JP2014141873A - Calculation method, device and program for simple seismic diagnosis score of existing wooden house - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a calculation method, device and program for a simple seismic diagnosis score of an existing wooden house in which, by using both a theoretical expression and an actual measurement, a score of seismic diagnosis can be accurately computed from a measurement result of constant micromotion and a simple investigation result and can be matched with a score of a precise seismic diagnosis.SOLUTION: A natural frequency of a target building is computed from data of constant micromotion measured at two spots of a second floor of the target building and the ground. In accordance with the computed natural frequency, a building model of the target building is defined as a model of a single-mass-point system, a bearing force is computed on the assumption of vibration in a primary mode and then, a fundamental value A×fis computed as the score of the target building by a method of computing a bearing force on a first floor after changing to a model of a double-mass-point system in accordance with distribution of an effective mass ratio (STEP1). While using a correction coefficient x1 for a form of a joint part and a correction coefficient x2 based on deterioration investigation according to a questionnaire style of the target building, the fundamental value of the score is corrected and a score Is' of seismic diagnosis is calculated (STEP2, STEP3).

Description

  The present invention relates to a method, an apparatus, and a program for easily calculating a seismic diagnosis score for an existing wooden house, and a comprehensive seismic evaluation method using this simple seismic diagnosis score calculation method.

  As a method of performing seismic diagnosis of an existing wooden house with high accuracy, there is a method in which a specialized engineer takes time to investigate and makes a precise diagnosis based on the survey results. The survey includes a floor survey, a shed, a room, and an exterior survey. Since this survey is based on drawings and visual inspection, the results depend on the accuracy of existing drawings and judgment based on specialized techniques. For more detailed investigation, a part of the building may be broken and looked inside or scraped to obtain a sample, but in that case, repair is required. Therefore, there is a need for a simple seismic diagnosis evaluation method that can be evaluated by simple surveys and without damaging the building.

The formulas for calculating the seismic assessment score of existing wooden houses through simple surveys have been studied for a long time, and many of them are calculated from the actual frequency measurements. As patent literature showing an equation for evaluating earthquake resistance using the natural frequency, there are the following examples.
In Patent Literature 1, (building natural frequency reduction rate) = f ₂ x / f ₁ x
f ₂ x: natural frequency after earthquake, f ₁ x: natural frequency after earthquake,
And
In Patent Document 2, H _d = (2πf _d ) / g
H _d : dynamic rating of the building, f _d : natural frequency,
And
In Patent Document 3, C ₁ = (T / 0.1) ² ((Q · R) ^1/2
C ₁ : Seismic reinforcement effect, T: natural period, Q: amount of amplification, R: degree of resonance sharpness,
And

  As a technology that is actually used, there is a technology that evaluates the hardness of a building by obtaining a natural frequency by fine tremor of the building. For example, it is evaluated that it is slightly harder than a building of the same age (actual operation technique 1). In addition to this, the state of the building being shaken by a vibrator is measured to confirm the rigidity of the building (actual operation technique 2). In this case, the deformability of the building, that is, how many earthquakes the seismic intensity is, and how much the portion of the building is deformed is determined.

The past studies include the following previous studies 1 to 4.
Past study 1 is a study of the relationship between natural frequency and seismic diagnosis score, and the relationship with the building year, based on actual measurement values. The evaluation formula is P _y = 4.71 × T _m +2.35.
P _y : grade, T _m : natural period,
And
Past study 2 is a study of the relationship between natural frequency and seismic diagnosis score. The evaluation formula is
I _f = 0.42 × f−0.56 (short side)
I _f = 0.27 × f + 0.48 (long side)
I _f : rating, f: natural frequency,
And
Past study 3 is a study of the relationship between natural period and base shear coefficient (seismic diagnosis score), and uses wooden houses for 1-DOF mass point analysis. The evaluation formula is
T = 2π (h · α _y · R _y / g · C _y ) ^0.5
C _y = 1.17 × Is ^1.34
Is: grade, T: natural period (= 1 / natural frequency), C _y : base shear coefficient,
And
Past study 4 is a study that is obtained from the natural frequency and building information (construction year, total floor area, etc.). The evaluation formula is
f = 4.671 + A + B + C
f: natural frequency, A: building age, B: roof type, C: outer wall type,
And

JP 2004-27762 A JP 2010-261193 A JP 2005-146448 A

Each of the above-mentioned Patent Documents 1 to 4 and operation techniques 1 and 2 are evaluated with their own ratings, and cannot be compared with seismic diagnosis by precise diagnosis. Therefore, the seismic performance is difficult to understand.
Each of the above-mentioned past studies 1 to 4 evaluates the seismic diagnosis score only by the natural frequency, is an expression based on an approximation from the actual measurement result, and has low accuracy. In other words, there is a big difference from the score of precision seismic diagnosis. Therefore, it is insufficient for practical use.

The object of the present invention is to use both the theoretical formula and the actual measurement value to obtain an accurate seismic diagnosis score without damaging the building with the measurement result of microtremor and the simple survey result. It is to provide a method, a device, and a program for calculating a simple seismic diagnosis score of an existing wooden house that can be matched with the rating of the seismic diagnosis.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an existing wooden house that can easily and quickly perform appropriate seismic evaluation, damage prediction, and improvement proposals without requiring an expert engineer with advanced knowledge. It is to propose a method for comprehensive evaluation of earthquake resistance.
Still another object of the present invention is to provide a method for comprehensive evaluation of seismic performance of an existing wooden house that can quantitatively determine the effect of the renovation when seismic renovation is performed.

The method for calculating the simple seismic assessment score of the existing wooden house of this invention is:
A method for calculating a rating of seismic diagnosis, which is a ratio of a holding capacity to a required capacity, of a target building for a seismic diagnosis consisting of a two-story existing wooden house,
The natural frequency of the target building is obtained from the data of microtremors measured on the second floor and the ground of the target building, and the building model of the target building is determined as a one-mass system model based on the obtained natural frequency. After calculating the proof stress assuming that it vibrates in the primary mode, the method of calculating the proof stress of the target building by calculating the proof stress of the first floor instead of distributing the effective mass ratio to a two-mass system model, Find the basic value to
The seismic diagnosis by correcting a basic value of the obtained score by using a correction coefficient for a form of a joint part of the structural member of the target building and a correction coefficient by a deterioration investigation by a questionnaire form of the target building It is characterized by calculating a score of.

According to this score calculation method, the natural frequency of the target building is obtained from the microtremor data as described above, and the building model is used as a one-mass system model and vibrates in the primary mode using the obtained natural frequency. After calculating the proof stress assuming that the proof is, the basic value as the above-mentioned score of the target building is obtained by the method of calculating the proof strength of the first floor instead of the distribution of the effective mass ratio to the two-mass system model. For this reason, a theoretical score using the natural frequency can be obtained. A theoretical score using only this natural frequency can be obtained with a certain degree of accuracy. However, there are items that are not included in the evaluation.
Therefore, this theoretical score is used as a basic value, and it is corrected with information related to the building, that is, a correction coefficient for the form of the joint part of the structural member of the target building, and a correction coefficient based on the deterioration survey by the questionnaire form of the target building. Calculate the grade of seismic diagnosis. In wooden houses, the biggest factors that greatly affect earthquake resistance other than the natural frequency are the type of joints in the frame and the deterioration of the building. Considering the type of joints and the state of deterioration, the accuracy of the seismic diagnosis can be improved.

