Upcrossing‐based time‐dependent resilience of aging structures

Abstract

The time-dependent resilience of an in-service aging structure provides quantitative measure of the structural ability to prepare for, adapt to, withstand and recover from disruptive events. Resilience models have been proposed in the literature to evaluate the resilience of aging structures subjected to discrete load processes, which are, however, not applicable to handle resilience problems considering continuous load processes. In this paper, a new method is developed to evaluate the time-dependent resilience of aging structures subjected to a continuous load process. The proposed method serves as the complement of the existing resilience models addressing discrete load processes, and takes into account the aging effects of the structural resistance/capacity and the nonstationarity in loads as a result of climate change. A structure suffers from a damage state upon the occurrence of an upcrossing of the load effect with respect to the resistance/capacity, leading to the reduction of the performance function, followed by a recovery process that restores the performance. The proposed method enables the time-dependent resilience to be evaluated via a closed form solution. It is also revealed that, the proposed resilience model takes an extended form of the existing formula for upcrossing-based time-dependent reliability, thus establishing a unified framework for the two quantities. The applicability of the proposed method is demonstrated through examining the time-dependent resilience of a residential building subjected to wind load. The effects of key factors on resilience, including the nonstationarity and correlation structure of the load process, as well as the resistance/capacity deterioration scenario, are investigated through an example. In particular, the structural resilience would be overestimated if ignoring the potential impacts of climate change, which is a relatively non-conservative evaluation.

Keywords

Time-dependent resilience / Stochastic load process / Multiple damage states / Upcrossing / Closed form solution

Relevance to resilience

A new method is developed to evaluate the time-dependent resilience of aging structures subjected to a continuous load process. The proposed method takes into account the aging effects of the structural resistance/capacity and the nonstationarity in loads.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Cao Wang: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The author declares that he has no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

This research described in this paper was supported by the Australian Government through the Australian Research Council’s Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DE240100207). This support is gratefully acknowledged. The views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily those of the Australian Government or Australian Research Council.

References

[1] Ellingwood BR, Mori Y. Reliability-based service life assessment of concrete structures in nuclear power plants: optimum inspection and repair. Nucl Eng Des 1997; 175(3):247-58.

[2] Alipour A, Shafei B, Shinozuka M. Performance evaluation of deteriorating highway bridges located in high seismic areas. J Bridge Eng 2011; 16(5):597-611.

[3] Edirisinghe R, Setunge S, Zhang G. Application of gamma process for building deterioration prediction. J Perform Constr Facil 2013; 27(6):763-73.

[4] Wang C. A stochastic process model for resistance deterioration of aging bridges. Adv Bridge Eng 2020; 1(1):3.

[5] Ellingwood BR. Risk-informed condition assessment of civil infrastructure: state of practice and research issues. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2005; 1(1):7-18.

[6] Wang C. Structural reliability and time-dependent reliability. Springer Cham; 2021.

[7] Ayyub BM. Systems resilience for multihazard environments: Definition, metrics, and valuation for decision making. Risk Anal 2014; 34(2):340-55.

[8] Bruneau M, Reinhorn A. Exploring the concept of seismic resilience for acute care facilities. Earthq Spectra 2007; 23(1):41-62.

[9] Basu AK. Introduction to stochastic process. Alpha Science International Ltd; 2003.

[10] IPCC. Climate change 2021:The physical science basis. Contribution of working group i to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press; 2021.

[11] Reguero BG, Losada InJ, Méndez FJ. A recent increase in global wave power as a consequence of oceanic warming. Nat Commun 2019; 10(1):205.

[12] Toimil A, Losada InJ, Nicholls RJ, Dalrymple RA, Stive MJF. Addressing the challenges of climate change risks and adaptation in coastal areas: a review. Coastal Eng 2020;156:103611.

[13] Liu J, Li R, Li S, Meucci A, Young IR. Increasing wave power due to global climate change and intensification of antarctic oscillation. Appl Energy 2024;358:122572.

