seismic fragility of low ductile partially infilled

SEISMIC FRAGILITY OF LOW DUCTILE PARTIALLY INFILLED

REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME IN MALAYSIA

NUR AMALINA BINTI ANUAR

A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of

Master of Engineering (Structure)

Faculty of Civil Engineering

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

JUNE 2017

To my beloved mother and father

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, all praises to Allah Almighty for giving me

accomplishment in completing this project report through many people and sources.

In preparing this thesis, I was in contact with many dedicated academicians of

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. They have contributed towards my understanding

and thoughts. In particular, I wish to express my sincere gratitude to my main

supervisor, Dr. Mohammadreza Vafaei for his patience, motivation, immense

knowledge and providing me with continuous support with regards to my study and

related research. I am also very thankful to my co-supervisor, Dr. Sophia C. Alih for

her insightful advices and encouragement. Their guidance helped me throughout the

process of researching and writing of this project report.

My appreciation also extends to Ministry of Education Malaysia for funding

my Master’s degree course in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia through MyBrain15

scholarship programme.

I am indebted to my family for the support they provided me spiritually

throughout the writing of this thesis. And finally, I acknowledge my friends who

have been providing me assistance throughout this research. My fellow postgraduate

students should also be recognized for their continuous support and advices

throughout the accomplishment of this project report.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to develop analytical fragility curves for low

ductile partially infilled reinforced concrete (RC) frames building under seismic

ground motions. Three RC frames with their ground story open and masonry walls

infilled in all of the upper stories (pilotis) comprise of three-, six- and nine-stories

were selected, modelled, and analysed representing common building type in

Malaysia. These frames were designed in accordance with BS 8110-1997 code

specification. 45 seismic ground motions were used and subdivided into three groups

namely low (L), medium (M) and high (H) records based on peak ground

acceleration (PGA) over peak ground velocity (PGV) ratio. ETABS 2015 was used

to perform Incremental Dynamic Collapse Analysis (IDA) with increment every 0.1g

until 0.5g. The PGA was compared to the maximum inter-story drift demand

obtained from nonlinear time history analysis and also to the three levels of

performance-based seismic designs, namely, immediate occupancy (IO), life safety

(LS), and collapse prevention (CP) to assess structural performance. The results

show that as the height of structure increases, the intensity of damage decreases.

Therefore, 3 story is the most damaging structure followed by 6-story and 9-story.

For all types of structure assessed, the most devastating type of earthquake records is

M. For 3 and 9 story, there are no difference observed between IO and LS. This

shows that the preserved strength was very small where IO suddenly jumps straight

to CP with increasing intensity. As for 6 story there is a clear distance between IO,

LS and CP and this shows that the structure is not very fragile.

ABSTRAK

Tujuan kajian ini adalah untuk menghasilkan lengkung kerapuhan bagi

rangka konkrit bertetulang (RC) bermulur rendah separa penuh dibawah pengaruh

pergerakan tanah seismik. Bingkai RC dengan tingkat bawah terbuka tanpa dinding

dan semua tingkat atas dipenuhi dinding yang terdiri daripada tiga-, enam dan

sembilan tingkat telah dipilih, peringkat, dan dianalisa mewakili jenis bangunan

biasa di Malaysia. Kerangka ini direka mengikut spesifikasi kod BS 8110-1997. 45

rekod pergerakan tanah telah dibahagikan kepada tiga kumpulan iaitu rendah (L),

sederhana (M) dan tinggi (H) rekod berdasarkan puncak tanah pecutan (PGA) nisbah

halaju (PGV) puncak tanah. ETABS 2015 telah digunakan untuk melakukan analisis

kejatuhan dinamik tokokan (IDA) dengan kenaikan setiap 0.1g hingga 0.5g. PGA

adalah permintaan maksimum antara tingkat drift yang diperolehi daripada analisis

tolakan statik tak linear dan juga kepada tiga peringkat berasaskan prestasi seismik

reka bentuk, iaitu serta-merta penghunian (IO), keselamatan hidup (LS), dan

pencegahan runtuhan (CP) untuk menilai prestasi struktur. Hasil kajian menunjukkan

