Mainshock–aftershock seismic fragility assessment of civil structures: A state-of-the-art review

Abstract

Sequential seismic events occur worldwide,which impose significant threats to the safety and serviceability of Civil infrastructure, especially buildings and bridges. Fragility functions are imperative to support decision-making tools for potential seismic risk identification and its impact on str uctural performance during sequential carthquakes. The increasing number of publications shows a notable increase in interest among rescarchers and the scien tific community in this domain. This study presents a systema eview of available resources and techniques for structural performance and fragility evaluation subjected to mainshock-aftershock seismic loading. Efforts have been made to focus on the salient features of various approaches rather than criticizing the mathematical frameworks and associated analysis approaches. Existing knowledge related to the effect of sequential seismic loading on buildings and bridge infrastructures and their fragility estimates is presented concisely. The paper concludes by detailing the opportunities for future developments in the fragility analysis of Civil infrastructure under sequential seismic hazard. This would encourage stakeholders and decision-makers to put into practice their applications for risk mitigation, recovery planning, and well-informed decision-making.

Keywords

bridge / building / mainshock-aftershock / seismic fragility / sequential ground motion

References

[1] Jeon JS, Desroches R, Lowes LN, Brilakis I. Framework of aftershock fragility Assessment—Case studies: older california reinforced concrete building frames. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2015;44(15):2617-2636.

[2] Prete MD, Guadagno FM, Scarascia-Mugnozza G. Earthquake induced damage in an historic area: the September–October 1997 seismic sequence which affected assisi, central Italy. Bull Eng Geol Environ. 1998;57(1):101-109.

[3] Chi WC, Dreger D. Crustal deformation in Taiwan: results from finite source inversions of six mw > 5.8 Chi-Chi aftershocks. J Geophys Res Solid Earth. 2004;109(7):B07305.

[4] Rathje EM, Stewart JP, Baturay MB, Bray JD, Bardet JP. Strong ground motions and damage patterns from the 1999 duzce earthquake in Turkey. J Earthq Eng. 2006;10(5):693-724.

[5] Kaiser A, Holden C, Beavan J, et al. The mw 6.2 christchurch earthquake of February 2011: preliminary report. N Z J Geol Geophys. 2012;55(1):67-90.

[6] Wen XZ, Zhang PZ, Du F, Long F. The background of historical and modern seismic activities of the occurrence of the 2008 MS 8.0 wenchuan, sichuan, earthquake. Acta Geophys Sin. 2009;52(2):444-454.

[7] Michele M, Di Stefano R, Chiaraluce L, et al. The amatrice 2016 seismic sequence: A preliminary look at the mainshock and aftershocks distribution. Ann Geophys. 2016;59(Fast Track 5):1-8.

[8] Brocher TM, Baltay AS, Hardebeck JL, et al. The mw 6.0 24 August 2014 south napa earthquake. Seismol Res Lett. 2015;86(2A):309-326.

[9] Ruppert NA, Nayak A, Thurber C, Richards C. Aftershock analysis of the 2018 mw 7.1 anchorage, Alaska, earthquake: relocations and regional moment tensors. Seismol Res Lett. 2019;91(1):114-125.

[10] Mai PM, Aspiotis T, Aquib TA, et al. The destructive earthquake doublet of 6 February 2023 in South-Central türkiye and northwestern Syria: initial observations and analyses. Seismic Record. 2023;3(2):105-115.

[11] Eurocode 8, CEN 8—Design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 2: Bridges ENV 1998–2:1994, Vol. 54 (European Committee for Standardization Brussels, 2011).

[12] Eurocode, Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance—Part 3: Assessment and Retrofitting of Buildings (European Committee for Standardization Brussels 2005).

[13] CHBDC, Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CSA S6-19) (Canadian Standard Association (CSA) 2019).

[14] CALTRANS, Seismic Design Criteria Version 1.7 (Sacramento, California: Department of Transportation, 2013).

[15] Applied Technological Council (ATC), Earthquake damage evaluation data for California (Report no. ATC-13), (Redwood City, CA: Applied Technical Council, 1985), https://www.atcouncil.org/pdfs/atC13.pdf.

[16] ATC, Seismic Vulnerability and Impact of Disruption of Lifelines in the Conterminous United States (Report No. ATC-25) (Redwood City, CA: Applied Technical Council, 1991).