The type of the joint can be defined as a correction coefficient by reflecting it in the score, for example, by comparing it with the score based on the test results when the format is variously changed. The deterioration situation can also be defined as a correction coefficient by comparing it with the score based on the test result and reflected in the score. Regarding the deterioration status, a deterioration survey using a questionnaire format, for example, a check item indicating whether or not each of the factors of deterioration of the building is applicable, a check result indicating the check result, and a correction coefficient for the check result, By defining the relationship, it can be reflected in the score as a correction coefficient. As described above, it is possible to calculate an accurate seismic diagnosis score by including in the evaluation items that cannot be evaluated only by theoretical evaluation using the natural frequency.
In addition, since the score of the simple seismic diagnosis to be obtained is the ratio of the possession strength to the required strength, it is different from the original scores used for each patent document and operation technology in the past, and general seismic diagnosis of existing wooden houses It can be matched with the rating of precision seismic diagnosis, which is an evaluation method, and the seismic resistance is easy to understand.
In this way, by using both the theoretical formula and the actual measurement value, it is possible to accurately obtain the seismic diagnosis score from the measurement result of microtremors and simple survey results such as questionnaire results, etc., and the score of precise seismic diagnosis The earthquake resistance evaluated is easy to understand. In addition, it is possible to accurately obtain a grade for seismic diagnosis without damaging the building, with less building information and no specialized knowledge.

ここで、上式（１）における定数または変数は、個々の建物に関する情報から定める数と、個々の建物に依存しない数とがあり、次のとおりである。括弧内の数値ないし数値範囲は、一例である。
〔個々の建物の情報により定める数〕
ｆ_０：固有振動数 [Ｈｚ]
ｘ１：接合部の形式に対する補正係数（＝０．６〜１．０）
ｘ２：劣化調査による補正係数（＝０．７〜１．０）
H_e：等価高さ [ｍ]
Ｚ：地震地域係数（＝０．７〜１．０）
〔個々の建物に依存しない定数〕
Ｒ_ｙ：層間変形角（１／１５０）
Ｒ_ｔ：振動特性係数（１．０と仮定する）
Ｃ_０：層せん断係数
ｇ：重力の加速度 [9.8m/ s²]
α′：有効質量比を含む剛性低減率（０．０５〜０．１５）
Ｂ：他の補正係数（０．５〜１．０） The method for calculating a simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score of an existing wooden house according to the present invention calculates an earthquake-proof diagnosis score Is ′ which is a ratio of the holding strength to the required strength of a target building of a two-story existing wooden house. More specifically, the rating Is ′ of the seismic diagnosis is obtained by the following equation (1).

Here, the constant or variable in the above formula (1) includes a number determined from information on each building and a number not depending on each building, and is as follows. The numerical value or numerical range in parentheses is an example.
[Number determined by individual building information]
f ₀ : natural frequency [Hz]
x1: Correction coefficient for the joint type (= 0.6 to 1.0)
x2: Correction coefficient based on deterioration investigation (= 0.7 to 1.0)
H _e : Equivalent height [m]
Z: Earthquake area coefficient (= 0.7 to 1.0)
[Constant value independent of individual buildings]
R _y : Interlayer deformation angle (1/150)
R _t : Vibration characteristic coefficient (assuming 1.0)
C ₀ : Layer shear coefficient g: Acceleration of gravity [9.8m / s ² ]
α ′: Stiffness reduction rate including effective mass ratio (0.05 to 0.15)
B: Other correction coefficient (0.5 to 1.0)

で示される部分が、固有振動数を用いた理論式による対象建物の前記評点とする基本値となる。固有振動数は、対象建物の２階と地盤の２箇所で計測した常時微動のデータから求める。 According to this equation, based on the natural frequency described above, the building model of the target building is assumed to be a one-mass system model and is assumed to vibrate in the first-order mode. A method of calculating the basic value as the score of the target building is realized by a method of calculating the proof stress of the first floor instead of the two mass point system model.
That is, among the above equations, the following equation on the right side,

The portion indicated by is a basic value as the score of the target building by a theoretical formula using the natural frequency. The natural frequency is obtained from microtremor data measured at the second floor and the ground of the target building.

  In the above equation (1), x1 is a correction coefficient for the joint type, and the correction coefficient of the corresponding joint type is used among the correction coefficients prepared for various types of joints. The form of the joint is, for example, whether or not square metal or hole-down hardware is used. If the joint type is known for the target building, the correction factor corresponding to the joint type may be used, but if the joint type is unknown, a correction factor is prepared corresponding to the year of construction. However, the correction coefficient of the classification of the corresponding building year may be used. Since the joint type has a clear tendency depending on the building regulations, the correction coefficient for the joint type can be simplified by classifying the joint type according to the year when the architectural regulations related to the joint change and selecting the correction coefficient. And can be determined appropriately.

  In the above formula (1), x2 is a correction coefficient determined according to the deterioration of the target building. In order to know the deterioration of the target building in detail, it is necessary for an expert engineer to enter the floor or behind the shed and visually observe it, or to scrape a sample from a part of the target building and analyze it. However, as described above, a check item indicating whether or not it corresponds to each cause of deterioration of the building is determined, and the relationship between the deterioration survey result in the questionnaire format in which this is checked and the correction coefficient for the survey result is shown. By setting it, it can be reflected in the score as a correction coefficient.

  Since the correction coefficients x1 and x2 are both used as coefficients for correcting the basic value of the score by the theoretical formula using the natural frequency, the accuracy of the score can be improved even if it is determined from the simple survey results as described above. We can plan enough. As described above, it is possible to easily obtain the matters related to the joint portion and the matters related to deterioration, which have been obtained by a strict investigation by experts in the past, and improve the accuracy of the score.

The correction coefficient B is a correction coefficient for bringing the score obtained by calculation closer to the actually measured value, and is set to a value in the range of 0.5 to 1.0, for example. When the correction coefficient B is 1.0, the above equation (1) is represented by the following equation without the correction coefficient B, and the score may be obtained by this equation.

In the method for calculating a simple seismic diagnosis score of an existing wooden house according to the present invention, the score after repair is calculated using a correction factor corresponding to the repair contents when the target building is repaired for any of the correction factors. You may do it.
When the target building is repaired, the score after the repair can be calculated by changing the correction coefficient to a value corresponding to the repair content. Therefore, the effects of repair can be easily predicted, and appropriate repair proposals can be made.

The overall earthquake resistance evaluation method for an existing wooden house according to the present invention is a method for comprehensive evaluation of earthquake resistance of an existing wooden house, using a computer to perform an earthquake resistance diagnosis of a target building made of an existing wooden house,
The process of inputting microtremor measurement data of the target building, the building structure of the target building, factors affecting the deterioration, and data in the form of installation area questionnaire, and analyzing these input data An analysis process for obtaining the results of evaluation, damage prediction, and improvement proposal, and an output process for outputting the results obtained in this analysis process as report data,
In the analysis process, any one of the above-described methods for calculating a simple seismic diagnosis score of the existing wooden house is used.

  In the conventional seismic diagnosis, as mentioned above, a specialist engineer took time to investigate the underfloor, the back of the shed, the room, the exterior, etc., and analyzed it according to the survey results. In addition, there is a problem that the result depends on the judgment of a professional engineer. However, according to the comprehensive evaluation method for earthquake resistance of the present invention, analysis is performed from measurement data of microtremors and data in a questionnaire format, and since the simple earthquake resistance diagnosis score calculation method of the present invention is used, specialized knowledge with advanced knowledge is provided. Even without an engineer, it is possible to easily and quickly perform appropriate seismic evaluation, damage prediction, and improvement proposals.

The apparatus for calculating a simple seismic diagnosis score of an existing wooden house according to the present invention calculates a seismic diagnosis score Is ′, which is a ratio of the retained strength to the required strength of a target building of the seismic diagnosis composed of a two-story existing wooden house. A device,
An input processing means (19) for storing the next input item inputted by the input device (5) in a predetermined storage area, and a score calculation means (25) for calculating the score Is ′ by the above equation (1). It is characterized by having.

  According to this simple earthquake-resistant diagnostic score calculation device, the theoretical formula and the actual measurement value are used together for the reason described above for the method of the present invention, so that the measurement result of the microtremor and the simple survey result damage the building. It is possible to obtain an accurate earthquake diagnosis score with high accuracy. In addition, it can be matched with the score of precision seismic diagnosis.