bahawa apabila ketinggian struktur bertambah, kerosakan struktur berkurangan. Oleh

itu, bangunan 3 tingkat adalah yang mengalami kerosakan paling merosakkan

struktur diikuti dengan bangunan 6 tingkat dan 9 tingkat. Untuk semua jenis struktur

yang dinilai, jenis rekod gempa bumi yg paling menghancurkan adalah jenis M. Bagi

bangunan 3 dan 9 tingkat, tiada perbezaan yang diperhatikan antara IO dan LS. Ini

menunjukkan bahawa kekuatan dalaman struktur adalah sangat kecil di mana IO

tiba-tiba bertukar terus ke CP dengan peningkatan intensiti gempa bumi. Bagi 6

tingkat terdapat jarak yang jelas antara IO, LS dan CP dan ini menunjukkan bahawa

struktur itu tidak begitu rapuh.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENT

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

DECLARATION ii

DEDICATION iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv

ABSTRACT v

ABSTRAK vi

TABLE OF CONTENT S vii

LIST OF TABLES x

LIST OF FIGURES xii

LIST OF SYMBOLS xv

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Research Background 1

1.2 Problem Statement 3

1.3 Objectives of Research 5

1.4 Scopes of Research 5

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.1 Introduction 7

2.1.1 Earthquake Formation 7

x

2.2 Seismotectonic and Geological Setting of Malaysia 10

2.2.1 Seismic Hazard in Malaysia 12

2.5 Ground Motion Intensity Measures 21

2.6 Seismic Vulnerability Assessment 21

2.6.1 Nonlinear Analysis 23

2.7 Limit States 27

2.8 Fragility Curve 29

3 METHODOLOGY 33

3.1 General 33

3.2 Selection of appropriate plan and number of stories for studied

building 35

3.3 Finite Element Simulation and Design of Buildings According

to Common Practice in Malaysia 37

3.3.1 Concrete Material Properties 37

3.3.2 Steel Material Properties 38

3.3.3 Load Assignments 39

3.3.4 Cross section of beams and columns 44

3.3.5 Partially infilled frame 48

3.4 Selection of Appropriate Seismic Records 50

3.5 Determination of Performance Limit State and Acceptance

Criteria 54

3.3.6 Hinge Assignment 54

3.6 Performing Incremental Dynamic Collapse Analysis 57

3.7 Data extraction and analysis 58

3.8 Derivation of Fragility Curves 58

4 RESULTS & DISCUSSION 60

4.1 Failure mechanism of studied frame 61

4.1.1 Plastic hinges formation in 3-story frame 62



4.1.4 Summary of failure mechanism formation 71

xi

4.2 Inter-story drift demand 72

4.2.1 Inter-story drift demand of 3 story frame 72



4.3 Capacity of structure 83

4.3.1 Capacity of 3-story frame 85



4.4 Development of fragility curves 91

4.4.1 Derivation of Fragility Curve for 3-story frame 92

4.4.2 Derivation of fragility curves for 6 story frame 100

4.4.3 Derivation of fragility curves for 9 story frame 107

4.5 Peak Ground Acceleration for Malaysia 115

5 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION 117

5.1 Conclusion 117

5.2 Recommendations 119

REFERENCES 120

xii

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Effects from earthquakes 10

2.2 Damage control and Building Performance Levels 28

3.1 Design Parameters 35

3.2 Low (L) seismic motion records 52

3.3 Medium (M) seismic motion records 53

3.4 High (H) seismic motion records 53

4.1 Maximum inter-story drift demand of 3 story under L records 73

4.2 Maximum inter-story drift demand of 3 story under M records 74

4.3 Maximum inter-story drift demand of 3 story under H records 75







4.10 Capacity of 3 story under L seismic records 85

4.11 Capacity of 3 story under M seismic records 85

4.12 Capacity of 3 story under H seismic records 86

xiii







4.19 Fragility curve calculation for 3 story frame L records 94

4.20 Fragility curve calculation for 3 story frame M records 95

4.21 Fragility curve calculation for 3 story frame H records 96







xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Fault lines and subduction trench surrounding Malaysia 11

