Risk-based cost-benefit analysis of structural strengthening to mitigate disproportionate collapse of buildings under abnormal blast loading

Beck, AT; Stewart, MG

Risk-based cost-benefit analysis of structural strengthening to mitigate disproportionate collapse of buildings under abnormal blast loading

Beck, AT Stewart, MG

Permalink

Publisher:: ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Structures, 2023, 57
Issue Date:: 2023-11-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	1-s2.0-S235201242301192X-main.pdf	Published version	4.61 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Beck, AT
dc.contributor.author	Stewart, MG
dc.date.accessioned	2024-03-05T07:11:28Z
dc.date.available	2024-03-05T07:11:28Z
dc.date.issued	2023-11-01
dc.identifier.citation	Structures, 2023, 57
dc.identifier.issn	2352-0124
dc.identifier.issn	2352-0124
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/176135
dc.description.abstract	Strengthening building structures to mitigate their likelihood of disproportionate collapse, due to initial damage produced by abnormal loads, has a significant impact on construction costs. The decision to strengthen or not needs to be taken under significant epistemic uncertainty related to potential blast hazard scenarios and threat probabilities. In this manuscript we present a novel risk-based cost-benefit analysis to address optimal and codified design options for RC buildings subject to blast hazards. Building frames of different aspect ratios (number of bays × number of stories) are addressed. Three terrorist blast hazard scenarios are considered: two VBIEDs and one smaller suitcase bomb. The large uncertainty in threat likelihood is addressed by treating annual threat probability as the independent parameter in the analyses. This makes the blast hazard analysis, and the progressive collapse analysis, independent of the factors that can make a particular building a target, like location, environment, ownership, and use. The analysis reveals the break-even hazard (threat) probabilities, which make the cost of structural strengthening equal to the reduction in expected cost of progressive collapse. For a particular building location, use, and blast threat, if the hazard probability is larger than the break-even probability, strengthening is cost-effective. The break-even point between the choices of strengthening with removal of a single or of two columns is also presented and discussed. Practical recommendations for codified Alternate Path Method include a distinction between strengthening factors for beams and columns, much in the same way as already done in conventional design.
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
dc.relation	http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/DP210101487
dc.relation.ispartof	Structures
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105103
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subject	0905 Civil Engineering, 1202 Building
dc.subject.classification	4005 Civil engineering
dc.title	Risk-based cost-benefit analysis of structural strengthening to mitigate disproportionate collapse of buildings under abnormal blast loading
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	57
utslib.for	0905 Civil Engineering
utslib.for	1202 Building
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology/School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
dc.date.updated	2024-03-05T07:11:27Z
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	57

Abstract:

Strengthening building structures to mitigate their likelihood of disproportionate collapse, due to initial damage produced by abnormal loads, has a significant impact on construction costs. The decision to strengthen or not needs to be taken under significant epistemic uncertainty related to potential blast hazard scenarios and threat probabilities. In this manuscript we present a novel risk-based cost-benefit analysis to address optimal and codified design options for RC buildings subject to blast hazards. Building frames of different aspect ratios (number of bays × number of stories) are addressed. Three terrorist blast hazard scenarios are considered: two VBIEDs and one smaller suitcase bomb. The large uncertainty in threat likelihood is addressed by treating annual threat probability as the independent parameter in the analyses. This makes the blast hazard analysis, and the progressive collapse analysis, independent of the factors that can make a particular building a target, like location, environment, ownership, and use. The analysis reveals the break-even hazard (threat) probabilities, which make the cost of structural strengthening equal to the reduction in expected cost of progressive collapse. For a particular building location, use, and blast threat, if the hazard probability is larger than the break-even probability, strengthening is cost-effective. The break-even point between the choices of strengthening with removal of a single or of two columns is also presented and discussed. Practical recommendations for codified Alternate Path Method include a distinction between strengthening factors for beams and columns, much in the same way as already done in conventional design.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/176135