The calculation program for the simple seismic assessment score of an existing wooden house according to the present invention can be executed by a computer, and the seismic assessment is a ratio of the possession strength to the required strength of a target building of the seismic diagnosis consisting of a two-story existing wooden house. A program for calculating the score of
An input processing step (R0) for storing input items input by the input device in a predetermined storage area;
It has the score calculation procedure (R1) which calculates the said score by said (1) Formula, It is characterized by the above-mentioned.

  According to this simple earthquake resistance diagnostic score calculation program, the theoretical formula and the actual measurement value are used in combination for the reason described above for the method of the present invention, so that the measurement result of the microtremor and the simple survey result damage the building. It is possible to obtain an accurate earthquake diagnosis score with high accuracy. In addition, it can be matched with the score of precision seismic diagnosis.

The other existing wooden house earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation method according to the present invention is a method for comprehensive evaluation of earthquake resistance of an existing wooden house for evaluating the effect of the earthquake resistance repair of the target building composed of a two-story existing wooden house,
Measurement of microtremor data at the second floor of the target building and at two locations on the ground before and after seismic retrofit of the target building, and seismic resistance using the microtremor data before seismic retrofit The calculation of the score of diagnosis and the calculation of the score of seismic diagnosis using the data of microtremor after earthquake-proof repair are respectively calculated using the simple method of calculating the seismic rating score of any of the above-mentioned existing wooden houses according to the present invention. Done
It is characterized in that the effect of the seismic retrofit is compared and quantitatively shown for the rating of the seismic diagnosis before and after the calculated seismic retrofit, or the item representing the performance of the target building obtained from the score.
The “item representing the performance of the target building determined from the score” is, for example, a matter representing the strength of the target building against an earthquake.

According to this method, microtremor data is always measured before and after the seismic retrofit, and the score of the seismic diagnosis before and after the retrofit is obtained using the method for calculating the simple seismic diagnostic score of the present invention. Therefore, it is possible to easily and accurately obtain the grades of the seismic diagnosis before and after the repair without damaging the building. The effects of the seismic retrofit are compared with respect to the rating of the seismic diagnosis before and after the seismic retrofit obtained as described above, or the item representing the performance of the target building obtained from the score. For this reason, the effect of improvement of earthquake resistance and the like by the earthquake-resistant repair can be quantified and clearly obtained.
By quantifying the repair effect in this way, customer satisfaction is improved. In addition, since the repair effect is confirmed by mechanical measurement, the repair effect can be confirmed together with the customer.

  According to the calculation method, apparatus, and program of the simple seismic diagnosis score of the existing wooden house according to the present invention, both use the theoretical formula and the actual measurement value. It is possible to accurately obtain the grade of the seismic diagnosis without damaging it, and to match the grade of the precise seismic diagnosis. In addition, it is possible to accurately obtain a grade for seismic diagnosis without damaging the building, and with less building information and no specialized knowledge.

According to the comprehensive method for evaluating earthquake resistance of existing wooden houses according to the present invention, appropriate earthquake resistance evaluation, damage prediction, and improvement proposals can be easily and quickly performed without requiring an expert engineer with advanced knowledge. be able to.
According to the seismic retrofit evaluation method for other existing wooden houses according to the present invention, when the seismic retrofit is performed, the effect of the retrofit can be obtained quantitatively, and an improvement in customer satisfaction can be expected.

It is explanatory drawing which shows the principal point in the earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method of the existing wooden house which concerns on 1st Embodiment of this invention. It is explanatory drawing of the fragility curve preparation method. It is explanatory drawing of an earthquake risk. It is explanatory drawing of the measuring method of a microtremor and how to obtain | require a natural frequency. It is explanatory drawing of the conceptual structure which mainly shows an input and an output about the apparatus which implements the same earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing of the conceptual structure which mainly shows the outline | summary of a function achievement means about the apparatus which implements the same earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing of the conceptual structure which mainly shows the program to equip about the apparatus which implements the earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing of a conceptual structure which shows the function achievement means of the apparatus which enforces the seismic-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing of the conceptual structure which mainly shows the fragility curve preparation part of the apparatus which implements the same earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is a flowchart of the calculation program of a simple earthquake-resistant evaluation diagnostic score. It is a flowchart of a fragility curve creation program. It is explanatory drawing of the example of an input screen of the apparatus which implements the earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing of the example of an output screen of the apparatus which implements the seismic-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is the whole flowchart of the earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation method of the existing wooden house. It is a flowchart which expands and shows the left half of FIG. 14A. It is a flowchart which expands and shows the right half of FIG. 14A. It is a flowchart of the process of evaluation of the earthquake occurrence probability in the comprehensive evaluation method. It is a flowchart of the process of earthquake resistance evaluation in the same comprehensive evaluation method. It is a flowchart of the process of durability evaluation in the comprehensive evaluation method. It is a flowchart of the process of deterioration evaluation in the comprehensive evaluation method. It is a flowchart of the processing of the complete destruction / half destruction probability and damage reduction effect in the comprehensive evaluation method. It is a flowchart of a process of the rough repair expense of wall repair in the comprehensive evaluation method. It is a flowchart of the process of the rough repair expense of the roof lightening in the comprehensive evaluation method. It is a flowchart of a process of the rough repair cost of deterioration repair in the same comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing of the input of the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score in the same earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing of the thought 1 used for the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnostic score. It is explanatory drawing of the concept 2 used for the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnostic score. It is explanatory drawing of the combination of the thoughts 1 and 2 used for the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score. It is a graph which shows the test example of the relationship between the evaluation result of the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score, and the score of a precise earthquake-resistant diagnosis. It is explanatory drawing which shows the history of the structure of the calculation formula in the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score. It is explanatory drawing of the process for calculating | requiring the natural frequency used for the calculation formula of the calculation method of the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score. It is explanatory drawing of the process for calculating | requiring the coefficient which concerns on the junction part in the calculation formula of the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score. It is explanatory drawing of the process for calculating | requiring the coefficient which concerns on deterioration in the calculation formula of the calculation method of the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score. It is explanatory drawing of the process which calculates | requires the other correction coefficient in the calculation formula of the calculation method of the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score. It is a graph which shows the example of a test of the relationship between the evaluation by a general earthquake-resistant diagnosis type | formula, and the score of a precise earthquake-resistant diagnosis. It is explanatory drawing of the building model used for the fragility curve preparation method in the seismic-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing which shows the relationship between the model and a correction | amendment integer. It is a graph of the example of a fragility curve. It is an explanatory diagram of a 0-1 function. It is a graph which shows the relationship between the maximum ground motion speed and damage probability. It is a graph which shows the relationship between the parameter which determines the median of a fragility curve, and building age. It is a graph which shows the relationship between the parameter which determines the median value of a fragility curve, and deformation | transformation performance. It is explanatory drawing of re-evaluation of an aged deterioration curve. It is a graph which compares the service life by a simple method with the service life by a detailed method. It is explanatory drawing of the item example in the questionnaire of a deterioration investigation. It is explanatory drawing which shows the relationship between a questionnaire result and the deterioration coefficient used for calculation of the soundness degree used for preparation of a fragility curve, and a seismic evaluation score. It is explanatory drawing which shows an example of the figure which shows comprehensive evaluation. It is explanatory drawing of the example of an output screen which shows the repair and reinforcement method and expense which are proposed. It is explanatory drawing of the conceptual structure which mainly shows the outline | summary of a function achievement means about the apparatus which implements the other earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method of this invention. It is explanatory drawing of the conceptual structure which mainly shows the program to equip about the apparatus which implements the earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method. It is explanatory drawing of the conceptual structure which mainly shows an input and an output about the apparatus which implements the same seismic-resistant comprehensive evaluation method before and after seismic reinforcement, respectively. It is explanatory drawing of the conceptual structure which mainly shows an input and an output about the apparatus which implements the seismic-resistant comprehensive evaluation method after earthquake-proof reinforcement. It is explanatory drawing which shows the example of the content of the report which the apparatus which implements the earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation method outputs.