[17] King SA, Kiremidjian AS, Basöz N, et al. Methodologies for evaluating the Socio-Economic consequences of large earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra. 1997;13(4):565-584.

[18] Shinozuka M, Chang SE, Eguchi RT, Abrams DP, Hwang HHM, Rose A. Advances in earthquake loss estimation and application to memphis, Tennessee. Earthquake Spectra. 1997;13(4):739-758.

[19] Werner SD, Taylor CE, Moore JE. Loss estimation due to seismic risks to highway systems. Earthquake Spectra. 1997;13(4):585-604.

[20] Mackie KR, Stojadinović B. Fragility basis for California Highway Overpass Bridge Seismic Decision Making. Berkeley: University of California;2005.

[21] Whitman RV, Biggs JM, Brennan JE, Cornell CA, de Neufville RL, Vanmarcke EH. Seismic design decision analysis. J Struct Div. 1975;101(5):1067-1084.

[22] HAZUS-MH 2.1. Multi-Hazard loss estimation methodology: Earthquake model HAZUS-MH 2.1 technical manual. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency;2012.

[23] Pitilakis K, Crowley H, Kaynia AM. SYNER-G: Typology Definition and Fragility Functions for Physical Elements at Seismic Risk: Buildings, Lifelines, Transportation Networks and Critical Facilities. In: PH, Crowley, AM , Kaynia, eds. Geotechnical, geological and earthquake engineering. Springer;2014.

[24] Meslem A, Lang DH. Physical Vulnerability in Earthquake Risk Assessment. In: A Meslem, DH Lang, eds. Oxford research encyclopedia of natural hazard science. Oxford University Press;2017.

[25] Elnashai AS, Di Sarno L. Fundamentals of earthquake engineering: From source to fragility. 2nd ed. The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom: John Wiley &Sons, Ltd;2015.

[26] Basöz NI, Kiremidjian AS, King SA, Law KH. Statistical analysis of bridge damage data from the 1994 northridge, CA, earthquake. Earthquake Spectra. 1999;15(1):25-54.

[27] Yamazaki F, Motomura H, Hamada T. Damage Assessment of Expressway Networks in Japan Based on Seismic Monitoring. In: 12th world conference on earthquake engineering (Upper Hutt, NZ: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 2000).

[28] Shinozuka M, Murachi Y, Dong X, Zhou Y, Orlikowski MJ. Effect of seismic retrofit of bridges on transportation networks. Earthquake Eng Eng Vib. 2003;2(2):169-179.

[29] Der Kiureghian A. Bayesian Methods for Seismic Fragility Assessment of Lifeline Components. In: TaylorVanMarcke CE, VanMarcke E, eds, In Acceptable risk processes: Lifelines and natural hazards, ASCE council on disaster reduction and technical council on lifeline earthquake engineering monograph no. 21, 2002:61-77.

[30] Gardoni P, Mosalam KM, Kiureghian AD. Probabilistic seismic demand models and fragility estimates for RC bridges. J Earthq Eng. 2003;7:79-106.

[31] Buckle MJ, Fragility curve development for assessing the seismic vulnerability of highway bridges, Technical Report (MCEER Highway Project/FHWA, 1999).

[32] Alam MS, Bhuiyan MAR, Billah AHMM. Seismic fragility assessment of SMA-Bar restrained Multi-Span continuous highway bridge isolated by different laminated rubber bearings in medium to strong seismic risk zones. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2012;10(6):1885-1909.

[33] Choi E, DesRoches R, Nielson B. Seismic fragility of typical bridges in moderate seismic zones. Eng Struct. 2004;26(2):187-199.

[34] Kwon OS, Elnashai AS. Fragility analysis of a highway Over-Crossing bridge with consideration of Soil–Structure interactions. Struct Infrastruct Eng. 2010;6(1-2):159-178.

[35] Martínez A, Hube MA, Rollins KM. Analytical fragility curves for Non-Skewed highway bridges in Chile. Eng Struct. 2017;141:530-542.

[36] Nielson BG, DesRoches R. Seismic fragility methodology for highway bridges using a component level approach. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2007;36(6):823-839.

