{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013589128697042365, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.7831978319783195, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Adjusting the Fragility Analysis Method to the Seismic Hazard Input : The Energy Absorption Method

Although the methodology of seismic probabilistic risk assessment (seismic PRA) has become standardized to some extent, different seismic PRA studies exhibit significant differences in resulting risk predictions. The primary reason for this observation consists in the different approaches used for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) which defines the hazard input for the PRA. While older studies relied on an intensity-based PSHA, linking the predicted hazard and the damaging consequence, recent studies express hazard in terms of a single ground motion measure, based on predictive models for the respective peak instrumental characteristic. The single measure, in the absence of the associated duration and frequency content of the entire ground motion time history, is poorly linked with the damaging effects. Further, empirical (experience based) fragilities are based on observations from damaging earthquakes. Fragilities based on test results also reflect ground motion characterising large magnitude damaging earthquakes. The predicted hazard from current PSHAs, particularly in low to moderate seismic regions, is frequently dominated by near site earthquakes of low to moderate magnitudes. The difference in the energy content of the associated ground motions, relative to the energy content reflected in the experience based and test based fragilities is insufficiently credited. Therefore, the ensuing process tends to overestimate the consequences of smaller earthquakes. This paper proposes a procedure to adjust the fragility method accounting for the energy characterizing the controlling earthquakes. The procedure is based on scaling energy content of controlling earthquakes to that of the reference earthquakes which form the basis of the generic fragility database. The procedure allows for adjusting the fragility data from different sources for use in a specific target region accounting for the duration and energy content characteristic of the target region controlling events, which can be estimated empirically or on the basis of stochastic point source ground motion models. This application method to seismic PRAs represents a meaningful alternative to direct nonlinear earthquake simulations of structures, thus reducing the computational effort for the development while assuring a consistent treatment of the differences between small and large earthquakes.