  A first embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. As shown in Fig. 1, this method for comprehensive evaluation of seismic performance of existing wooden houses is a method for comprehensive evaluation of seismic risk, etc. of the target building. And a method for creating a fragility curve. Note that the “wooden house” in this embodiment is a house of a wooden frame construction method.

  The score based on the simple seismic diagnosis is the ratio of the retained strength to the required strength. In this method of calculating the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score, the score is obtained from the measurement result of the microtremors of the target building, basically for the score obtained by the precise diagnosis. Although it is easily obtained, it is obtained by reflecting the joint strength that affects the score and the reduction in the proof stress due to deterioration in addition to the measurement result of the fine movement at all times. The score obtained in this way is a converted value for the score obtained by precision diagnosis. In this specification, the score calculated by this score calculation method is specified as “score (converted value)”, Sometimes referred to simply as “score”.

  The fragility curve is a curve that represents the probability that the building will be in a damaged state with respect to the input ground motion. Find the fragility curve. In this fragility curve creation method, yield strength or base shear coefficient is obtained from the measurement results of microtremors, and deformation performance (for example, deformation at the time of complete destruction or half-destruction is determined based on the results of interviews on durability and defects of the target building). A building model is created from the yield strength or base shear coefficient and the deformation performance, and a fragility curve is created from the building model.

  According to this fragility curve creation method, as shown in FIG. 2, it is created by reflecting earthquake resistance, durability, and degree of deterioration. For example, an earthquake loss function is created from the fragility curve created in this way, and an expected earthquake loss value is obtained from the earthquake loss function and the earthquake hazard curve. A life cycle cost (LCC) is calculated from the expected earthquake loss value and the earthquake-proof reform cost.

  As shown in Fig. 3, the evaluation items for seismic performance, that is, the evaluation items for seismic risk, are items related to the seismic risk on the site, the estimated value of seismic performance, durability (service life), and the degree of deterioration. It may be expressed as difficulty, earthquake resistance, life span, and health.

  In this seismic comprehensive evaluation method, these individual evaluations and their comprehensive evaluations are made, and renovation proposals are made. That is, in this comprehensive earthquake resistance evaluation method, analysis is performed using input data (measurement data for microtremor measurement) and hearing data (address, building structure / specification, floor plan information, deterioration information, lifestyle information), Displays the building's seismic performance evaluation results, damage prediction, and improvement proposals (approximate repair cost, damage reduction effect by repair, repair technology information, earthquake-resistant goods information, LCC evaluation). In addition to being able to be displayed on the screen, one report is displayed and created. If there is a printer, the report can be printed on the spot, and even if there is no printer, the report can be attached to an e-mail or uploaded.

  FIG. 5 and FIG. 6 show the equipment and the target building used in this comprehensive method for evaluating earthquake resistance of existing wooden houses. The building 1 to be evaluated or diagnosed is a two-story existing wooden house. In this evaluation method, an information processing device 2 and two sensors 3 connected to the information processing device 2 are used. FIG. 5 illustrates an example of the contents of input and output of the information processing apparatus 2, and FIG. 6 illustrates the information processing apparatus 2 in a structural manner.

  The information processing apparatus 2 is a computer composed of a personal computer or a portable terminal. The mobile terminal is, for example, a tablet-type terminal or a high-function mobile phone called a smartphone. Each sensor 3 is a measuring device that constantly detects fine movement, and an acceleration sensor or the like is used. The two sensors 3 are installed on the ground portion 1a and the second floor 1b of the target building 1 at the time of measurement. The ground part 1a is, for example, the dirt of the entrance of the target building 1.

  As illustrated in FIG. 7, the information processing device 2 includes a processing device body 4, an input device 5, and an output device 6. The input device 5 is a device that can be input by an operator such as a keyboard, a touch panel, and a mouse. The output device 6 is an image display device 6a such as a liquid crystal display device capable of displaying an image, a printer capable of printing an image, or the like.

  The processing device main body 4 includes arithmetic processing means 7 composed of a CPU (Central Processing Unit) and a memory, a storage device 8 composed of a large capacity storage element, a hard disk, etc., the sensor 3 and other external devices (not shown). Communication means 11 for connecting wirelessly or by wire to a communication network 31 such as a wide area communication network such as the Internet or a LAN (local area network). The communication means 11 is connected to an evaluation result DB (database) server 32 or the like.

  The processing device body 4 includes an OS (operation program) 10 and a comprehensive evaluation program 13 as an application program that operates on the OS 10. The comprehensive evaluation program 13 includes a fine motion measurement / natural frequency calculation program 14 for calculating the natural frequency of the target building 1 and a main analysis program 15. The main analysis program 15 includes a calculation program 16 for a simple seismic diagnosis score of an existing wooden house for calculating a score for the seismic diagnosis, a fragility curve creation program 17 for an existing wooden house, and a processing program 18 for performing other processes. Yes. The seismic comprehensive evaluation apparatus 2A having the input processing means 19, the comprehensive evaluation means 20, and the output processing means 21 shown in FIG. 6 (B) with the hardware of the processing apparatus main body 4 and the OS 10 and the comprehensive evaluation program 13. 8>.

  In FIG. 6, the input processing means 19 outputs an input screen (to be described later together with FIG. 13) for guiding items to be input to the image display device 6a, and stores the data input from the input device 5 or the like in a predetermined storage area. Remember. The comprehensive evaluation means 20 is a means for performing a predetermined process on input data to calculate the score, create a fragility curve, and the like, and includes fine movement measurement / natural frequency calculation 22 and main analysis means 23. Yes. The output processing means 21 outputs the evaluation result as an evaluation result screen to the image display device 6a from the result processed by the comprehensive evaluation means 20 and the data stored by the input processing means 19, and has a predetermined format. Data to be the report 41 (FIG. 5) is generated and output to the printer (not shown) of the output device 6 and the evaluation result DB server 12. The information processing apparatus 2 has an active fault DB (database) 24 or is connected to the active fault DB 24 via the communication network 11.

  As shown in FIG. 8, the main analysis unit 23 includes a score calculation unit 25 that is a unit for calculating a score, a fragility curve creation unit 26 that creates a fragility curve, and a processing unit 27 that performs other processes. Of the total earthquake resistance evaluation apparatus 2A, the score calculation unit 25 and the input processing means 19 constitute a simple earthquake resistance diagnosis score calculation apparatus 2Aa. The fragility curve creation unit 26 and the input processing means 19 constitute the fragility curve creation device 2Ab shown in FIG. The simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score calculation device 2Aa and the fragility curve creation device 2Ab will be described later.

  FIG. 12 shows an example of an input screen. The screens of STEP 1 to 5 are sequentially switched and displayed. “Back” and “Next” input buttons are displayed on each screen, and the input screen can be switched. On these input screens, information on the location of the target building 1 (STEP 1), building information (STEP 2), floor plan information (STEP 3), and information on defects (STEP 4) are guided and entered. The input work is performed, for example, by interviewing the owner of the diagnosis company with the staff of the diagnosis company. Note that the floor plan information is very important information for performing damage prediction, durability evaluation, renovation approximate cost, damage reduction effect by renovation, and LCC evaluation.

