1. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Sapienza – University of Rome
Francesco Petrini, Ph.D., P.E.
Konstantinos Gkoumas, Ph.D., P.E.
Franco Bontempi, Ph.D., P.E.
Sapienza - University of Rome
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Strutturale e
Geotecnica
Damage and loss evaluation in the performance-
based wind engineering

2. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Presentation outline
2
• Overview of the Performance Based Wind
Engineering (PBWE) procedure
• Models for tall buildings and the assessment of
occupant comfort:
• Application on a high-rise building
• Assessment of the annual probabilities of exceeding
the human perception thresholds
• Vibration and occupant comfort issues
• Damage analysis
• Loss analysis
• Conclusions and indications for further research

3. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Presentation outline
3
• Overview of the Performance Based Wind
Engineering (PBWE) procedure
• Models for tall buildings and the assessment of
occupant comfort
• Application on a high-rise building
• Assessment of the annual probabilities of exceeding
the human perception thresholds
• Vibration and occupant comfort issues
• Damage analysis
• Loss analysis
• Conclusions and indications for further research

4. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Performance-Based Wind Engineering (PBWE)
4
The problem of risk assessment is disaggregated into the following elements:
- site and structure-specific hazard analyses, that is, the assessment of the
probability density functions f(IM), f(SP) and f(IP|IM,SP);
- structural analysis, aiming at the assessment of the probability density function of
the structural response f(EDP|IM,IP,SP) conditional on the parameters characterizing the
environmental actions, the wind-fluid-structure interaction and the structural properties;
- damage analysis, that gives the damage probability density function f(DM|EDP)
conditional on EDP;
- finally, loss analysis, that is the assessment of G(DV|DM), where G(·|·) is a
conditional complementary cumulative distribution function.
G(DV) = ∫…∫ G(DV|DM) · f(DM|EDP) · f(EDP|IM, IP,SP) · f(IP|IM,SP) ·
· f(IM) · f(SP) · dDM · dEDP · dIP · dIM · dSP
Interaction
Parameters
Structural
Parameters
Intensity
measure
IM IP SP
Engineering
Demand
Parameters
EDP
Damage
Measure
DM
Decision
Variable
DV

5. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
PBWE procedure flowchart
5
Petrini, F. & Ciampoli M., 2012, Performance-based wind design of tall buildings, Structure & Infrastructure
Engineering, 8(10), 954-966.
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structuralanalysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV:decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
Ciampoli M, Petrini, F. & Augusti G., 2011, Performance-Based Wind Engineering: toward a general
procedure, Structural Safety, Structural Safety, 33(6), 367-378.

6. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
6
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM)
f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Aerodynamic
analysis
Struc’l analysis Damage analysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP: engineering
demand parameters
DM: damage measures DV: decision variables
Select
O, D
O: location
D: design
Environment
info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP: structural system
parameters
Structural
system info
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM)
f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Aerodynamic
analysis
Struc’l analysis Damage analysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP: engineering
demand parameters
DM: damage measures DV: decision variables
Select
O, D
O: location
D: design
Environment
info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP: structural system
parameters
Structural
system info
O, D
g(IM|O,D)
g(IM)
p(EDP|IM)
P(EDP)
p(DM|EDP)
P(DM)
p(DV|DM)
P(DV)
Hazard analysis Struc’l analysis Damage analysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
EDP: engineering
demand param.
DM: damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O: location
D: design
Facility
info
Decision-
making
O, D
g(IM|O,D)
g(IM)
p(EDP|IM)
P(EDP)
p(DM|EDP)
P(DM)
p(DV|DM)
P(DV)
Hazard analysis Struc’l analysis Damage analysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
EDP: engineering
demand param.
DM: damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O: location
D: design
Facility
info
Decision-
making
PBWEPBEE

7. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Presentation outline
7
• Overview of the Performance Based Wind
Engineering (PBWE) procedure.
• Models for tall buildings and the assessment of
occupant comfort
• Application on a high-rise building
• Assessment of the annual probabilities of exceeding
the human perception thresholds
• Vibration and occupant comfort issues
• Damage analysis
• Loss analysis
• Conclusions and indications for further research

8. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
8
Tamura,Y.(2009).Windandtallbuildings,ProceedingsoftheFifth
European&AfricanConferenceonWindEngineering(EACWE5),
Florence,Italy,July19-23,2009..
Vibration frequency
Accelerationthresholdsformotion
perception
w(t;z2)Vm(z2)
Vm (z1)
Vm (z3)
V(t;z2)
v(t;z2)u(t;z2)
X
Z
Y
θ
B1
B2
H
Loss of serviceability
Lossofintegrityof
non-structural
elements
Motionperception
bybuilding
occupants
Displacements
Acceleration
Discomfort level in terms of
perception thresholds
1

9. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
9
Loss of serviceability
Lossofintegrityof
non-structural
elements
Motionperception
bybuilding
occupants
Bashor,R.andKareem,A.(2007)."ProbabilisticPerformanceEvaluationof
Buildings:AnOccupantComfortPerspective",Proc.12thInternational
ConferenceonWindEngineering,1-6July,Cairns,Australia.Available
onlineathttp://www.nd.edu/~nathaz/[Accessed15June2010].
w(t;z2)Vm(z2)
Vm (z1)
Vm (z3)
V(t;z2)
v(t;z2)u(t;z2)
X
Z
Y
θ
B1
B2
H
Discomfort level in terms of
perception thresholds
Usually Across wind vibration
is critical for comfort
The reference period for
comfort evaluation is 1 year
1
2
3 1st
natural frequency is dominant4
Italian Guidelines
f1
Scalarthreshold
Displacements
Acceleration

10. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
10
Case study structure
Structure
•74 floors
•Height H=305m
•Footprint B1=B2=50m (square)
3dframeontheexternalperimeter
centralcore
Bracing system
A steel high-rise building
Finite Element model
FE Model
Approximately
•10,000 elements
•4,000 nodes
•24,000 DOFs

11. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
11
Experimental model of
Actions
SpenceS.M.J.,GioffrèM.,GusellaV.,Influenceofhighermodesonthe
dynamicre-sponseofirregularandregulartallbuildings,Proc.6th
InternationalColloquiumonBluffBodiesAerodynamicsand
Applications(BBAAVI),Milano,Italy,July20-24,2008.
Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel of the
CRIACIV in Prato, Italy
1:500Scalemodel
Response
time history
Time domain structural analyses
(Experimental actions)
Time domain
analyses
Experimental
forces
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
3500 3600 3700 3800 3900 4000
aL, aD
[cm/s2
]
t [s]Along Across

12. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
12
( )
( )
( ) )(),(
),,(exp
1
),(),(
22
212
2
ωχωρ
ωξξ
ωρω
⋅⋅⋅⋅=
=⋅⋅−⋅
⋅⋅⋅⋅=
∫∫
hSVc
dAdAf
A
hSVchS
uumxD
A A
uumxDDD tt
( )
)(),h(S
)(HVc
),h(S)(H),h(S
2
uu
22
mxD
DD
2
rr tttt
ωχω
ωρ
ωωω
⋅⋅
⋅⋅⋅⋅
=⋅=














⋅+







−
⋅
⋅
⋅
=
2
0
2
2
2
0
2
2
0
2
2
41
1
1
)(
ω
ω
ν
ω
ω
ω
ω
m
H
rrm
p
grr σ⋅+= rg
Wind action
spectra
(analytical)
Response spectra
Peak response
Frequency domain response
Response Peak
Factor
Analytical model of the buffeting forces
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( )ωfexpωSωSωS jkuuuuuu kkjjkj
−=
( )
( )
( ) ( )( )kj
2
kj
2
z
jk
zVzV2π
zzCω
ωf
+
−
=
Cross-spectrum
5.0
0
uu2
x
u
200
300(x)dxR
u
1
L 





⋅== ∫
∞
z
where:
( )
( ) [ ]5/3
ju
ju
x2
u
uu
/zLf10.3021ω/2π
/zLfσ6.686
ωS jj
⋅⋅+⋅
⋅⋅⋅
=
( )( ) 2
fri0
0
u
2
u
u1.75)log(zarctan1.16
(n)dnSσ
⋅+⋅−=
== ∫
∞
)z(V2π
zω
f
jm
j
⋅
⋅
=
Autospectrum
( ) 3ew(t)2ev(t)1eu(t))j(zmV)jz(t;jV

⋅+⋅+⋅+=
α
10m
10
z
V(z)V








⋅=
Solari,G.Piccardo,G.(2001).Probabilistic3-Dturbulencemodelingforgustbuffetingof
structures,ProbabilisticEngineeringMechanics,(16),73–86.
Turbulentwindvelocityspectra
(analytical)
Model of the Vortex shedding forces
(variable with the angle of attack)
1.E+01
1.E+03
1.E+05
1.E+07
1.E+09
1.E+11
0.000 0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000
PSD
n [Hz]
Total Forcespectrum
Turbulenceforcespectrum
Vortexsheddingforcespectrum

13. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
13

14. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
14

15. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
15
Hazard analysis
( ) ( ) 













θ
−⋅





θ
⋅
θ
θ
=θ
θ−θ
θ
)(
10
1)(
10
10, exp
)(
)(
),(f 10
kk
V
c
V
c
V
c
k
V
The roughness length z0 is characterized by a
lognormal PDF. The mean value μz0 and the
standard deviation σz0 of z0 are expressed as
function of θ (assuming a slight difference between
four sectors, i.e. a mean value of z0 varying
between 0.08 m and 0.12 m and a COVz0 equal to
0.30).
V10 and θ are described by their joint probability
distribution function
θ
V10
IM =
θ
V10
z0
Parameters c(θ) and k(θ) are derived from NIST®
wind speed database.
(Annual occurrence)
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info

16. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
16
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort
Interaction analysis IP =
gr
CD
CL
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info

17. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
17
Interaction analysis IP =
gr
CD
CL
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort
462.2507.1265.0 2
+ξ+ξ−=µ
rg
( )











≤⋅η
>⋅η
⋅η+
−
⋅η
=σ
+
+
+
+
122if650
122if
46
213
45
2
21
.T.
.T
.
)Tln(
.
)Tln(
.
windr,e
windr,e
windr,e
windr,e
gr
( )







<≤
η
<≤
η−
=η +
+
+
1690if
690100if
380631 450
r
r
r
r
.
r
r,e
q.
.q.
.q.
r
r
r σ
σ
=+η 
(Obtained from time-domain
analyses)
The peak response factor gr is characterized by a Gaussian distribution function
rgµ
rgµ
Vanmarcke (1975)
The aerodynamic coefficients CD and CL are characterized by Gaussian
distributions. Mean values are expressed as a function of θ, varying from
those corresponding to a square shape (for θ = 0) to those corresponding to
a rhomboidal shape (for θ = 45); the coefficient of variations of CL and CD
are taken equal to 0.07 and 0.05.
μCD μCL
D
Cµ
μCD μCL
L
Cµ
rrm
p
grr σ⋅+=

18. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
18
G(EDP) = ∫…∫ G(EDP|IM, IP, SP) · f(IP|IM,SP) · f(IM) · f(SP) · dIP · dIM · dSP
Monte Carlo sim
(5000 runs)
aL
p
Reduced
formulation
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
Structural analysis
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort
EDP= aL
p
(peak acceleration in the across wind direction)

19. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
19
Risk Curve. EDP= aL
p
= peak acceleration in the across wind direction
The annual probabilities of exceeding the human perception thresholds for
apartment and office building vibrations are 0.0576 and 0.0148 respectively.
aL
p
G(aL
p)
aL
p [mm/s2]
Ciampoli, M. & Petrini, F., 2012, Performance-Based Aeolian Risk assessment and reduction for tall buildings, Probabilistic
Engineering Mechanics, 28 (75–84).
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort

20. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
20
TMD
Design Parameters
γ = mTMD/mtot
β = ωTMD/ ω1
ξ* = damping of TMD
aL
p[mm/s2]
n [Hz]
β = ξ* =
β = ξ* =
β = ξ* =
β = ξ* =
β = ξ* =
β = ξ* =
β = ξ* =
G(aL
p)
aL
p [mm/s2]
Parametric analysis Effects on risk
γ = 1/150
Aeolian Risk reduction using TMD
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort

21. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Presentation outline
21
• Overview of the Performance Based Wind
Engineering (PBWE) procedure.
• Models for tall buildings and the assessment of
occupant comfort
• Application on a high-rise building
• Assessment of the annual probabilities of exceeding
the human perception thresholds
• Vibration and occupant comfort issues
• Damage analysis
• Loss analysis
• Conclusions and indications for further research

22. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
22
Vibration and occupant comfort issues
Consequences of wind induced vibrations
in high rise buildings
-Fear and alarm
-Discomfort
-Reduced task concentration
-Dizziness, migraine and nausea
Kwok, K.C.S., Hitchcock, P.A. & Burton, M.D., 2009, Perception of vibration and occupant comfort in wind-
excited tall buildings, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 97(7-8), 368-380
Wind induced vibration
−Damage analysis
−Loss Analysis
Studies on human perception of vibration and tolerance thresholds
-Field experiments and studies in wind-excited buildings
-Motion simulator tests
-Field experiments conducted in artificially excited buildings
Mitigation measures
-Modifications to the structural system and/or the
aerodynamic shape
-Installation of vibration control devices
- Negative impressions/ publicity
- Eventually they can be an attraction
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info

23. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
23
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
Damage analysis
Probabilistic damage analysis: assign a probability distribution to the perception
thresholds
Procedure: obtain a pdf that assigns at each vibration level a percentage of persons
that experience discomfort
Kwok, K.C.S., Hitchcock, P.A., 2008. Occupant comfort test using a tall building motion simulator. In: Proceedings of Fourth
International Conference on Advances in Wind and Structures, Jeju, Korea, 28–30 May.
Vibration and occupant comfort issues

24. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
24
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
Loss analysis
Probabilistic loss analysis: assign a cost probability for different damages
Issues: the uncertainty in the cost relies on various factors (e.g. market trend)
DM
Non structural elements
Structural elements
Comfort
Safety
Serviceability
Safety
Serviceability
DV
Direct
Indirect
(As a direct damage to the structure)
(As a consequence of the damaged structure)
IM
SP
IP EDP DM DV
- Direct VS indirect cost that are not
possible to account for in monetary terms.
- Initial VS life-cycle cost. In particular
regarding the evaluation of retrofitting
strategies that could improve the
serviceability performance (e.g. comfort),
by means of vibration mitigation.
Vibration and occupant comfort issues

25. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
25
Vibration and occupant comfort issues
Loss analysis for comfort – concept (1)
Limit states implying damages in structural or non-
structural components
•Direct damages (tangible): costs necessary for
retrofitting the structures
•Direct damages (non tangible): costs due to service
interruption for restoration
Uncertainties are on the unitary costs

26. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
26
Vibration and occupant comfort issues
Loss analysis for comfort – concept (2)
Limit states implying perception of low structural
quality (e.g. discomfort) but not implying damages
Our proposal
Cost necessary for improving the quality to an
acceptable level, e.g.
a.Cost related with a change of the activity in the structure (for
example, change from residential to office)
b.Cost of a TMD installation
• Direct losses: DL= ATMD * Ac + TMD installation cost
• Direct losses due to the activity interruption for retrofitting the TMD’s
• Account for possible future gains due to attraction factor

27. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
27
Vibration and occupant comfort issues
Loss analysis for comfort – concept (3)
INDIRECT DAMAGES
Depending o whether we consider a new or an
existing structure
• Structural design before
the construction
• Existing structure
no indirect costs
costs due to
service interruption

28. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Wind occurrence
28
Vibration and occupant comfort issues
Lifecycle cost analysis
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
Loss analysis
Economic
investment
Economic
value
Life cycle
assessment
MC
simulation
With TMD
With TMD retrofitted
Economic
losses
Without TMD

29. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Presentation outline
29
• Overview of the Performance Based Wind
Engineering (PBWE) procedure.
• Models for tall buildings and the assessment of
occupant comfort
• Application on a high-rise building
• Assessment of the annual probabilities of exceeding
the human perception thresholds
• Vibration and occupant comfort issues
• Damage analysis
• Loss analysis
• Conclusions and indications for further research

30. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
• Occupant comfort is an important issue in the design of
tall buildings. Due to the stochastic nature of wind action
and wind-induced vibration, deterministic analyses are
inadequate for carrying out a comfort assessment.
• The insertion of passive control devices can reduce
the vibration perception of building occupants. But the
effectiveness of the device must be evaluated in terms of
cost (by computing the probability of exceeding
acceptable values of an appropriate DV).
• Damage and loss analysis of wind-induced vibrations
will be based on corroborated literature studies that
provide statistics on the occupant comfort.
30
Conclusions and indications for further research

31. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Thank you for your attention
31
Francesco Petrini, Konstantinos Gkoumas, Franco Bontempi
Sapienza - University of Rome, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Strutturale e Geotecnica
Acknowledgements:
Prof. Marcello Ciampoli, Prof. Giuliano Augusti
This study is partially supported by StroNGER s.r.l. from the fund “FILAS - POR FESR LAZIO
2007/2013 - Support for the research spin-off”.

32. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Additional slides
32
Francesco Petrini, Konstantinos Gkoumas, Franco Bontempi
Sapienza - University of Rome, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Strutturale e Geotecnica

33. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
33
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort
Interaction analysis IP =
gr
CD
CL
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
rrm
p
grr σ⋅+=
)T(log
.
)T(log
winde
windegr
⋅η
+⋅η=µ
2
5770
2 Davenport
(1983)
Reliable results for a broad
range of processes

34. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
34
Interaction analysis IP =
gr
CD
CL
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
rrm
p
grr σ⋅+=
)T(log
.
)T(log
winde
windegr
⋅η
+⋅η=µ
2
5770
2 Davenport
(1983)
Reliable results for a broad
range of processes
- In the Davenport formulation the peak factor does not depend on the bandwidth of the stochastic process.
- Alternative formulations consider this dependence.
( )











≤⋅η
>⋅η
⋅η+
−
⋅η
=σ
+
+
+
+
122if650
122if
46
213
45
2
21
.T.
.T
.
)Tln(
.
)Tln(
.
windr,e
windr,e
windr,e
windr,e
gr
)ln(2
577.0
)ln(2
,
,
windre
windreg
T
Tr
⋅η
+⋅η=µ
+
+
Vanmarcke
(1975)
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort

35. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
35
Interaction analysis IP =
gr
CD
CL
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
rrm
p
grr σ⋅+=
)T(log
.
)T(log
winde
windegr
⋅η
+⋅η=µ
2
5770
2 Davenport
(1983)
Reliable results for a broad
range of processes
- In the Davenport formulation the peak factor does not depend on the bandwidth of the stochastic process.
- Alternative formulations consider this dependence.
( )











≤⋅η
>⋅η
⋅η+
−
⋅η
=σ
+
+
+
+
122if650
122if
46
213
45
2
21
.T.
.T
.
)Tln(
.
)Tln(
.
windr,e
windr,e
windr,e
windr,e
gr
)ln(2
577.0
)ln(2
,
,
windre
windreg
T
Tr
⋅η
+⋅η=µ
+
+
Vanmarcke
(1975)
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort
rR1
2
rB
2
rR2
2
n*Srr
n (Hz)
rR1
2
rB
2
rR2
2
n*Srr
n (Hz)
Background
(broad band process)
Resonant
(narrow band
process)
Lightly damped
buildings
Highly damped
buildings

36. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
36
Interaction analysis IP =
gr
CD
CL
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort
rR1
2
rB
2
rR2
2
n*Srr
n (Hz)
rR1
2
rB
2
rR2
2
n*Srr
n (Hz)
Background
(broad band process)
Resonant
(narrow band
process)
Lightly damped
buildings
Highly damped
buildings
Therefore, the bandwidth
parameter, and also the response
peak factor must depend on the
structural damping

37. Damageandlossevaluationintheperformance-basedwindengineering
ICOSSAR 2013
11th
International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability
June 16-20, Columbia University, New York, NY
Francesco Petrini
Konstantinos Gkoumas
Franco Bontempi
37
Interaction analysis IP =
gr
CD
CL
O
f(IM|O)
f(IM) f(IP|IM,SP)
f(IP)
f(EDP|IM,IP,SP)
G(EDP)
f(DM|EDP)
G(DM)
f(DV|DM)
G(DV)
Hazard analysis
Interaction
analysis
Structural analysis Damageanalysis Loss analysis
IM: intensity
measure
IP: interaction
parameters
EDP:engineering
demand param.
DM:damage
measure
DV: decision
variable
Select
O, D
O:location
D:design
Environme
nt info
Decision-
making
D
f(SP|D)
f(SP)
Structural
characterization
SP:structural
system parameters
Structural
system
info
Models for tall buildings and the assessment of occupant comfort
462.2507.1265.0 2
+ξ+ξ−=µ
rg
( )











≤⋅η
>⋅η
⋅η+
−
⋅η
=σ
+
+
+
+
122if650
122if
46
213
45
2
21
.T.
.T
.
)Tln(
.
)Tln(
.
windr,e
windr,e
windr,e
windr,e
gr
( )







<≤
η
<≤
η−
=η +
+
+
1690if
690100if
380631 450
r
r
r
r
.
r
r,e
q.
.q.
.q.
r
r
r σ
σ
=+η 
(Obtained from time-domain
analyses)
The peak response factor gr is characterized by a Gaussian distribution
function
rgµ
rgµ
Vanmarcke (1975)