[37] Nielson BG, DesRoches R. Analytical seismic fragility curves for typical bridges in the central and southeastern United States. Eng Struct. 2007;23(3):615-633.

[38] Ramanathan K. “Next-generation seismic fragility curves for california bridges incorporating the evolution in seismic design philosophy” (PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology 2012).

[39] Rahman Bhuiyan MA, Alam MS. Seismic vulnerability assessment of a Multi-Span continuous highway bridge fitted with shape memory alloy bars and laminated rubber bearings. Earthquake Spectra. 2012;28(4):1379-1404.

[40] Zhang J, Huo Y. Evaluating effectiveness and optimum design of isolation devices for highway bridges using the fragility function method. Eng Struct. 2009;31(8):1648-1660.

[41] Rashid M, Nishio M. System fragility evaluation of a curved highway bridge structure considering Multi-Direction seismic excitations. Adv Struct Eng. 2023;26:2672-2692.

[42] Rashid M, Nishio M. Dynamic response evaluation of an existing bridge structure based on finite element modeling. 224. Cham: Springer;2022.

[43] Saida T, Rashid M, Nishio M. System fragility analysis of highway bridge using Multi-Output Gaussian process regression surrogate model. Adv Struct Eng. 2024;27:2803-2822.

[44] Werner SD, Taylor CE, Cho S, et al. Redars 2 methodology and software for seismic risk analysis of highway sytems. Buffalo, NY, USA: MCEER, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Red Jacket Quadrangle;2006.

[45] Li Y, Song R, Van De Lindt JW. Collapse fragility of steel structures subjected to earthquake Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. J Struct Eng. 2014;140(12):04014095.

[46] Franchin P, Pinto PE. Allowing traffic over Mainshock-Damaged bridges. J Earthquake Eng. 2009;13(5):585-599.

[47] Kumar R, Gardoni P. Modeling structural degradation of RC bridge columns subjected to earthquakes and their fragility estimates. J Struct Eng. 2012;138(1):42-51.

[48] Kumar R, Gardoni P. Effect of seismic degradation on the fragility of reinforced concrete bridges. Eng Struct. 2014;79:267-275.

[49] Alessandri S, Giannini R, Paolacci F. Aftershock risk assessment and the decision to open traffic on bridges. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2013;42(15):2255-2275.

[50] Dong Y, Frangopol DM. Risk and resilience assessment of bridges under mainshock and aftershocks incorporating uncertainties. Eng Struct. 2015;83:198-208.

[51] Fakharifar M, Chen G, Sneed L, Dalvand A. Seismic performance of Post-Mainshock FRP/Steel repaired RC bridge columns subjected to aftershocks. Composites Part B. 2015;72:183-198.

[52] Fakharifar M, Chen G, Dalvand A, Shamsabadi A. Collapse vulnerability and fragility analysis of substandard RC bridges rehabilitated with different repair jackets under Post-Mainshock cascading events. Int J Concr Struct Mater. 2015;9(3):345-367.

[53] Ghosh J, Padgett JE, Sánchez-Silva M. Seismic damage accumulation in highway bridges in Earthquake-Prone regions. Earthquake Spectra. 2015;31(1):115-135.

[54] Jeon JS, Desroches R, Lee DH. Post-Repair effect of column jackets on aftershock fragilities of damaged RC bridges subjected to successive earthquakes. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2016;45(7):1149-1168.

[55] Omranian E, Abdelnaby AE, Abdollahzadeh G. Seismic vulnerability assessment of RC skew bridges subjected to Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2018;114:186-197.

[56] Guo X, Zhang Z, Chen Z. Mainshock-Integrated aftershock vulnerability assessment of bridge structures. Appl Sci. 2020;10(19):6843.

[57] Chen X, Xiang N, Guan Z, Li J. Seismic vulnerability assessment of tall pier bridges under Mainshock–Aftershock-Like earthquake sequences using Vector-Valued intensity measure. Eng Struct. 2022;253:113732.

[58] Wang Z, Deng X, Luo X, Dang X, Guo J. Aftershock fragility assessment of continuous RC girder bridges using a modified damage index. Buildings. 2022;12(10):1675.

[59] Wang T, Han Q, Wen J, Wang L. Analysis of the effect of Mainshock–Aftershock sequences on the fragility of RC bridge columns. Buildings. 2022;12(10):1681.