2.2. Illustration of soft story building 15

2.3 Dispersed damage/beam-sway and column sway 16

2.4 Masonry infilled frame sub assemblages 17

2.5 Variation of seismic force with ductility demand 19

2.6 Plastic hinge rotation on structural elements 22

2.7 Components of analytical vulnerability assessment 23

2.8 Capacity curve of structures 24

2.9 Limit states of buildings in severe earthquake 28

3.1 Flow chart of research methodology 34

3.2 Plan view of studied building 36

3.3 Elevation view of 3-story RC frame model 36

3.4 Distribution of dead load imposed on 3 story frame 39

3.5 Distribution of live load imposed on 3 story frame 40

3.6 Lateral wind load imposed to 3-story frame 41



3.9 Longitudinal Steel Reinforcing of 3-story model 44

xv

3.10 Cross section of 3 storey RC frame 45

3.11 Cross section of 6 story RC frame 46

3.12 Cross section of 9 story RC frame 47

3.13 Masonry infilled frame sub assemblages 48

3.14 Compressive diagonal struts used in studied building 49

3.15 Relationship of source distance and PGA/PGV 50

3.16 Relationship of source distance and magnitude 51

3.17 Hinges assigned to structural elements 54

3.18 Hinge property for masonry wall 55

3.19 Hinge property for columns 55

3.20 Hinge properties for beams 56

3.21 Load case data used in Etabs 2015 57

4.1 Formation of plastic hinges in 3 story frame L records 62

4.2 Formation of plastic hinges in 3 story frame M records 63

4.3 Formation of plastic hinges in 3 story frame H records 64







4.10 Median of inter-story drift demand for 3 story frame (L) 92

4.11 Median of inter-story drift demand for 3 story frame (M) 92

4.12 Median of inter-story drift demand for 3 story frame (H) 93

4.13 Fragility curve of 3-story partially infilled RC frame 97



xvi


4.17 Fragility curve of 6-story partially infilled RC frame 105




4.21 Fragility curve of 9 story partially infilled RC frame 112

4.22 PGA with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years 115

xvii

LIST OF SYMBOLS

fck - Characteristic cube strength of concrete

fyk - Characteristic strength of reinforcement

Fu - Ultimate stress of reinforcement

Fy - Yield stress of reinforcement

k - Stiffness

D - Damage

Ф - Standard normal cumulative distribution of PGA

μ - Mean

σ - Standard deviation

Mw - Moment magnitude scale

cm - centimetre

m - metre

km - kilometre

MPa - MegaPascal

kN - kiloNewton

∆ - deflection

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Background

In this study, the fragility functions developed for low ductile partially

infilled Reinforced Concrete (RC) buildings are discussed. The seismic fragility

analysis of structure is a requirement for seismic loss estimation and seismic risk

management. The vulnerability of structures, seismically, is usually conveyed

through functions of fragility, which denote the probability of exceeding or reaching

limit state performance damage by seismic ground movements. Fragility curves are

tremendously essential to estimate the total risk to the structural buildings from

possible tremors and to forecast the effects of loss to the economy from forthcoming

tremors. These fragility functions also can be handy in planning for disaster or

emergency response by national authority, furthermore an advantage for the

insurance companies to execute rough estimation on the total loss of the post-

earthquake.

Additionally, fragility curves can also be utilized to outline the design

retrofitting for damaged structures or that with inadequate strength to resist

earthquake loadings. This is done by performing benefit and cost studies for different

sorts of structural material and properties. Moreover, these fragility functions can be

used to alleviate risk through the adjustment of seismic codes for the plan of new

2

structures; the potential losses are quantitatively compared with the additional cost in

providing seismic resistance.

A large portion of the structures, additionally the buildings constructed

without the consideration of seismic code may have adequate and sufficient lateral

strength to withstand tremors of moderate size with a small degree of damage but not

severe or extreme tremors. Studies on vulnerability are conducted preceding the

earthquake events. The significance of the building, its utilization and the owner’s

necessities will decide whether the damage is acceptable or not.

