4.7 Article

A prediction method of building seismic loss based on BIM and FEMA P-58

Journal

AUTOMATION IN CONSTRUCTION
Volume 102, Issue -, Pages 245-257

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2019.02.017

Keywords

Seismic loss; BIM; FEMA P-58; Component level; Ontology

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFC0809900]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [U1709212]
  3. China Scholarship Council [201806465044]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Predicting the seismic loss of a building is critical for its resilience. A prediction method for building seismic loss based on the building information model (BIM) and FEMA P-58 is proposed in this study. First, a component-level damage prediction algorithm is designed to establish the mapping from BIM components to the performance groups (PGs) in FEMA P-58, and to predict the component damage using the BIM-based time-history analysis (THA) and the fragility curves of PGs. Subsequently, an ontology-based model considering the deduction rules in the local unit-repair-cost database is created for obtaining exact measurement data of components in a BIM. Meanwhile, a component-level loss prediction algorithm is developed using the measurement data and the unit repair costs corresponding to damage states, by which the predicted seismic losses can agree with the actual situation of the specific region. Finally, a component-level visualization algorithm is designed to display the seismic damage and loss in a virtual reality (VR) environment. A six-story office building in Beijing is used as a pilot test to demonstrate the advantages of the proposed method. The outcome of this study produces a component-level and visual loss prediction result that agrees with the actual situation of the specific region, which can be used to evaluate the post-earthquake economic resilience of different buildings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available