[60] Pang Y, Wu L. Seismic fragility analysis of multispan reinforced concrete bridges using Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Math Probl Eng. 2018;2018:1-12.

[61] Liang Y, Yan JL, Cheng ZQ, Chen P, Ren C. Time-Varying seismic fragility analysis of offshore bridges with continuous Rigid-Frame girder under main aftershock sequences. J Bridge Eng. 2020;25(8):04020055.

[62] Pandikkadavath MS, Jithiya KK, Nagarajan P, Mangalathu S. Seismic Mainshock–Aftershock response assessment of reinforced concrete bridges Pre-Exposed to flood induced local scouring. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2022;20(15):8253-8275.

[63] Eser Aydemir M, Aydemir C, Arslan G. Experimental study on the energy dissipation and seismic behavior of RC columns due to repeated earthquakes including vertical excitation. Eng Struct. 2023;293:116650.

[64] Goda K, Salami MR. Inelastic seismic demand estimation of Wood-Frame houses subjected to Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2014;12(2):855-874.

[65] Nazari N, Lindt JWV, Li Y. Effect of aftershock intensity on seismic collapse fragilities. Int J Reliab Saf. 2014;8(2-4):174.

[66] Nazari N, van de Lindt JW, Li Y. Effect of Mainshock–Aftershock sequences on woodframe building damage fragilities. J Perform Constructed Facil. 2015;29(1):04014036.

[67] Tesfamariam S, Goda K. Loss estimation for Non-Ductile reinforced concrete building in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada: effects of Mega-Thrust Mw9-Class subduction earthquakes and aftershocks. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2015;44(13):2303-2320.

[68] Han R, Li Y, van de Lindt J. Seismic risk of base isolated Non-Ductile reinforced concrete buildings considering uncertainties and Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Struct Saf. 2014;50:39-56.

[69] Raghunandan M, Liel AB, Luco N. Aftershock collapse vulnerability assessment of reinforced concrete frame structures. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2015;44(3):419-439.

[70] Han R, Li Y, van de Lindt J. Assessment of seismic performance of buildings with incorporation of aftershocks. J Perform Constructed Facil. 2015;29(3):04014088.

[71] Abdelnaby AE. Fragility curves for RC frames subjected to tohoku Mainshock–Aftershocks sequences. J Earthquake Eng. 2018;22(5):902-920.

[72] Tesfamariam S, Goda K. Energy-Based seismic risk evaluation of tall reinforced concrete building in vancouver, BC, Canada, under MW 9 megathrust subduction earthquakes and aftershocks. Front Built Environ. 2017;3:1-17.

[73] Wen W, Zhai C, Ji D, Li S, Xie L. Framework for the vulnerability assessment of structure under Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2017;101:41-52.

[74] Hosseinpour F, Abdelnaby AE. Fragility curves for RC frames under multiple earthquakes. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2017;98:222-234.

[75] Shokrabadi M, Burton HV, Stewart JP. Impact of sequential ground motion pairing on Mainshock–Aftershock structural response and collapse performance assessment. J Struct Eng. 2018;144(10):04018177.

[76] Wen W, Zhang M, Zhai C, Liu W. Resilience loss factor for evaluation and design considering the effects of aftershocks. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2019;116:43-49.

[77] Yu X, Zhou Z, Lu W. Development of fragility surfaces for reinforced concrete buildings under Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2021;50(15):3981-4000.

[78] Zhou Z, Xu H, Gardoni P, Lu D, Yu X. Probabilistic demand models and fragilities for reinforced concrete frame structures subject to Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Eng Struct. 2021;245:112904.

[79] Di Sarno L, Pugliese F. Effects of Mainshock–Aftershock sequences on fragility analysis of RC buildings with ageing. Eng Struct. 2021;232:111837.

[80] Farivarrad AH, Estekanchi HE. Seismic performance assessment of SMRF structures subjected to Mainshock–Aftershock seismic sequences by endurance time method. J Earthquake Eng. 2022;26(7):3281-3299.

[81] Song P, Wang C, Sun Q. Mainshock–Aftershock fragility surfaces analysis of reinforced concrete frame structures using a double incremental dynamic analysis approach. Struct. 2023;56:104868.

