Fragility Evaluation in Building-Piping Systems: Effect of Piping Interaction With Buildings

[+] Author and Article Information
Yong Hee Ryu

Department of Civil Engineering,
North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC 27695
e-mail: yryu@ncsu.edu

Abhinav Gupta

Department of Civil Engineering,
North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC 27695
e-mail: agupta1@ncsu.edu

Bu Seog Ju

Department of Civil Engineering,
Kyung Hee University,
Yongin, Gyeonggi-do 17104, South Korea;
Department of Civil Engineering,
North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC 27695
e-mail: bju2@khu.ac.kr

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received August 14, 2017; final manuscript received December 26, 2017; published online December 14, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Fabrizio Paolacci.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 141(1), 010906 (Dec 14, 2018) (13 pages) Paper No: PVT-17-1151; doi: 10.1115/1.4039004 History: Received August 14, 2017; Revised December 26, 2017

Many studies assessing the damage from 1971 San Fernando and 1994 North Ridge earthquakes reported that the failure of nonstructural components like piping systems was one of the significant reasons for shutdown of hospitals immediately after the earthquakes. This paper is focused on evaluating seismic fragility of a large-scale piping system in representative high-rise, midrise, and low-rise buildings using nonlinear time history analyses. The emphasis is on evaluating piping's interaction with building and its effect on piping fragility. The building models include the effects of nonlinearity in the performance of beams and columns. In a 20-story building that is detuned with the piping system, critical locations are on the top two floors for the linear frame building model. For the nonlinear building model, critical locations are on the bottom two floors. In an eight-story building that is nearly tuned with the piping system, the critical locations for both the linear frame and nonlinear models are the third and fourth floors. It is observed that building nonlinearity can reduce fragility due to reduction in the tuning between building and piping systems. In a two-story building, the nonlinear building frequencies are closer to the critical piping system frequencies than the linear building frequency; the nonlinear building is more fragile than the linear building for this case. However, it is observed that the linear building models give excessively conservative estimates of fragility than the nonlinear building models.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


FEMA 577, 2007, “Design Guide for Improving Hospital Safety in Earthquakes, Floods, and High Winds: Providing Protection to People and Buildings (2007),” Federal, Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, Report. https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/10672
Ayres, J. M. , and Phillips, R. J. , 1998, “ Water Damage in Hospitals Resulting From the Northridge Earthquake,” ASHRAE Trans., 104(Pt. 1B), pp. 1286–1296.
Bachman, R. , Bonowitz, D., Caldwell. P. J., Filiatrault, A., Kennedy, R. P., McGavin, G., and Miranda, E., 2004, “Engineering Demand Parameters for Nonstructural Components,” Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, Report No. ATC-58. https://www.atcouncil.org/pdfs/atc582t23.pdf
Ju, B. S. , Gupta, A. , and Ryu, Y. H. , 2017, “ Piping Fragility Evaluation: Interaction With High-Rise Building Performance,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 139(3), p. 031801. [CrossRef]
Ryu, Y. , Gupta, A. , Jung, W. , and Ju, B. , 2016, “ A Reconciliation of Experimental and Analytical Results for Piping Systems,” Int. J. Steel Struct., 16(4), pp. 1043–1055. [CrossRef]
Wood, R. L. , Hutchinson, T. C. , Lee, C. , and Grigoriu, M. D. , 2012, “Fragility Function Development for Nonstructural Component Systems,” NEESR-GC: Simulation of the Seismic Performance of Nonstructural Systems, Structural Systems Research Project Report Series, University of California, San Diego, CA, Techinical Report No. 2009 SSRP 09/1.
International Building Code (IBC), 2006, “International Building Code 2006,” International Code Council, Falls Church, VA.
ACI, 2014, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete,” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, Report No. ACI 318-14.
Mazzoni, S. , Mckenna, F. , Scott, M. H. , and Fenves, G. L. , 2006, “OpenSees Command Language Manual, Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (OpenSees),” University of California, Berkeley, CA, accessed Jan. 24, 2018, http://opensees.berkeley.edu/
Scott, M. H. , and Fenves, G. L. , 2006, “ Plastic Hinge Integration Methods for Force-Based Beam-Column Elements,” ASCE J. Struct. Eng., 132(2), pp. 244–252. [CrossRef]
Paulay, T. , and Priestley, M. J. N. , 1992, Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Ryu, Y. , 2013, “Fragility of Piping Systems and Reliability of Piping Components,” Ph.D. dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. https://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/handle/1840.16/8532
Ayers, J. M. , 1996, Northridge Earthquake Hospital Water Damage Study, Ayers & Ezers Associates, Los Angeles, CA.
FEMA P695, 2009, “Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors,” Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, Report https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1716-25045-9655/fema_p695.pdf.
Ju, B.-S. , Tadinada, S. K. , and Gupta, A. , 2011, “Fragility Analysis of Threaded T-Joint Connections in Hospital Piping Systems,” ASME Paper No. PVP2011-57958.
ASME, 2007, “Rule for Construction of Nuclear Facility Components,” American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III.
ASCE/SEI, 2005, “Seismic Design Criteria for Structures, Systems, and Components in Nuclear Facilities,” American Society of Civil Engineers and Structural Engineering Institute, Reston, VA, Standard No. ASCE/SEI 43-05. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/9780784407622
USNRC, 2007, “A Performance-Based Approach to Define the Site-Specific Earthquake Ground Motions,” Regulatory Guide 1.208, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
Tian, Y., Filiatrault, A., and Mosqueda, G., 2015, “Seismic Response of Pressurized Fire Sprinkler Piping Systems II: Numerical Study,” J. Earthq. Eng., 19(4), pp. 674–699. [CrossRef]
EPRI, 1994, “Methodology for Developing Seismic Fragilities,” Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, Report No. EPRI TR-103959. https://www.epri.com/#/pages/product/TR-103959/
Gupta, A. , and Bose, M. K. , 2017, “ Significance of Non-Classical Damping in Seismic Qualification of Equipment and Piping,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 317, pp. 90–99. [CrossRef]
Gupta, A. , 1999, “ Significance of Nonclassical Damping in Coupled System Analysis,” 15th Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology Conference, Seoul, Korea, Aug. 15–20.
Ryu, Y. H. , Jung, W. Y. , and Ju, B. S. , 2016, “ Vibration Effects of Nonclassically Damped Building-Piping Systems Subjected to Extreme Loads,” Shock Vib., 2016, p. 6189326.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The cost of medium-size hospital (FEMA, 2007)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Flowchart for evaluation of system-level piping frailties

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Two-story piping system model: two-story building (12 degrees-of-freedom (12DOFs)), eight-story building (24DOFs), and 20-story building (60DOFs)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

RC moment frame buildings

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

25 mm (1 in) rotational spring model for cyclic test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

50 mm (2 in) and 100 mm (4 in) rotational spring model for cyclic test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Beam with hinges element diagram

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Node numbers in piping model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Response spectra for normalized earthquake records

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

SDOF building—SDOF piping system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Element force in piping oscillator, 2DOF coupled system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Fragility curves using classical versus nonclassical damping in coupled system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

20-Story: absolute maximum acceleration at 1.3 g (linear frame)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

20-Story: absolute maximum acceleration at 1.3 g (plastic hinge fiber)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Piping fragility curves in 20-story building

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Eight-story: absolute maximum acceleration at 2.3 g (linear frame)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Eight-story: absolute maximum acceleration at 2.3 g (plastic hinge fiber)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Piping fragility curves in an eight-story building

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Piping fragility curves in a two-story building



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In