The design of the buildings is based on the provisions of British Standard

8110-1997 in this study. The studied buildings are designed to resist wind loads and

gravity loads only as most of the buildings in Malaysia did not imply seismic codes

on the buildings due to its location outside earthquake prone areas. 45 ground motion

records are imposed to estimate the vulnerability of the buildings. The variable

considerations are the buildings heights that are the number of storeys and the

seismic design level with regard to Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA). Extra

consideration for the partially infilled frames is the quantity of infills (brick walls). In

this study, three performance levels or limit states, namely immediate occupancy

(IO), life safety (LS) and collapse prevention (CP) are considered to assess the

structural performance denoting the inter-story demand. The damage scale or

measure of interest is corresponded from the median value of the fragility functions.

Hence, in this study, fragility curves are used as the main tool for

preparations of seismic risk map. As mentioned before, fragility analysis plays an

important role in seismic risk assessment to estimate the vulnerability of a structure

reaching or exceeding limit state performance damage by seismic ground

movements. This vulnerability assessment method can be categorized into four

categories, that are, empirical, hybrid, judgemental and analytical. The classification

relies on upon the damage data used in their generation which are established mainly

from observed post-tremor study, analytical simulation, expert judgement or

combination of both. (Kwon & Elnashai, 2006) The Malaysian Meteorological

Department reports that only limited data of strong ground motions have been

recorded. In view of that, the curves are developed using analytical simulation.

3

Moreover, these curves are particularly handy in vulnerability assessment, post

tremor assessment and retrofit prioritization from potential seismic tremors. (Jeong &

Elnashai, 2007) Additionally, these curves are more critical and vital in the loss

estimation of economy, life and occupancy that many happen as an aftereffect of

future seismic tremors. (Tan & Abdul Razak, 2010) Therefore, this project report

highlights the development of fragility curves to assess the vulnerability of buildings

under seismic ground motions.

1.2 Problem Statement

Earthquakes are one of the most disastrous events that could happen in

human history and are frequently exciting highly populated cities. Earthquakes

impose damages to structures and infrastructures, subsequently cause casualties and

fatalities. Malaysia is categorized under low seismicity group as it is located

tectonically within the comparatively steady Sunda Shelf. Except for Sabah, where it

is categorized under moderate seismicity group. Since Malaysia’s geology is far from

earthquake prone area, the buildings have been designed according to BS8110-1997

to resist gravity and wind loads effects only. A large portion of present and existing

Malaysian’s structures have not been designed for earthquake thus never designed to

take seismic excitation effect. Having experienced with local and distant seismic

motions, Malaysia has come to realize that the danger of earthquake is real and has

the risk to public safety and welfare.

Therefore, there has been effort to reduce seismic induced damages. One way

to decrease seismic induced damages is to retrofit buildings which have not been

designed for seismic actions. There are several methods available, namely,

reinforcement jacketing, steel jacketing and Fibre-Reinforced Polymer (FRP)

installation that have been proposed to mitigate or reduce structural damages under

seismic actions. In order to retrofit our structures, we need to allocate enough

budgets and the government should have estimation on total cost for retrofitting and

4

rehabilitating the structures. Therefore, one way to estimate seismic induced

damages and the cost for retrofit of buildings is by preparing seismic risk map.

Hence, in this study, fragility curves are used as the main tool for

preparations of seismic risk map. For Malaysia, there has been no comprehensive

study on the preparation of fragility curves. Based on the research carried out by

(Saruddin & Mohamed Nazri, 2015), they developed fragility curves for material of

moment resisting concrete frame (MRCF) and steel frame (MRSF). It was found that

the steel frame has better performance than moment resisting concrete frame. (Tan,

et al., 2014) developed fragility curves for three story reinforced concrete frame.

From their study, the results indicate that the fragility curves are affected by both the

number of stories in the building and soil conditions.

Based on the affirmation studies, there has been no fragility curves developed

for low ductile partially infilled RC frame in Malaysia. There is also no fragility

curves developed for partially infilled RC frame that takes into consideration near-

and far-field effects of earthquakes in Malaysia. Therefore, in this study fragility

curves for low ductile partially infilled RC frame considering near-field and far-field

seismic ground motions are developed in contributing to the shortcomings of

previous studies.