As information about the location, the address where the target building 1 exists is input. This input is performed, for example, by selecting a prefecture, a municipality, or a town street from the menu.
As building information, the age of building, presence / absence of extension / renovation, type of roofing material, roof type, type of outer wall material, total floor area, eaves on the first floor, and location of foundation vents are input. The input format is, for example, a format in which a menu is displayed in an input box and a corresponding item is selected from the menu. The total floor area is selected to select whether or not it is known, and if it is known, the area is entered.
As the floor plan information, the number of rooms of a living room, a kitchen, a bath, a washroom, and a toilet are input for the first and second floors.

For information on defects, for each factor that affects the type of defect, that is, the deterioration of the target building, the content indicating the type of the defect is displayed in words, and if applicable, check boxes such as whether or not applicable This is done by checking the check input section.
The types of defects to be input are, for example, the following items (1) to (8), and the same contents are shown in FIG.
(1) There is no pain. Or, repairs are made each time.
(2) Roof ridges and eaves lines are wavy.
(3) The floor is tilted. There is a big floor noise.
(4) Pillars and walls are tilted. The installation of the joinery is bad.
(5) There are multiple large cracks in the outer wall finish.
(6) The part is rotten or eaten by termites.
(7) I saw a group of feather ants during the rainy season.
(8) I'm not sure.

  When the input on the input screens of STEP1 to STEP4 is completed, the screen of STEP5 is displayed, and whether the two sensors 3 and 3 are installed on the first floor or the second floor is input. After that, by turning on the “measurement start” software key displayed on this screen, the sensors 3 and 3 always measure fine movement. The measurement time is several minutes, for example. The building is constantly subject to slight vibrations that are not felt by the human body due to the vibration factors of the wind and nearby vehicles. Such a fine movement is measured by the sensors 3 and 3.

  FIG. 13 shows an example of an output screen for the evaluation result. Each screen shown in the figure can be switched and displayed. On the evaluation result output screen, the score that is the evaluation result (because it is a converted value, it is displayed as the predicted score value on the screen), the estimated useful life, and the health score are displayed on each screen. In addition, the contents of damage prediction are displayed on another screen. As the predicted score value, a score that is a ratio of the retained strength to the required strength by the simple seismic diagnosis is displayed. The estimated useful life is the remaining number of years until the target building reaches the end of its life. In addition to this, the comprehensive display shown in FIG. 45, the reinforcing / repairing method shown in FIG. 46, and the implementation cost are output. Each item displayed on these output screens is recorded together in the report.

As shown in FIG. 45 and the like, a comprehensive evaluation expression method is a graph in which two or more evaluation items are combined.
The expression of evaluation is expressed in terms of units unique to each item (probability, ratio, number of years, points, etc.), and intuitively with level numbers or mark numbers and graphs that divide each unit expression within a certain range. A method that can be grasped.
Comprehensive evaluation is expressed in a chart, the vertical axis of the chart represents the degree of security against earthquakes, and the horizontal axis represents the overall health level.
In addition, it will be possible to confirm the explanation and calculation method as the basis of the result of each evaluation item.
As the repair proposal information corresponding to each evaluation result, it is also possible to display the estimated cost of repair, damage reduction effect by repair, repair technology information, earthquake-resistant goods information, and cost (LCC) in consideration of future maintenance cycles.
Note that a combination of evaluations including earthquake risk and earthquake resistance may be obtained as a comprehensive evaluation value (risk-proof ratio) and output on an output screen or report. Further, the durability evaluation score and the health evaluation score may be combined to obtain a long-lasting degree, and the result may be output on an output screen or a report.

FIG. 14A is an overall flowchart of each process in this earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation method. The figure is enlarged and shown in two parts in FIGS. 14B and 14C.
In this earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation method, as described above, the input information I1, the building information I2, the floor plan information I3, the defect information T4, and the microtremor data I5 regarding the location (address) of the target building 1 input on the input screen are used. By analysis, as an evaluation result and a proposal result, earthquake occurrence probability (A1), durability evaluation (A2), earthquake resistance evaluation (A3), deterioration evaluation (A4), evaluation of total destruction / half-destruction probability (A5), damage reduction The effect proposal (A5), wall reinforcement cost presentation (A6), roof reinforcement cost presentation (A7), and deterioration repair cost presentation (A8) are obtained. The evaluation result and the proposal result thus obtained are displayed on the screen as described above.

Probability of earthquake occurrence (A1), seismic evaluation (A2), durability evaluation (A3), deterioration evaluation (A4), evaluation of total destruction / half-destruction probability (A4), damage reduction effect proposal (A5), wall An outline of each process (S1 to S23) of analysis for providing reinforcement cost presentation (A6), roof reinforcement cost presentation (A7), and deterioration repair cost presentation (A8) will be described with reference to FIGS.
Among the above diagnoses and proposals, a fragility curve is created (S19) in the analysis process for the evaluation of the probability of complete destruction / half destruction (A4) and the proposal of damage reduction effect (A5), and the durability evaluation (A3) and wall The score (converted value) is calculated (S10) in order to present the reinforcement cost (A6). The creation of the fragility curve and the calculation of the score are described in detail after the outline description with reference to FIGS. explain.

  FIG. 15 shows the flow of processing for obtaining the earthquake occurrence probability (difficulty of earthquake occurrence) (A1). The latitude, longitude, and ground amplification factor are acquired from the database from the input address information I1 (prefecture, municipality, town-chome data) and analyzed. For the database and analysis, for example, fault data and calculation methods published by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Earthquake Research Promotion Headquarters are used. By this analysis, the probability of occurrence of seismic intensity 5 to 6 is obtained, and the difficulty of occurrence of an earthquake at the installation location is evaluated. Also, nearby active fault information (predicted seismic intensity, approximate distance / depth / magnitude / occurrence probability) is obtained.

FIG. 16 shows the flow of each process for performing earthquake resistance evaluation (building strength) (A2). From the building age in the inputted building information I2 and the defect information I4, the correction coefficient (correction coefficient based on the form of the joint section divided by the building year) x1 and the correction coefficient x2 based on the defect information are acquired. Further, to obtain the natural frequency f ₀ of the target building 1 from the measurement data of the microtremors (I5).
These acquired correction coefficient x1, x2, using the natural frequency f _0, obtains a score (converted value) to evaluate the strength of the target building 1.

FIG. 17 shows the flow of each process for performing durability evaluation (life of building) (A3).
A coefficient relating to the area classification and the annual average temperature in the area classification is acquired from the input address data I1. The coefficient relating to the outer wall is acquired from the type of the outer wall surface material in the building information I2, and the coefficient relating to the eave is acquired from the eave type (outside of the eave) on the first floor. From the ease of basic ventilation, which is the arrangement information of the ventilation openings in the building information I2, a coefficient related to the ventilation openings is acquired. From the floor plan information I3, the ratio of the area around the water and the other area of the building is calculated.
The service life is calculated according to a predetermined formula by analyzing the acquired annual average, coefficients for outer walls, eaves, and ventilation openings, and the ratio of the area around the water.
The lifetime of the building is evaluated from the calculated useful life and the input building age. Life = service life-age.

FIG. 18 shows a flow of processing for obtaining deterioration evaluation (building health) (A4). A health evaluation score is obtained from the check contents of the input defect information I4 of the building according to a predetermined evaluation rule. Items to be checked are, for example, the items described above with reference to FIG.
The above evaluation rule is obtained, for example, with points. As a specific example, when only a predetermined check item (1) is checked, a XX point (for example, 95 Pt) is set, and when only another check item (5) is checked, It is a rule determined to set a point (for example, 80 Pt) and a point for a point (for example, 5 Pt) when other check items (6) are checked. The health degree of the building is evaluated from the health degree evaluation points thus obtained.

