Structural Damage Prediction of a Reinforced Concrete Frame under Single and Multiple Seismic Events Using Machine Learning Algorithms
Source abstract
Abstract
Advanced machine learning algorithms have the potential to be successfully applied to many areas of system modelling. In the present study, the capability of ten machine learning algorithms to predict the structural damage of an 8-storey reinforced concrete frame building subjected to single and successive ground motions is examined. From this point of view, the initial damage state of the structural system, as well as 16 well-known ground motion intensity measures, are adopted as the features of the machine-learning algorithms that aim to predict the structural damage after each seismic event. The structural analyses are performed considering both real and artificial ground motion sequences, while the structural damage is expressed in terms of two overall damage indices. The comparative study results in the most efficient damage index, as well as the most promising machine learning algorithm in predicting the structural response of a reinforced concrete building under single or multiple seismic events. Finally, the configured methodology is deployed in a user-friendly web application.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Seismic Performance and Analysis · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Civil Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace, Campus of Kimmeria, 67100 Xanthi, Greece
School of Science & Technology, Informatics Studies, Hellenic Open University, 65404 Kavala, Greece
References (80)
Show source-provided references
1. Papadopoulos, G.A., Agalos, A., Karavias, A., Triantafyllou, I., Parcharidis, I., and Lekkas, E. (2021). Seismic and Geodetic Imaging (DInSAR) Investigation of the March 2021 Strong Earthquake Sequence in Thessaly, Central Greece. Geosciences, 11.10.3390/geosciences11080311 ↗
2. Effects of aftershocks on peak ductility demand due to strong ground motion records from shallow crustal earthquakes10.1002/eqe.2188 ↗
3. Closed-form aftershock reliability of damage-cumulating elastic-perfectly-plastic systems10.1002/eqe.2363 ↗
4. Collapse capacity of inelastic single-degree-of-freedom systems subjected to mainshock-aftershock earthquake sequences10.1080/13632469.2018.1453417 ↗
5. Seismic damage accumulation in highway bridges in earthquake-prone regions10.1193/120812EQS347M ↗
6. Maximum inelastic displacement of mainshock-damaged structures under succeeding aftershock10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106248 ↗
7. The effects of repeated earthquake ground motions on the non-linear response of SDOF systems10.1002/eqe.225 ↗
8. Inelastic displacement ratios for SDOF structures subjected to repeated earthquakes10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.07.002 ↗
9. Nonlinear behaviour of RC frames under repeated strong ground motions10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.04.013 ↗
10. Seismic sequence effects on three-dimensional reinforced concrete buildings10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.02.005 ↗
11. Effect of different aspects of multiple earthquakes on the nonlinear behavior of RC structures10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.11.006 ↗
12. Kavvadias, I.E., Rovithis, P.Z., Vasiliadis, L.K., and Elenas, A. (2018, January 18–21). Effect of the aftershock intensity characteristics on the seismic response of RC frame buildings. Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Thessaloniki, Greece.