[82] Zhou Z, Han M, Dong Y, Yu X. Seismic resilience of corroded Mid-Rise reinforced concrete structures under Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Eng Struct. 2023;288:116192.

[83] Pedone L, Gentile R, Galasso C, Pampanin S. Energy-Based procedures for seismic fragility analysis of Mainshock-Damaged buildings. Front Built Environ. 2023;9:1-20.

[84] Gentile R, Galasso C. Hysteretic Energy-Based State-Dependent fragility for Ground-Motion sequences. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2021;50(4):1187-1203.

[85] Moshref A, Khanmohammadi M, Tehranizadeh M. Assessment of the seismic capacity of Mainshock-Damaged reinforced concrete columns. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2017;15(1):291-311.

[86] Di Sarno L, Wu JR. Fragility assessment of existing Low-Rise steel Moment-Resisting frames with masonry infills under Mainshock–Aftershock earthquake sequences. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2021;19(6):2483-2504.

[87] Veismoradi S, Cheraghi A, Darvishan E. Probabilistic Mainshock–Aftershock collapse risk assessment of buckling restrained braced frames. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2018;115:205-216.

[88] Saed G, Balomenos GP. Fragility framework for corroded steel Moment-Resisting frame buildings subjected to Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2023;171:107975.

[89] Fang C, Ping B, Zheng Y, Ping Y, Ling H. Seismic fragility and loss estimation of Self-Centering steel braced frames under Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. J Build Eng. 2023;73:106433.

[90] Zhang Y, Wang Z, Jiang L, Skalomenos K, Zhang D. Seismic fragility analysis of masonry structures considering the effect of Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Eng Struct. 2023;275:115287.

[91] Furtado A, Rodrigues H, Varum H, Arêde A. Mainshock–Aftershock damage assessment of infilled RC structures. Eng Struct. 2018;175:645-660.

[92] Fikri R, Ingham J. Seismic response and aftershock fragility curves for Non-Ductile Mid-Rise buildings comprised of reinforced concrete frame with masonry infill. Struct. 2022;45:1688-1700.

[93] Uma SR, Ryu H, Luco N, Liel AB, Raghunandan M, “Comparison of Main-Shock and Aftershock Fragility Curves Developed for New Zealand and US Buildings,” in 9th pacific conference on earthquake engineering, Auckland, NZ, Vol. 227 (2011).

[94] Li Q, Ellingwood BR. Performance evaluation and damage assessment of steel frame buildings under main Shock–Aftershock earthquake sequences. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2007;36(3):405-427.

[95] Shinozuka M, Feng MQ, Lee J, Naganuma T. Statistical analysis of fragility curves. J Eng Mech. 2000;126(12):1224-1231.

[96] Ghosh J, Padgett JE. Aging considerations in the development of Time-Dependent seismic fragility curves. J Struct Eng. 2010;136(12):1497-1511.

[97] Ramanathan K, DesRoches R, Padgett JE. A comparison of pre-and Post-Seismic design considerations in moderate seismic zones through the fragility assessment of multispan bridge classes. Eng Struct. 2012;45:559-573.

[98] Di Trapani F, Malavisi M. Seismic fragility assessment of infilled frames subject to Mainshock/Aftershock sequences using a double incremental dynamic analysis approach. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2019;17(1):211-235.

[99] Di Sarno L. Effects of multiple earthquakes on inelastic structural response. Eng Struct. 2013;56:673-681.

[100] Li H, Li L, Zhou G, Xu L. Time-Dependent seismic fragility assessment for aging highway bridges subject to Non-Uniform Chloride-Induced corrosion. J Earthquake Eng. 2020;26:3523-3553.

[101] Rashid M, Nishio M. System Fragility Analysis of a Horizontally Curved Multi-Span Highway Bridge Structure. In: EVACES, lect notes civil eng. eds, MP Limongelli, PF GiordanoQuqa, S Gentile, CA Cigada, (Springer Cham, Switzerland: LNCE, 2023), 500-510. Lect Notes Civil Eng.

[102] Park SW, Park HS, Oh BK, Choi SW. Fragility assessment model of building structures using characteristics of artificial aftershock motions. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng. 2018;33(8):691-708.

[103] Iervolino I, Chioccarelli E, Suzuki A. Seismic damage accumulation in multiple Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2020;49(10):1007-1027.