FIG. 19 shows the flow up to the process until the probability of complete / half-destruction of a building and the damage reduction effect (A5) are obtained. From the input address information I1, the annual average temperature and the coefficient of the region classification are acquired. Coefficients related to the outer wall, eaves, and ventilation openings are acquired from the type of outer wall material in building information I2, the appearance of the first floor eaves, and the ease of basic ventilation. The deterioration coefficient is acquired from the building defect information I4. From the floor plan information I3, the ratio of the area around the water and the other area of the building is calculated.
Analyzed from the coefficient of annual average temperature / regional division, coefficient of outer wall, eaves, vents, deterioration coefficient, and the ratio of surrounding area and other area, the deformation performance, that is, the target building 1 Estimate the deformation angle to be completely destroyed and the deformation angle to be partially destroyed.
On the other hand, the yield strength or base shear coefficient is estimated by analyzing the microtremor data of the target building 1.

  A building model is created from the deformation angle that causes complete or semi-destruction, yield strength or base shear coefficient, and a fragility curve is created from the building model. From this fragility curve, the probability of complete destruction or half destruction of the target building 1 is calculated. Next, the building model after reinforcement and repair is set and the damage reduction effect is presented.

FIG. 20 shows the flow of the process of calculation (A6) of the estimated repair cost (wall reinforcement cost). From the building age in the building information I2, a correction coefficient based on the building age <correction coefficient based on the joint type> is acquired. The correction coefficient based on the defect information is acquired from the building defect information I. The natural frequency f ₀ is acquired from the measurement data of the microtremor of the target building 1. Correction coefficient of these building age, the correction coefficient by the defect information I4, and analyzed using the natural frequency f _0, to obtain a rating of Seismic (converted value) Is'.

When the rating Is ′ is 1.0 or more, it is determined that no repair is necessary.
When the rating Is ′ is less than 1.0, the proof stress necessary for setting the rating Is ′ to 1.0 is calculated from the total floor area, and the number of seismic walls to be reinforced is determined. The total floor area used for the calculation of the proof stress is the value of the total floor area when the total floor area is input, and when the total floor area is not input, the estimated total floor area is calculated from the floor plan information I3. And use the estimated value.

FIG. 21 shows the flow of processing for obtaining the estimated repair cost (lightening cost of the roof) (A7). A coefficient determined from the roof shape is acquired based on the roof shape in the input building information I2. Analysis is performed using this coefficient and the total floor area, and the 1st and 2nd floor areas, the total floor area, the building area, the external scaffold area, the outer wall area, the temporary enclosure length, the building perimeter length, and the roof area are obtained. As the value of the total floor area used for the analysis, a value directly input as an area or a value estimated from floor plan information is used as described above.
Then, the roof material after renovation is selected, and the reinforcing cost of the roof is obtained and presented using the selected roof material and each value obtained in the analysis.

FIG. 22 shows the flow of processing for obtaining the estimated repair cost (deterioration repair cost) (A8). As in the case of calculating the weight reduction cost of the roof shown in FIG. 21, analysis is performed using the total floor area or floor plan information, and the first and second floor areas, the total floor area, the building area, the external scaffold area, the outer wall Get the area, temporary enclosure length, and building perimeter length.
If a certain item is selected from the input defect information I4 that “a plurality of large cracks are generated in the outer wall finish”, the repair cost for outer wall cracks is obtained by a predetermined analysis A and the result is displayed.
When a certain item “the xylem is rotten or eaten by termites” is selected, the white ant countermeasure cost is obtained by other analysis B and the result is displayed.
If a certain item is selected as "There are multiple large cracks in the exterior wall finish" and a certain item is selected as "The xylem is rotten or eaten by termites", the above analysis A and analysis Perform both steps B and display the crack repair cost for the outer wall and the need for countermeasures against white ants.
If neither of the items that "Several large cracks are generated in the outer wall finish" or "Mutions of the xylem or being eaten by termites" is selected, repairs related to deterioration repair are not Judge as unnecessary.

Next, the process of calculating the earthquake-resistant diagnosis score will be described with reference to FIGS. 4 and 23 to 33. As shown in FIG. 23, the target building for earthquake resistance diagnosis is a two-story existing wooden house. The score is the ratio of the possession strength to the required strength.
As the input for calculating the rating, the data of microtremor measured by the sensor 3 such as an acceleration sensor at the second floor and the ground of the target building, and the building information input on the building information input screen G2 (STEP 2) , And the result of the deterioration investigation by the questionnaire format input on the defect information input screen G4 (STEP 4).

  By performing frequency analysis on the data of microtremors on the second floor and the ground, the resonance point of the target building 1 is found as shown in FIG. This resonance point is defined as the natural frequency. Various methods and devices have been put to practical use as a method for obtaining the natural frequency by frequency analysis from microtremor data, and any method and device may be used.

  In FIG. 23, the building information input on the building information input screen G2 (STEP 2) is the building age, presence / absence of extension / renovation, roof type, roof type, outer wall as described above for each input screen in FIG. This includes information on the type of materials, the eaves on the first floor, the layout of the ventilation openings on the foundation, the total floor area, etc. The information regarding the total floor area is input whether or not it is known. If the information is known, the total floor area is input. If not, the floor plan information input on another input screen is used.

  The information on the deterioration investigation input on the defect information input screen G4 is the check content of the check item indicating whether or not each factor of the deterioration of the building is applicable. The check item is, for example, the item described above with reference to FIG.

  In this score calculation method, the score Is ′ is calculated by using the above-mentioned input data and the seismic performance evaluation formula (1).

Here, the constant or variable in the above formula (1) includes a number determined from information on each building and a number not depending on each building, and is as follows. The numerical value or numerical range in parentheses is an example.
[Number determined by individual building information]
f ₀ : natural frequency [Hz]
x1: Correction coefficient for the joint type (= 0.6 to 1.0)
x2: Correction coefficient based on deterioration investigation (= 0.7 to 1.0)
He: Equivalent height [m]
Z: Earthquake area coefficient (= 0.7 to 1.0)
[Constant value independent of individual buildings]
R _y : Interlayer deformation angle (1/150)
R _t : Vibration characteristic coefficient (assuming 1.0)
C ₀ : Layer shear coefficient g: Acceleration of gravity [9.8m / s ² ]
α ′: Stiffness reduction rate including effective mass ratio (0.05 to 1.15)
B: Other correction coefficient (0.5 to 1.0)

This seismic performance evaluation formula is a formula created from the following viewpoint.
(1) Improve accuracy by using theoretical formulas and formulas based on actual measurements.
(2) Match with the precise seismic diagnosis score.
(3) Evaluation is possible with simple building information.

This seismic performance evaluation formula uses the natural frequency, calculates the proof stress assuming that the building model of the target building is a one-mass system model and vibrates in the first mode, and then distributes the effective mass ratio. Using the calculation method for the proof stress of the first floor instead of the two-mass point model, find the basic value as the score of the target building,
The seismic diagnosis in consideration of the correction coefficient x1 for the form of the joint part of the structural member of the target building and the correction coefficient x2 by the deterioration investigation by the questionnaire form of the target building 1 in consideration of the basic value of the obtained score. This is a formula that realizes a method of calculating the score of
In addition, when calculating | requiring proof stress on the assumption that it vibrates with the above-mentioned primary mode, it assumes that the natural frequency by constant tremor has relation with the equivalent rigidity of an object building.
This seismic performance evaluation formula is, so to speak, a formula that combines the concept of seismic diagnosis by precise diagnosis (1) with the concept of critical strength calculation by mass point model (2).