5

1.3 Objectives of Research

Therefore, this study embarks on the following objectives:

1. To study failure mechanism of low ductile partially infilled RC frames

subjected to ground motions.

2. To investigate inter-storey drift demand of low ductile partially infilled RC

frames subjected to ground motions.

3. To develop seismic fragility curves for low ductile partially infilled RC

frames subjected to ground motions.

1.4 Scopes of Research

This project focuses on the following scopes:

1. Seismic fragility of low ductile partially reinforced concrete frames in

Malaysia subjected to seismic ground motions.

2. Seismic risk analysis using fragility curves for three-, six- and nine storeys of

RC frame buildings are selected as studied buildings

3. All of the buildings are regular in both plan and elevation configuration.

4. Each frame of three-, six- and nine-story has four 6m bays and typical story

height of 3m except for the ground story having height of 4m. The total

height of building is 10m, 19m and 28m respectively.

6

5. Compressive strength of concrete: 20 MPa

6. Yield stress of reinforcement, Fy : 300 MPa

7. Ultimate stress of reinforcement, Fu : 420 MPa

8. Live load applied is 6 kN/m2

9. Dead load applied is 25.5kN/m except for the top floor (without walls) i.e.

15.54kN/m

10. 45 earthquake records will be used to perform Incremental Dynamic Collapse

Analysis (IDA)

11. The structures are designed in compliance with the BS 8110-1997 code

specification

12. Preliminary design of these 3 models is performed by using ETABS 2015

software. This finite element simulation and design of buildings are according

to common practice in Malaysia.

120

REFERENCES

Adnan, A., Hendriyawan, Marto, A. & Irsyam, M., 2005. Seismic hazard assessment

for Peninsular Malaysia using Gumbel Distribution Method. Jurnal Teknologi, pp.

57-73.

Adnan, A., Hendriyawan, Marto, A. & Irsyam, M., 2005. Seismic Hazard

Assessment for Peninsular Malaysia Using Gumbel Distribution Method. Jurnal

Teknologi, pp. 57-73.

Asamoah, M. A. & Ankamah, N. O., March 2016. Effect of Design Ductility on the

Progressive Collapse Potential of RC Frame Structures Designed to Eurocode 8.

American Journal of Civil Engineering, 4(2), pp. 40-49.

Aslam Faqeer Mohamad, M. F. R. G. E. S., 2016. Seismic performance of older R/C

frame structures accounting for infills-induced shear failure of columns. Engineering

Structures, pp. 1-13.

Asteris, P. G., Chrysostomou, C. Z., Giannopoulus, I. P. & Smyrou, E., 2011.

Masonry Infilled Reinforced Concrete Frames with Openings. Greece, s.n.

Bolt, B. A., 2003. Earthquakes. Berkeley: W. H. Freeman.

Bozorgnia, Y. & Bertero, V., 2004. Non-linear dynamic analysis. Earthquake

engineering: from engineering seismology to performance-based design, pp. 1-17.

Calvi, G. M. et al., 2006. DEVELOPMENT OF SEISMIC VULNERABILITY

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES OVER THE PAST 30 YEARS. ISET Journal

of Earthquake Technology, pp. 75-104.

Cornell, C. A. & Krawingkler, H., 2000. Progress and Challenges in Seismic

Performance Assessment. [Online]

Available at: http://peer.berkeley.edu/news/2000spring/performance.html

121

DeVall, R. H., 2003. Background information for some of the proposed earthquake

design provisions for the 2005 edition of the National Building Code of Canada.

Can. J. Civil Eng. 30, pp. 279-286.

Dolsek, M. & Fajfar, P., 2008. The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response

of a four-storey reinfirced concrete frame- a deterministic assessment. Engineering

Structures, pp. 1991-2001.

Dolsek, M. & Fajfar, P., 2008. The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response

of a four-storey reinforced concrete frame-a deterministic assessment. Engineering

Structures 30, pp. 1991-2001.

