Loss and Downtime Assessment of RC Dual Wall–Frame Office Buildings Toward Resilient Seismic Performance

Simple item page
dc.article.number1200
dc.catalogadorjlo
dc.contributor.authorGallegos Calderón, Marco Fernando
dc.contributor.authorAraya Letelier, Gerardo Andrés
dc.contributor.authorLópez-García, Diego
dc.contributor.authorMolina Hutt, Carlos
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-13T18:36:08Z
dc.date.available2025-03-13T18:36:08Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.description.abstractThis study quantitatively assesses the impact of seismic design strategies on the performance of reinforced concrete (RC) dual wall–frame office buildings by comparing direct and indirect economic losses and downtime in life-cycle terms. A high-rise archetype building located in Santiago, Chile, on stiff soil was evaluated as a benchmark case study. Three design strategies to potentially enhance the seismic performance of a building designed conventionally were explored: (i) incorporating fluid viscous dampers (FVDs) in the lateral load-resisting structure; (ii) replacing conventional non-structural components with enhanced ones (ENCs); and (iii) a combination of the previous two strategies. First, probabilistic structural responses were estimated through incremental dynamic analyses using three-dimensional nonlinear models of the archetypes subjected to a set of hazard-consistent Chilean ground motions. Second, FEMA P-58 time-based assessment was conducted to estimate expected annual losses (EALs) for economic loss estimation. Finally, for downtime assessment, a novel probabilistic framework, built on the FEMA P-58 methodology and the REDi guidelines, was employed to estimate the expected annual downtimes (EADs) to achieve specific target recovery states, such as reoccupancy (RO) and functional recovery (FR). Results revealed that seismically enhancing RC dual wall–frame buildings with FVDs significantly improves resilience by reducing loss and downtime. For example, the enhanced building with FVDs achieved an EAL of 0.093% and EAL of 8.6 days for FR, compared to the archetype base building without design improvements, which exhibited an EAL of 0.125% and an EAD of 9.5 days for FR. In contrast, the impact of ENCs alone was minor, compared to the effect of FVDs, with an EAL of 0.106% and an EAD of 9.1 days for FR. With this detailed recovery modeling, probabilistic methods, and a focus on intermediate recovery states, this framework represents a significant advancement in resilience-based seismic design and recovery planning.
dc.fechaingreso.objetodigital2025-03-13
dc.format.extent26 páginas
dc.fuente.origenSCOPUS
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/su17031200
dc.identifier.issn2071-1050
dc.identifier.scopusidSCOPUS_ID:85217780589
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3390/su17031200
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uc.cl/handle/11534/102577
dc.information.autorucEscuela de Ingeniería; Gallegos Calderón, Marco Fernando; S/I; 1080977
dc.information.autorucEscuela de Construcción Civil; Araya Letelier, Gerardo Andrés; 0000-0003-4252-1341; 124980
dc.issue.numero3
dc.language.isoen
dc.nota.accesocontenido completo
dc.revistaSustainability
dc.rightsacceso abierto
dc.subjectDowntime assessment
dc.subjectEnhanced non-structural component
dc.subjectFluid viscous damper
dc.subjectLoss assessment
dc.subjectRC dual wall–frame office buildings
dc.subjectResilience
dc.subjectSubduction earthquakes
dc.subject.ddc620
dc.subject.deweyIngenieríaes_ES
dc.titleLoss and Downtime Assessment of RC Dual Wall–Frame Office Buildings Toward Resilient Seismic Performance
dc.typeartículo
dc.volumen17
sipa.codpersvinculados1080977
sipa.codpersvinculados124980
sipa.trazabilidadSCOPUS;2025-02-23
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
sustainability-17-01200.pdf
Size:
3.83 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Artículos de revistas