  The concept (1) of seismic diagnosis by precise diagnosis will be described with FIG. In this concept (1), the rating Is and the holding strength Qr are expressed by the following equations (3) and (4). The score Is is a ratio of the retained yield strength Qr to the required yield strength Qd.

here,
Q _r : Holding strength of building [kN]
Q _d : Required strength of building [kN]
P _w : Holding strength [kN]
Fs: Decreasing coefficient depending on the rigidity (0.5 to 1.0)
Fe: Reduction factor (0.4 to 1.0) due to eccentricity and floor specifications
R ₁ : Vibration characteristic coefficient Z: Earthquake area coefficient A _i : Layer shear force coefficient _Co : Standard shear force coefficient _Wi : Support load [kN]
P _W0 : Standard yield strength of walls, etc. [kN]
L: Effective length [m] (= length × 3.1 ÷ opening width)
K _o: opening reduction factor C _f: joint reduction factor (0.6 to 1.0)
* C _dw : Deterioration reduction factor (0.6 to 1.0) based on basic specifications, wall standard proof stress, and joint specifications
* Depends on the standard wall strength and the degree of deterioration

  In the above equation, deterioration evaluation is distinguished by “none”, “partial”, “significant”, and the like. The joint evaluation is performed using square metal or hole-down hardware.

The concept (1) based on this precise diagnosis can calculate the score Is with high accuracy, but Fs (= reduction factor due to rigidity), Fe (= Eccentricity and reduction factor according to floor specifications), C _f (= joining part reduction factor), C _dw (= deterioration reduction factor) are required, and the yield strength reduction factor is large. In addition, in order to obtain information for determining the reduction factors Fs and Fe, it is necessary to investigate the target building by an expert. Further, the standard proof strength _Pw0 is determined to be equal to or less than the interlayer displacement angle (1/150) of the experimental results, but the building proof strength tends to be evaluated more safely than the actual one.

The concept (2) based on the mass point model will be described with FIG. Assuming that the two-story wooden house vibrates in the first-order mode, a one-mass system model is used. Further, it is assumed that the natural frequency f ₀ due to the constant fine movement is related to the equivalent rigidity Ke. The one-mass system model obtained under such assumption is distributed according to the effective mass ratio to form a two-mass system model. Thereby, the proof stress of the 1st floor part is obtained.
However, in this idea (2), the proof stress is obtained only by the natural frequency, and the joint and deterioration are not included in the evaluation, and the accuracy is poor.

In this embodiment, the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1), which is a formula that combines the concept (1) and the concept (2), is used. In other words, as shown below, an encircled line is attached to the above equation (1), and the part indicated by the broken line is the part based on the precise seismic diagnosis (concept (1)), and is indicated by the solid line The part is a part based on the mass system model. In the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1) of this embodiment, the coefficients (Fs, Fz) that cannot be easily determined by the precise earthquake resistance diagnosis in the above formula (3) are omitted, and in the mass model, the measured natural vibration is measured. Assume that the number f ₀ is the natural frequency g of the one-mass system.

Supplementary description will be given of building information and constants used in the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1) of the embodiment.
The correction coefficient x1 is a correction coefficient by the joint portion, and here, a value set by being classified according to the construction year is used. For example,
If 1980> construction year, x1 = 0.6 to 1.0,
If 1981 ≦ construction year <2000, x1 = 0.6 + (construction year−1981) × 0.4 / 19
age,
In the case of construction year ≦ 2000, x1 = 1.0.

  FIG. 27 shows a result of comparing the score Is ′ according to the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1) according to this embodiment and the score Is based on the precise earthquake resistance diagnosis for 27 target buildings. As shown in the figure, it was confirmed that the score (converted value) based on the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1) is highly consistent with the score based on the precise earthquake resistance diagnosis.

The process of deriving the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1) will be described with reference to FIG.
In step 1, a basic formula for obtaining the reference value of the rating Is ′ from the natural frequency f ₀ is created.
Is′≈A · f ₀ ²

In step 2, an equation is created by adding the joint type as the correction coefficient x1 to the basic equation.
Is′≈A · f ₀ ² × x1
In step 3, a formula is further added with a correction coefficient x2 for deterioration.
Is′≈A · f ₀ ² × x1 × x2
In step 4, a formula is added by adding a correction coefficient B to the test result.
Thereby, it becomes the above-mentioned simple earthquake-resistant evaluation calculation formula (1).

The constant A is a value represented by the following formula.

  An example of a method for calculating the constant A will be described with reference to FIG. Of the constants constituting the constant A, the constants other than α ′ (= the stiffness reduction rate including the effective mass ratio) are generally determined values, but the constant α ′ needs to be obtained in advance. . This constant α ′ is obtained by a seismic diagnosis score Is that does not include a joint / deterioration reduction and a regression equation (least square method) of natural frequencies.

With reference to FIG. 30, the joint portion format will be described with respect to the correction coefficient x1. The correction coefficient x1 is, for example, as described above.
If 1980> construction year, x1 = 0.6 to 1.0,
If 1981 ≦ construction year <2000, x1 = 0.6 + (construction year−1981) × 0.4 / 19
In the case of construction year ≦ 2000, x1 = 1.0.
Here, since the law was revised in 1981 and 2000, the coefficient is determined on the assumption that the joint specification has changed before and after this.

  With reference to FIG. 31, the correction coefficient x2 for deterioration will be described. For example, the correction coefficient x2 is obtained by applying the deterioration points calculated by the deterioration investigation using the earthquake-resistant diagnosis general diagnosis. In that case, x2 = 0.7 to 1.0.

The correction coefficient B for the test result will be described with reference to FIG. The correction coefficient B is obtained by, for example, a seismic diagnosis score Is and a regression equation (least square method) of A × (natural frequency) ² × x1 × x2.

A result obtained by comparing the calculation result of the score Is ′ by the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1) according to the embodiment with other calculation methods will be described.
When the ratio of the score Is ′ to the precise earthquake resistance score Is according to this simple earthquake resistance evaluation formula (1) was determined, it was 1.42 at the maximum and 0.38 at the minimum.
In each of the other past studies A, B, and C published as papers,
Previous study A: Max 3.46, Min 0.71
Previous study B: Max 4.00, Min 0.88,
Previous study C: maximum 1.13, minimum 0.24,
As compared with other calculation formulas, it was possible to evaluate in a well-balanced manner, and it was confirmed that the accuracy was good.

  In general seismic diagnosis, the maximum is 1.10, and the minimum is 0.31, and even if compared with general seismic diagnosis, it can be evaluated in a well-balanced manner according to the simple earthquake resistance evaluation formula (1) published Was confirmed.

  Furthermore, the simplified seismic evaluation calculation formula (1) according to the embodiment has an advantage that a score by seismic reinforcement can be predicted by clearly separating the joint type and reduction due to deterioration and the building strength. It is done.

An example of deterioration repair will be described. This is an evaluation prediction when only deterioration repair is performed on a building with a rating Is ′ = 0.5.
x2: Assume that 0.6 → 1.0. in this case,
Is ′: 0.5 → 0.5 × 1.0 / 0.6 → 0.8.
That is, the building whose rating Is ′ = 0.5 before the reinforcement is improved to the rating Is ′ = 0.8 by the reinforcement.

An example of bearing wall reinforcement will be described.
This is an evaluation prediction when reinforcing one bearing wall (standard proof stress 3 kN) to a building with a rating Is ′ = 0.5.
Before reinforcement, Qr = 50 kN (required by the inverse calculation of the formula. However, the total weight of the building is required). However, due to reinforcement, Qr = 53 kN (substitute into the formula and the natural frequency f after reinforcement f ₀ and score Is ′ are predicted).
In this case, the score Is ′ = 0.5 before reinforcement can be calculated to improve to the score Is ′ = 0.7 by reinforcement.

The other effect by this simple earthquake-resistant evaluation calculation formula (1) is demonstrated.
The conversion value of the earthquake-resistant diagnosis score can be calculated with only a small amount of building information (for example, only information input on the input screens G2 and G4 shown in FIG. 23).
・ Even if you do not have specialized knowledge, you can calculate the converted value of the seismic diagnosis score by simply checking the questionnaire regarding deterioration. For example, it is possible only by interviewing customers.

