Resilience-based performance evaluation and design of buildings for multiple hazards

Joyner, M D (2021) Resilience-based performance evaluation and design of buildings for multiple hazards. PhD thesis, Northeastern University, USA.

Abstract

Performance of buildings under the effects of natural hazards plays a central role in community resilience. This dissertation focuses on addressing this role through a) characterization of the multihazard resilience currently provided by codes and standards; b) identification of ways to improve resilience through performance-based design; and c) development of a resilience-based building design methodology. To assess the level of resilience already provided by current codes and standards and identify shortcomings, a framework for resilience-based performance evaluation of buildings under multiple hazards is developed and used to assess two code-based building designs—one designed for Boston and the other for San Francisco—under wind and earthquake hazards over a 50-year lifespan. Findings suggest a need for improved seismic performance for the building designed for San Francisco, due primarily to influence from low-severity damage states and permanent drift damage. The methodology is then used to assess the influence of stiffness, strength, and deformation capacity (referred to as the basic design variables) on building performance, identifying effective design strategies for the proposed framework. Results suggest that stiffness increases could be focused primarily in the lower ~40% of stories while strength increases should be applied uniformly over the building’s height. Leveraging lessons learned through analysis of the basic design variables, a multiobjective optimization design methodology is developed. It is first used to optimize designs of 4, 7, 10, and 15-story buildings and assess—by comparison—the effectiveness of building code functionality criteria, which are found to be generally effective. The results also demonstrate the potential benefits of efficient proportioning of the basic design variables through multiobjective optimization by achieving 30%-45% reduction of lost functionality with less than 2% increase in initial cost. Each component of the methodology is then expounded through detailed design of a 7-story RC moment frame building, along with supporting methods and models needed to make the methodology practical for design including simplified structural models, convergence criteria for multiple objectives, and a post-Pareto pruning approach.

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Thesis advisor: Sasani, M
Uncontrolled Keywords: effectiveness; hazards; optimization; standards; building design; building performance; earthquake; performance evaluation
Index terms: community resilience, building design, dissertation, effectiveness, earthquake, natural hazard, functionality, building performance, design strategy, lifespan, performance evaluation, deformation, performance-based, design of building, lessons learned, building code, methodology
Subjects: regulatory law, professional development, material properties and characteristics, performance management, performance measurement, building design, material degradation and durability, design methods, environmental hazards, quality assurance, social equity, research methods, architectural design, design features, research dissemination and communication
Topics: Research Practice, Information Management, Construction Materials, Design Practice, Sustainability, Quality Management, Legal Issues
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here