[14] Wang C-H, Wang X, Khoo YB. Extreme wind gust hazard in Australia and its sensitivity to climate change. Nat Hazards 2013;67:549-67.

[15] Li CQ, Melchers RE. Outcrossings from convex polyhedrons for nonstationary Gaussian processes. J Eng Mech 1993; 119(11):2354-61.

[16] Wang C, Zhang H, Beer M. Structural time-dependent reliability assessment with new power spectral density function. J Struct Eng 2019; 145(12):04019163.

[17] Yang W, Zhang B, Wang W, Li C-Q. Time-dependent structural reliability under nonstationary and non-Gaussian processes. Struct Saf 2023;100:102286.

[18] Yang DY, Frangopol DM. Life-cycle management of deteriorating civil infrastructure considering resilience to lifetime hazards: a general approach based on renewal-reward processes. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2019;183:197-212.

[19] Wang C, Ayyub BM. Time-dependent resilience of repairable structures subjected to nonstationary load and deterioration for analysis and design. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertainty Eng Syst Part A Civ Eng 2022; 8(3):04022021.

[20] Wang C, Ayyub BM. Time-dependent seismic resilience of aging repairable structures considering multiple damage states. Earthq Eng Resilience 2022; 1(1):73-87.

[21] Mori Y, Ellingwood BR. Reliability-based service-life assessment of aging concrete structures. J Struct Eng 1993; 119(5):1600-21.

[22] 7- 22 A. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. Reston, Virginia: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2022.

[23] Rice SO. Mathematical analysis of random noise. Bell Syst Tech J 1944; 23(3):282-332.

[24] Grigoriu M. Crossings of non-Gaussian translation processes. J Eng Mech 1984; 110(4):610-20.

[25] Zheng R, Ellingwood BR. Stochastic fatigue crack growth in steel structures subject to random loading. Struct Saf 1998; 20(4):303-23.

[26] Kim H, Shields MD. Modeling strongly non-Gaussian non-stationary stochastic processes using the iterative translation approximation method and Karhunen-Loève expansion. Comput Struct 2015;161:31-42.

[27] Wang C. A generalized index for functionality-sensitive resilience quantification. Resilient Cities Struct. 2023; 2(1):68-75.

[28] Taylor HM, Karlin S. An introduction to stochastic modeling. 3rd ed. Academic Press; 1998. ISBN 978-0-12-684887-8

[29] Baker JW. Introducing correlation among fragility functions for multiple components. In: Proceedings of the 14th World conference on earthquake engineering, October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China; 2008.

[30] Wang C, Zhang H, Ellingwood BR, Guo Y, Mahmoud H, Li Q. Assessing post-hazard damage costs to a community’s residential buildings exposed to tropical cyclones. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2020; 17(4):443-53.

[31] Wang C, Zhang H. Assessing the seismic resilience of power grid systems considering the component deterioration and correlation. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst Part B Mech Eng 2020; 6(2):020903.

[32] Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA. Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC federal emergency management agency steel moment frame guidelines. J Struct Eng 2002 ;128(4):526-33.

[33] Li Y, Ellingwood BR.Hurricane damage to residential construction in the US: importance of uncertainty modeling in risk assessment. Eng Struct 2006; 28(7):1009-18.

[34] Ghosh J, Padgett JE. Aging considerations in the development of time-dependent seismic fragility curves. J Struct Eng 2010; 136(12):1497-511.

[35] Wang C, Teh LH. Time-dependent seismic reliability of aging structures. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertainty Eng Syst Part A Civ Eng 2022; 8(2):04022010.

[36] Abdelhady AU, Spence SMJ, McCormick J. Risk and fragility assessment of residential wooden buildings subject to hurricane winds. Struct Saf 2022;94:102137.

[37] FEMA. Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology: hurricane model. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Mitigation Division; 2003.