13. Zhou, Z., Yu, X., and Lu, D. (2020). Identifying Optimal Intensity Measures for Predicting Damage Potential of Mainshock–Aftershock Sequences. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10196795 ↗
14. Development of fragility surfaces for reinforced concrete buildings under mainshock-aftershock sequences10.1002/eqe.3542 ↗
15. Framework of aftershock fragility assessment—Case studies: Older California reinforced concrete building frames10.1002/eqe.2599 ↗
16. Fragility curves for RC frames under multiple earthquakes10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.04.013 ↗
17. Fragility curves for RC frames subjected to Tohoku mainshock-aftershocks sequences10.1080/13632469.2016.1264328 ↗
18. Machine Learning Applications for Building Structural Design and Performance Assessment: State-of-the-Art Review10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101816 ↗
19. The promise of implementing machine learning in earthquake engineering: A state-of-the-art review10.1177/8755293020919419 ↗
20. A Review on Application of Soft Computing Techniques for the Rapid Visual Safety Evaluation and Damage Classification of Existing Buildings10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102536 ↗
21. Prediction of seismic-induced structural damage using artificial neural networks10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.11.010 ↗
22. Neuro–fuzzy techniques for the classification of earthquake damages in buildings10.1016/j.measurement.2010.02.011 ↗
23. Seismic parameters’ combinations for the optimum prediction of the damage state of R/C buildings using neural networks10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.01.001 ↗
24. Kostinakis, K., and Morfidis, K. (2020). Application of Artificial Neural Networks for the Assessment of the Seismic Damage of Buildings with Irregular Infills’ Distribution. Seismic Behaviour and Design of Irregular and Complex Civil Structures III, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-33532-8_23 ↗
25. Earthquake Magnitude Prediction Using Recurrent Neural Networks
26. Deep learning-based classification of earthquake-impacted buildings using textual damage descriptions10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101111 ↗
27. Deep long short-term memory networks for nonlinear structural seismic response prediction10.1016/j.compstruc.2019.05.006 ↗
28. A data-driven building’s seismic response estimation method using a deep convolutional neural network10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3065837 ↗
29. Seismic response prediction method for building structures using convolutional neural network
30. Machine-learning-enhanced tail end prediction of structural response statistics in earthquake engineering10.1002/eqe.3432 ↗
31. Assessment and Localization of Structural Damage in r/c Structures through Intelligent Seismic Signal Processing10.1080/08839514.2021.1935589 ↗
32. Lazaridis, P.C., Kavvadias, I.E., Demertzis, K., Iliadis, L., Papaleonidas, A., Vasiliadis, L.K., and Elenas, A. (2021, January 28–30). Structural Damage Prediction Under Seismic Sequence Using Neural Networks. Proceedings of the 8th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Athens, Greece.10.7712/120121.8750.18752 ↗
33. Collapse fragility of steel structures subjected to earthquake mainshock-aftershock sequences10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001019 ↗
34. Luzi, L., Lanzano, G., Felicetta, C., D’Amico, M., Russo, E., Sgobba, S., Pacor, F., and ORFEUS Working Group 5 (2020). Engineering Strong Motion Database (ESM) (Version 2.0).
35. Ancheta, T.D., Darragh, R.B., Stewart, J.P., Seyhan, E., Silva, W.J., Chiou, B.S., Wooddell, K.E., Graves, R.W., Kottke, A.R., and Boore, D.M. (2013). Peer NGA-West2 Database, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. Technical Report.10.1193/070913EQS197M ↗
36. Valles, R., Reinhorn, A.M., Kunnath, S.K., Li, C., and Madan, A. (1996). IDARC2D Version 4.0: A Computer Program for the Inelastic Damage Analysis of Buildings, University at Buffalo 212 Ketter Hall Buffalo. Technical Report.
37. Park, Y.J., Reinhorn, A.M., and Kunnath, S.K. (1987). IDARC: Inelastic Damage Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Frame–Shear–Wall Structures, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research.
38. CEN (2005). EN 1992-1-1 Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures—Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, European Committee for Standardization.
39. GNU Octave and reproducible research10.1016/j.jprocont.2012.04.006 ↗
40. Eaton, J.W., Bateman, D., Hauberg, S., and Wehbring, R. (2022, March 11). GNU Octave Version 6.1.0 Manual: A High-Level Interactive Language for Numerical Computations. Available online: https://octave.org/doc/octave-6.1.0.pdf.
41. Kramer, S.L. (1996). Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall.
42. Arias, A. (1970). A Measure of Earthquake Intensity. Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
43. EPRI (1988). Criterion for Determining Exceedance of the Operating Basis Earthquake, Electric Power Research Institute USA. Rapport NP-5930 2848-16.
44. Araya, R., and Saragoni, G.R. (1985, January 21–28). Earthquake accelerogram destructiveness potential factor. Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engineeringq, San Francisco, CA, USA.
45. A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion
46. Reinoso, E., Ordaz, M., and Guerrero, R. (February, January 30). Influence of strong ground-motion duration in seismic design of structures. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand.
47. Características de terremotos. Análisis general
48. Bolt, B.A. (1973, January 25–29). Duration of strong ground motion. Proceedings of the 5th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, lRome, Italy.
