and risk assessment of built environment. Examples of non-linear dynamic procedures are: Incremental Dynamic Analysis (IDA), Multiple-Stripe Analysis (MSA), and Cloud Analysis (CA).
This mini symposium aims to provide an outlook into progress made and the challenges we face in seismic risk assessment of civil infrastructure employing NDAP. Proper application of NDAP is closely entangled with the type of ground motion time-histories employed (recorded/synthetic), the corresponding selection criteria, and the choice of intensity measure(s) used for representing ground-motion intensity (if in a PBEE framework). NDAP are quite versatile for analytical fragility and vulnerability assessment of buildings and infrastructure. Considering the structural modelling uncertainties with NDAP can be quite challenging and seems to need more practical procedures. Application of NDAP can be quite challenging in certain applications; for example, structural analysis considering soil-structure interaction, structural analysis of tall and special buildings, bridges, offshore platforms, and under-ground structures. The NDAP can be extended to seismic risk assessment for a sequence of ground motion time-histories. Finally, despite being versatile and approachable, the NDAP are not yet explicitly implemented in seismic design codes. Therefore, it is important to identify the research gaps which stand in the way of eventual code-based implementations of NDAP.
This mini-symposium session invites contributions dealing with any of the following topics:

• Synthetic (physics-based, stochastic) vs. as-recorded ground motions as the input for NDAP;
• Ground-motion record selection for different NDAP;
• Criteria (e.g., sufficiency and efficiency) for selection of suitable intensity measures;
• Analytical fragility assessment based on different NDAP;
• Fragility and vulnerability assessment of infrastructure using NDAP;
• Employing displacement-based, force-based and energy-based demand parameters in seismic reliability and risk assessment;
• Consideration of modelling uncertainties while employing different NDAP;
• NDAP considering soil-structure interaction;
• NDAP for bridges and underground structures;
• NDAP for tall and special structures;
• Application of NDAP for calculating the response to a seismic sequence;
• Reliability-based safety-checking using NDAP;
• Implementation of NDAP in the design building codes;