[104] Amadio C, Fragiacomo M, Rajgelj S. The effects of repeated earthquake ground motions on the Non-Linear response of SDOF systems. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2003;32(2):291-308.

[105] Hatzigeorgiou GD, Beskos DE. Inelastic displacement ratios for SDOF structures subjected to repeated earthquakes. Eng Struct. 2009;31(11):2744-2755.

[106] Zhai CH, Wen WP, Chen Z, Li S, Xie LL. Damage spectra for the Mainshock–Aftershock Sequence-Type ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2013;45:1-12.

[107] Zhai CH, Wen WP, Li S, Xie LL. The Ductility-Based strength reduction factor for the Mainshock–Aftershock Sequence-Type ground motions. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2015;13(10):2893-2914.

[108] Goda K. Nonlinear response potential of Mainshock–Aftershock sequences from Japanese earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 2012;102(5):2139-2156.

[109] Ruiz-García J, Negrete-Manriquez JC. Evaluation of drift demands in existing steel frames under As-Recorded Far-Field and Near-Fault Mainshock–Aftershock seismic sequences. Eng Struct. 2011;33(2):621-634.

[110] Ruiz-García J. Mainshock–Aftershock ground motion features and their influence in building’s seismic response. J Earthquake Eng. 2012;16(5):719-737.

[111] Zhai CH, Wen WP, Li S, Chen Z, Chang Z, Xie LL. The damage investigation of inelastic SDOF structure under the Mainshock–Aftershock Sequence-Type ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2014;59:30-41.

[112] Shcherbakov R. A modified form of bath’s law. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 2004;94(5):1968-1975.

[113] Boore DM, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, Atkinson GM. NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5%damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra. 2014;30(3):1057-1085.

[114] Utsu T, Ogata Y, Matsu’ura RS. The centenary of the omori formula for a decay law of aftershock activity. J Phys Earth. 1995;43(1):1-33.

[115] Goda K. Record selection for aftershock incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2015;44(7):1157-1162.

[116] Aljawhari K, Gentile R, Freddi F, Galasso C. Effects of Ground-Motion sequences on fragility and vulnerability of Case-Study reinforced concrete frames. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2021;19(15):6329-6359.

[117] Ramamoorthy SK, Gardoni P, Bracci JM. Probabilistic demand models and fragility curves for reinforced concrete frames. J Struct Eng. 2006;132(10):1563-1572.

[118] Freddi F, Padgett JE, Dall’Asta A. Probabilistic seismic demand modeling of local level response parameters of an RC frame. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2017;15(1):1-23.

[119] Freddi F, Tubaldi E, Ragni L, Dall’Asta A. Probabilistic performance assessment of Low-Ductility reinforced concrete frames retrofitted with dissipative braces. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2013;42(7):993-1011.

[120] Park YJ, Ang AHS. Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete. J Struct Eng. 1985;111(4):722-739.

[121] Zhai CH, Wen WP, Zhu TT, Li S, Xie LL. Inelastic displacement ratios for design of structures with constant damage performance. Eng Struct. 2013;52:53-63.

[122] Decanini LD, Bruno S, Mollaioli F. Role of damage functions in evaluation of response modification factors. J Struct Eng. 2004;130(9):1298-1308.

[123] Panyakapo P. Evaluation of Site-Dependent Constant-Damage design spectra for reinforced concrete structures. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2004;33(12):1211-1231.

[124] Amiri S, Di Sarno L, Garakaninezhad A. Correlation between Non-Spectral and Cumulative-Based ground motion intensity measures and demands of structures under Mainshock–Aftershock seismic sequences considering the effects of incident angles. Struct. 2022;46:1209-1223.

[125] Tesfamariam S, Goda K, Mondal G. Seismic vulnerability of reinforced concrete frame with unreinforced masonry infill due to main Shock–Aftershock earthquake sequences. Earthquake Spectra. 2015;31(3):1427-1449.

[126] Seyedi DM, Gehl P, Douglas J, Davenne L, Mezher N, Ghavamian S. Development of seismic fragility surfaces for reinforced concrete buildings by means of nonlinear Time-History analysis. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2010;39(1):91-108.

[127] FEMA P695, Federal Emergency Management Agency (ATC-63) (Redwood City, CA: Applied Technology Council (ATC) 2009).