49. A measure of earthquake motion capacity to damage medium-period structures10.1016/S0267-7261(05)80002-8 ↗
50. Hysteretic energy spectrum and damage control10.1002/eqe.93 ↗
51. Housner, G.W. (1952, January 25–29). Spectrum intensities of strong-motion earthquakes. Proceedings of the Symposium on Earthquake and Blast Effects on Structures, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
52. Selection of Natural and Synthetic Accelerograms for Seismic Vulnerability Studies on Reinforced Concrete Frames10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000209 ↗
53. Lazaridis, P.C., Kavvadias, I.E., and Vasiliadis, L.K. (2019, January 5–7). Correlation between Seismic Parameters and Damage Indices of Reinforced Concrete Structures. Proceedings of the 4th Panhellenic Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology, Athens, Greece.
54. OpenSeismoMatlab: A new open-source software for strong ground motion data processing10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00784 ↗
55. Rossum, G. (1995). Python Reference Manual, National Research Institute for Mathematics and Computer Science, Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, Amsterdam Science Park.
56. Detection of seismic structural damage using parameter-based global damage indices10.1016/0266-8920(90)90008-8 ↗
57. Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:4(722) ↗
58. Kunnath, S.K., Reinhorn, A.M., and Lobo, R. (1992). IDARC Version 3.0: A Program for the Inelastic Damage Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures, US National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER), University at Buffalo 212 Ketter Hall Buffalo. Technical Report.
59. Damage-limiting aseismic design of buildings10.1193/1.1585416 ↗
60. Inelastic spectra to predict period elongation of structures under earthquake loading10.1002/eqe.2554 ↗
61. Detection of influential observation in linear regression10.1080/00401706.1977.10489493 ↗
62. Influential observations in linear regression10.1080/01621459.1979.10481634 ↗
63. Gibbons, J.D., and Chakraborti, S. (2010). Nonparametric Statistical Inference, CRC Press.10.1201/9781439896129 ↗
64. Wetschoreck, F., Krabel, T., and Krishnamurthy, S. (2021, December 17). 8080labs/Ppscore: Zenodo Release. Available online: https://zenodo.org/record/4091345#.Yk0mjTURVPY.
65. Drucker, H. (1997, January 8–12). Improving regressors using boosting techniques. Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, Nashville, TN, USA.
66. Sparse Bayesian learning and the relevance vector machine
67. Breiman, L., Friedman, J.H., Olshen, R.A., and Stone, C.J. (2017). Classification and Regression Trees, Routledge.10.1201/9781315139470 ↗
68. Extremely randomized trees10.1007/s10994-006-6226-1 ↗
69. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine10.1214/aos/1013203451 ↗
70. Discriminatory analysis. Nonparametric discrimination: Consistency properties10.2307/1403797 ↗
71. An introduction to kernel and nearest-neighbor nonparametric regression10.1080/00031305.1992.10475879 ↗
72. Guyon, I., Luxburg, U.V., Bengio, S., Wallach, H., Fergus, R., Vishwanathan, S., and Garnett, R. (2017). LightGBM: A Highly Efficient Gradient Boosting Decision Tree. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Curran Associates, Inc.
73. Glantz, S.A., and Slinker, B.K. (2001). Primer of Applied Regression & Analysis of Variance, McGraw-Hill, Inc.
74. Minsky, M., and Papert, S.A. (2017). Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational Geometry, MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/11301.001.0001 ↗
75. Random forests10.1023/A:1010933404324 ↗
76. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python
77. Yellowbrick: Visualizing the Scikit-Learn Model Selection Process10.21105/joss.01075 ↗
78. Bengfort, B., Bilbro, R., Johnson, P., Billet, P., Roman, P., Deziel, P., McIntyre, K., Gray, L., Ojeda, A., and Schmierer, E. (2022, January 10). Yellowbrick v1.3. Available online: https://zenodo.org/record/4525724#.Yk0p5DURVPY.
79. Stochastic gradient boosting10.1016/S0167-9473(01)00065-2 ↗
80. Teixeira, T., Treuille, A., Conkling, T., Kantuni, H., McGrady, K., Jonathan, R., Rosso, E., Zwitch, R., Donato, V., and Chen, A. (2022, February 07). Streamlit. 0.69. 0. Github. Available online: https://github.com/streamlit/streamlit.