IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i23p10392-d1530991.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Seismic Vulnerability Methods for RC-Frame Buildings Pre- and Post-Earthquake

Author

Listed:
  • Mabor Achol Samuel

    (School of Civil Engineering, Chang’an University, 75 Chang’an Road, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Ergang Xiong

    (School of Civil Engineering, Chang’an University, 75 Chang’an Road, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Mahmood Haris

    (School of Civil Engineering, Chang’an University, 75 Chang’an Road, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Beco Chenadaire Lekeufack

    (School of Civil Engineering, Chang’an University, 75 Chang’an Road, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Yupeng Xie

    (School of Civil Engineering, Chang’an University, 75 Chang’an Road, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Yufei Han

    (School of Civil Engineering, Chang’an University, 75 Chang’an Road, Xi’an 710061, China)

Abstract

The seismic vulnerability of reinforced concrete (RC) buildings has been an important issue, especially in earthquake-prone regions with limited seismic design codes such as South Sudan. Improving the seismic performance of reinforced concrete buildings is critical for maintaining structural functionality under normal service loads and for rapid recovery after natural disasters such as earthquakes. This research aims to thoroughly assess the methods used to evaluate the seismic vulnerability of RC frame structures in pre- and post-earthquake scenarios. The primary objective is to provide a comprehensive framework that integrates empirical, analytical, and experimental methods, categorizing existing assessment methods and proposing improvements for resource-constrained environments. However, empirical methods have always used historical earthquake data to estimate potential damage. In contrast, analytical methods have used computational tools such as fragility curves to assess the probability of damage at different seismic intensities. Additionally, experimental methods, such as shaking table tests and pseudo-dynamic analyses, have validated theoretical predictions and provided insights into structural behavior under simulated conditions. Furthermore, key findings highlight critical vulnerabilities in RC buildings, quantify damage probabilities, and compare the strengths and limitations of different assessment methods. However, challenges such as limited data availability, computational limitations, and difficulties replicating actual conditions in test setups highlight areas for improvement. By addressing these challenges, the review provides recommendations for future studies, including integrating advanced computational and regional hazard characterization methods, improving experimental methods to enhance the accuracy of vulnerability assessments, and ultimately supporting the design of more resilient RC structures and increasing disaster preparedness.

Suggested Citation

  • Mabor Achol Samuel & Ergang Xiong & Mahmood Haris & Beco Chenadaire Lekeufack & Yupeng Xie & Yufei Han, 2024. "Assessing Seismic Vulnerability Methods for RC-Frame Buildings Pre- and Post-Earthquake," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-27, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10392-:d:1530991
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10392/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10392/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sardar S. Shareef, 2023. "Earthquake Consideration in Architectural Design: Guidelines for Architects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Faris A. AlFaraidy & Kishore Srinivasa Teegala & Gaurav Dwivedi, 2023. "Selection of a Sustainable Structural Floor System for an Office Building Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Multi-Attribute Utility Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-21, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10392-:d:1530991. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.