Dumova-Jovanoska, E., 2004. Fragility Curves for RC Structures in Skopje Region.

Vancouver, Canada, s.n., p. Paper No. 3.

Elghazouli, A., 2009. Seismic Design of Buildings to Eurocode 8. London, United

Kingdom, Spon Press.

FEMA 356, 2000. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of

Buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.

FEMA P-58-1, 2012. Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings Volume 1 –

Methodology. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Filiatrault, A. et al., 2013. Elements of Earthquake Engineering and Structural

Dynamics. Canada: Presses Internationales Polytechnique.

Ghobarah, A., 2001. Performance based design in earthquake engineering:state of

development. Journal of Engineering Structures 23, pp. 878-884.

Gill, J., Shariff, N. S., Omar, K. & Amin, Z. M., 2015. Tectonic Motion of Malaysia :

Analysis from Years 2001 to 2013. Kuala Lumpur, ISPRS Annals of the

Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, pp. 1-8.

Guevara-Perez, L. T., 2012. "Soft Story" and "Weak Story" in Earthquake Resistant

Design: A Multidisciplinary Approach. 15 WCEE.

Hejazil, F. et al., 2011. Effect of Soft Story on Structural Response of High Rise

Buildings. IOP Conf. Series: Material sScience and Engineering, pp. 1-13.

Hetland, E. A. & Hager, B. H., 2006. Interseismic strain accumuluation: Spin-up,

cycle invariance, and irregular rupture sequences. Geochemistry, Geophysics,

Geosystems, p. 7(5).

Heydari, M. & Mousavi, M., 2015. The Comparison of Seismic Effects of Near-Field

and Far-Field Earthquakes on Relative Displacements on Seven-storey Concrete

Building with Shear Wall. Special Issue of Curr World Environment.

122

Holmes, M., 1961. Steel frames with brickwork and concrete infilling. London, s.n.,

pp. 473-478.

Ibrahim, Y. & El-Shami, M., 2011. Seismic Fragility Curves for Mid-Rise

Reinforced Concrete Frames in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The IES Journal Part A:

Civil & Structural Engineering, pp. 213-223.

Jeong, S. H. & Elnashai, A. S., 2007. Probabilistic Fragility Analysis Parameterized

by Fundamantal Response Quantities. Engineering Structures 29(6), pp. 1238-1251.

Kalantari, A., 2012. Seismic Risk of Structures and the Economic Issues of

Earthquakes. In: Earthquake Engineering. s.l.:Intech.

Kwon, O. S. & Elnashai, A., 2006. The Effect of Material and Ground Motion

Uncertainty on the Seismic Vulnerability Curves of RC Structure. Engineering

Structures 28(2), pp. 289-303.

Liauw, T.-C. & Kwan, K.-H., 1984. Nonliner behaviour of non-integral infilled

frames. Computers & Structures, pp. 551-560.

Mat Said, S. N., 2010-2011. SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RISKS IN MALAYSIA,

Petaling Jaya: MMD.

MMD, 2016. Seismicity in Malaysia and around the Region. [Online]

Available at:

http://www.met.gov.my/web/metmalaysia/education/earthquakeandtsunami/seismicit

yinmalaysiaandaroundtheregion

[Accessed 14 November 2016].

Moniri, H., 2014. Evaluation of Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete

Buildings Using Incremental Dynamic Analysis (IDA) for Near-Field Earthquakes.

Gazimagusa: Eastern Mediterranean University.

Monish, S. & Karuna, S., 2015. A Study On Seismic Performance Of High Rise

Irregular Rc Framed Buildings. IJRET: International Journal of Research in

Engineering and Technology.

Mwafy, A., 2012. Analytically derived fragility relationships for modern high-rise

buildings in the UAE. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buidings, pp. 824-

843.

Mwafy, A. M., 2010. Analytically derived fragility relationships for modern high-

rise buildings in UAE. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 21(11),

pp. 824-843.

Nazri, F. & Alexander, N., 2012. Predicting the Collapse Potential of Structures in

Earthquake. University of Bristol.