[128] Luco N, Cornell CA. Structure-Specific scalar intensity measures for Near-Source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthquake Spectra. 2007;23(2):357-392.

[129] Gardoni P, Der Kiureghian A, Mosalam KM. Probabilistic capacity models and fragility estimates for reinforced concrete columns based on experimental observations. J Eng Mech. 2002;128(10):1024-1038.

[130] Eads L, Miranda E, Lignos DG. Average spectral acceleration as an intensity measure for collapse risk assessment. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2015;44(12):2057-2073.

[131] Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. Developing efficient scalar and vector intensity measures for IDA capacity estimation by incorporating elastic spectral shape information. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2005;34(13):1573-1600.

[132] Shafieezadeh A, Ramanathan K, Padgett JE, Desroches R. Fractional order intensity measures for probabilistic seismic demand modeling applied to highway bridges. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2012;41(3):391-409.

[133] Padgett JE, DesRoches R. Methodology for the development of analytical fragility curves for retrofitted bridges. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 2008;37(8):1157-1174.

[134] Huang W, Andrawes B. Seismic Performance of SMA Retrofitted Multiple-Frame RC Bridges Subjected to Strong Main Shock–Aftershock Sequences. In: NCEE 2014—10th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering: Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering (Anchorage, Alaska, USA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), 2014)

[135] Omranian E, Abdelnaby A, Abdollahzadeh G, Rostamian M, Hosseinpour F. Fragility Curve Development for the Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Retrofitted RC Bridges Under Mainshock–Aftershock Seismic Sequences. In: JG Soules, ed. Structures congress 2018: Bridges, transportation structures, and nonbuilding structures-selected papers from the structures congress. CB&I American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE);2018:2018.

[136] Shafaei H, Naderpour H. Seismic fragility evaluation of FRP-Retrofitted RC frames subjected to Mainshock–Aftershock records. Struct. 2020;27:950-961.

[137] Noureldin M, Adane M, Kim J. Seismic fragility of structures with energy dissipation devices for Mainshock–Aftershock events. Earthquake Struct. 2021;21(3):219-230.

[138] Ghasemi M, Khorshidi H, Fanaie N. Performance evaluation of RC-MRFs with UHPSFRC and SMA rebars subjected to Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Struct. 2021;32:1871-1887.

[139] Afsar Dizaj E, Salami MR, Kashani MM. Seismic vulnerability assessment of ageing reinforced concrete structures under real Mainshock–Aftershock ground motions. Struct Infrastruct Eng. 2022;18(12):1674-1690.

[140] Di Sarno L, Amiri S. Period elongation of deteriorating structures under Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Eng Struct. 2019;196:109341.

[141] Di-Sarno L, Majidian A. Risk assessment of a typical petrochemical plant with ageing effects subjected to seismic sequences. Eng Struct. 2024;310:118110.

[142] Panchireddi B, Ghosh J. Cumulative vulnerability assessment of highway bridges considering corrosion deterioration and repeated earthquake events. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2019;17(3):1603-1638.

[143] Cui Z, Alipour A, Shafei B. Structural performance of deteriorating reinforced concrete columns under multiple earthquake events. Eng Struct. 2019;191:460-468.

[144] Zakeri B, Padgett JE, Ghodrati Amiri G. Fragility assessment for seismically retrofitted skewed reinforced concrete box girder bridges. J Perform Constructed Facil. 2015;29(2):04014043.

[145] Garakaninezhad A, Amiri S, Noroozinejad Farsangi E. Effects of ground motion incident angle on inelastic seismic demands of skewed bridges subjected to Mainshock–Aftershock sequences. Pract Period Struct Des Constr. 2023;28(2):04023006.

[146] Jithiya KK, Pandikkadavath MS, Mangalathu S, Nagarajan P. Seismic Mainshock-Aftershock (MS-AS) vulnerability assessment of reinforced concrete bridge exposed to flood induced scour. Lect Notes Civil Eng. 2022;175:211-221.

[147] W Wen, D Ji, and C Zhai. Ground motion rotation for Mainshock–Aftershock sequences: necessary or not? Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 2020;130:105976.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 The Author(s). Enrthquake Englncering and Retilience published by Tianjlin University and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.