123

Paulay, T. & Priestley, M. J. N., 1992. Seismic design of reinforced concrete and

masonry buildings. New York: Wiley Interscience Publication.

Paul, J. et al., 2012. Andaman postseismic deformation observations: Still slipping

after all these years?. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, pp. 343-351.

Polyakov, S. V., 1960. On the interaction between masonry filler walls and enclosing

frame when loaded in the plane of the wall. Translation in Earthquake Engineering,

pp. 36-42.

Ravikumar, C. M., Babu, N. K. S., Sujith, B. V. & Venkat, R. D., 2012. Effect of

Irregular Configurations on Seismic. Journal of Architecture Research 2(3), pp. 20-

26.

Repapis, C. C., 2016. Seismic Performance Evaluation of Existing RC Buildings

Without Seismic Details. Comparison of Nonlinear Static Methods and IDA. The

Open Construction & Building Technology Journal, pp. 158-179.

Rossetto, T. & Elnashai, A., 2003. Derivation of vulnerability functions for

European-type RC structures based on observational data. Engineering Structures,

pp. 1241-1263.

Saruddin, S. N. A. & Mohamed Nazri, F., 2015. Fragility curves for low-rise and

mid-rise buildings in Malaysia. Procedia Engineering, pp. 873-878.

Sawada, T., Hirao, K., Yamamoto, H. & Tsujihara, O., 1992. Relation between

maximum amplitude ratio and spectral parameters of earthquake ground motion. s.l.,

s.n., pp. vol. 2. 617-22.

SEAOC, 1995. Vision 2000: Performance-Based Seismic Engineering of Buildings.

Sacramento, CA. Structural Engineers Association of California.

Seifi, M., Noorzaei, J., Jaafar, M. S. & Panah, E. Y., 2008. Nonlinear Static Pushover

Analysis in Earthquake Engineering: State of Development. ICCBT.

Seifi, M., Noorzaie, J., Jaafar, M. S. & Yazdan Panah, E., 2008. Nonlinear Static

Pushover Analysis in Earthquake Engineering: State of Development. Kuala

Lumpur, s.n., pp. 69-80.

Simons, W. J. F. et al., 2007. A decade of GPS in Southeast Asia: Resolving

Sundaland motion and boundaries. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solod Earth, p.

112(B6).

Sun, J. & Pan, T.-C., 1995. Seismic characteristics of Sumatra and its relevance to

Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore. Journal of Southeast Asian Earth Sciences, pp.

105-111.

Tan, K. & Abdul Razak, H., 2010. Seismic Hazard Assessment of School Buildings

In Peninsular Malaysia. SE Asian Appl. Geol., pp. 232-241.

124

Tan, K., Abdul Razak, H., Suhatril, M. & Lu, D., 2014. Fragility curves of a RC

frame building subjected to seismic ground motions. Civil Engineering research, pp.

159-163.

Tso, W. K., Zhu, T. J. & Heidebrecht, A. C., 1992. Engineering implication of

ground motion A/V ratio. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 11(3), pp.

133-144.

Tso, W., Zhu, T. & Heidebrecht, A., 1992. Engineering implication of ground motion

A/V ratio.. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, pp. 133-144.

UBC, 1997. Whittier, California, Uniform Building Code.

Vamvatsikos, D. & Cornell, C. A., 2002. Incremental Dynamic Analysis. Earthquake

Engineering Structure Dyn., p. 23.

Vamvatsikos, D. & Cornell, C. A., 2002. Incremental Dynamic Analysis. Earthquake

Engineering Structure Dynamics.

Vamvatsikos, D. & Cornell, C. A., 2005. Direct estimation of the seismic demand

and capacity of multi-degree-of-freedom systems through incremental dynamic

analysis of single degree of freedom approximation. Structure Engineering, pp. 589-

599.

Vigny, C. et al., 2005. Insight into the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake from GPS

measurements in Southeast Asia. Nature, pp. 201-206.

Villaverde, R., 2007. Methods to assess the seismic collapse capacity of building

structures : State of the art. Structure Engineering, pp. 57-66.

seismic fragility of low ductile partially infilled

Documents