An example of a program and an apparatus for executing this simple method for calculating seismic evaluation score will be described.
The simple earthquake resistance diagnosis score calculation program 16 shown in FIG. 7 includes an input processing procedure R0, a score calculation procedure R1, and an output processing procedure R2, as shown in the flowchart of FIG. The score calculation procedure R1 is a procedure for calculating the score Is ′ by the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1). The input processing procedure R0 is a procedure for performing the processing described for the input processing means 19.

  The score calculation unit 25 in the simple earthquake resistance diagnosis score calculation device 2Aa in FIG. 8 is a means for calculating the score Is ′ by the simple earthquake resistance evaluation calculation formula (1). The score calculation unit 25 and the input processing means 19 constitute the simple seismic diagnosis score calculation device 2Aa.

  According to the calculation program 16 for the simple seismic diagnosis score and the calculation device 2Aa for the simple seismic diagnosis score, the above-described method for calculating the simple seismic diagnosis score can be carried out. By using it together, it is possible to accurately obtain the grade of the seismic diagnosis from the measurement result of the microtremor and the simple survey result, and to match the grade of the precise seismic diagnosis.

Next, the fragility curve shown in FIG. 36 and its creation method, apparatus, and program will be described. The fragility curve will be described before the creation method.
The fragility curve represents the probability that a building will be in a damaged state with respect to input seismic motion, and is often represented by a lognormal distribution as shown in FIG. The figure shows two fragility curves showing the probability distribution in the case of complete destruction and the probability distribution in the case of half destruction. Unlike the 0-1 function as shown in FIG. 37, the fragility curve represents the probability of a certain damaged state, so that the possibility of the damaged state can be known in detail.
When the fragility curve is represented by a lognormal distribution function Φ, it is represented by the following equation (2).

  In the curve indicating the lognormal distribution function Φ, the standard deviation ζ indicates a slope. The larger the standard deviation ζ, that is, the greater the variation, the more the curve is inclined. The median λ (value marked with a circle in FIG. 36) indicates the seismic motion ν when the damage probability is 50%. Since the logarithmic normal distribution function Φ of the above equation is determined by the median λ and the standard deviation ζ, the median λ and the standard deviation ζ are obtained for the creation.

  We will explain the fragility curve considering the aging of buildings. It is known that this is expressed by the following equation according to previous studies. As shown in FIG. 38, the fragility curve moves to the left as the building strength decreases.

The above-mentioned fragility curve taking into account building aging includes the following variables.
g: Gravitational acceleration (= 9.8 m / s ² )
H _e : equivalent height (= 4.5 m, for example)
C _y : Base shear coefficient ← (obtained from microtremor measurement)
μ: Effective mass ratio (= 0.9)
F _h : Reduction rate of acceleration response spectrum (= 1.5 / (1 + 10h))
Attenuation: h = γ (1-1 / √ (R _m (τ) / Ry))
Coefficient: γ = 0.2
Yield deformation angle: Ry = 1/120
R _m (τ): Median of maximum response angle at which a certain damaged state is obtained
← (Required from durability / deterioration check items)
ζ _R : Variation of damage with respect to the maximum response deformation angle (= 0.4)

Base shear coefficient C _y is different Determination is proposed, in this embodiment, a newly devised the following equation (3). With this base shear coefficient C _y, it was found that results close to the rating evaluation formula.

なお、Ｈ_e：等価高さ

H _e : equivalent height

The aged deterioration of R _m (maximum response deformation angle) will be described.
The variable R _m (τ) is a maximum response angle at which the damage probability is 50% in a building τ years old, and is a parameter that determines the median value of the fragility curve. From past studies, it is known that the aging curve is expressed by the following equation.
R _m (τ) = R _mo · d (τ)
d (τ) = max [exp (-ln) (0.5) ・ (τ / (τ0)) ² ), 0.5]
R _mo : Maximum response deformation angle at new construction

  The above equation is shown in a graph as shown in FIG. The lower the durability, the shorter the service life τ0. From the above formula, the service life τ0 is known, and the service life diagnosis can be performed.

The re-evaluation of the aging curve will be explained. As shown in FIG. 41, the median value R _m0 of the maximum response angle at which a certain damage state occurs varies depending on the building age. The median value R _m0 is a curve indicated by a broken line in the figure when the soundness level is 1.0. However, if the target building 1 is deteriorated, the useful life βτ0 is lowered. Therefore, the degree of soundness is determined by deterioration diagnosis, and the reduction factor is re-evaluated according to the determination result, and the re-evaluated reduction factor is used.
The fragility curve generating method of an existing wooden house of this proposal, creating a fragility curves by performing the above aging of R _m, and the re-evaluation of the aged deterioration curve.

A method of creating the fragility curve of FIG. 36 will be described. In summary, as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, the building modeling method is as follows: (1) Base shear coefficient C _y (or yield strength) based on the results of microtremor measurement, (2) Durability (simple durability) The building model shown by the graph in FIG. 34 is created using the useful life of the diagnosis etc.) and (3) the degree of deterioration (soundness degree by the simple deterioration diagnosis etc.), and a fragility curve is created from the model of this building.

Specifically, it is created in the following steps.
First, to calculate the base shear coefficient C _y or yield point strength Q shows the earthquake resistance of the building according to a predetermined calculation rule from Microtremor measured per the target building 1.
The base shear coefficient C _y or yield point strength Q, useful life, and with the health of, the subject building 1, when a and having a predetermined intact condition expressed by the relation between load and deformation angle shown in FIG. 34 Model into a building model with deformation angle values. The building model is a model representative regards the target building 1 1 mass system and, as shown in the figure, until a certain deformation angle (1/120 rad in the illustrated example), base shear coefficient C _y or While deformation angle yield strength Q is proportional, in the above of a variant angle than is the base shear coefficient C _y or yield point strength Q is constant, the graph deformed only progresses. The deformation angle at which the wooden framed house is in a yielding state is generally 1/120, and this value was used. The soundness is the degree of progress of deterioration. It said predetermined intact condition here is completely destroyed and partially destroyed shall be building model with deformation angle R _m when the destroyed and partially destroyed.

Base shear coefficient C _y refers to story shear coefficient in the building foundation, it can be seen as a value indicating the vibration characteristics of the entire building, or the like seismic performance of the design. The layer shear force coefficient is a coefficient obtained by dividing the maximum value of the horizontal shear force generated on an arbitrary floor by the total weight above the arbitrary floor.

The value of the drift angle R _m when the said predetermined intact condition obtained from the building model, and to create a fragility curve of the target building using the base shear coefficient C _y or yield point strength.

  Here, the service life obtained by simple durability diagnosis is used as the service life. As the soundness, the soundness based on the simple deterioration diagnosis in the questionnaire format is used.

According to this method, determine the base shear coefficient C _y or yield point strength Q from the measured value of microtremor, for use in the creation of a building model, vibration characteristics, every seismic performance, good accuracy based on the actual measurement value of the target building 1 building Can be a model.
Also, the basic properties of the target building 1, in addition to the base shear coefficient C _y or yield point strength Q shows the performance, in order to create a building model using the service life, and soundness, more highly accurate building A model can be created. The service life and soundness can be obtained easily by using the service life based on the simple durability diagnosis or the soundness based on the simple deterioration diagnosis.
The building model is a model represented by the relationship between the load and the deformation angle, and has the median values of deformation angles R _m (total destruction) and R _m (half destruction) when the state is completely destroyed or partially destroyed, and the fragility curve is since determined by the median R _m and the standard deviation ζ deformation angle as described above, it can be created from this building model fragility curve easily. The standard deviation ζ is obtained from the two median values R _m .

  For these reasons, fragility curves can be created immediately for existing wooden houses by continuous microtremor measurement and simple questionnaire surveys. In addition, it is possible to create a building model that combines the results of seismic evaluation by microtremor measurement, the results of deformability evaluation based on durability and soundness, so that a highly accurate fragility curve can be created. It becomes the creation method.

When using the base shear coefficient C _y, the base shear coefficient C _y determines the natural frequency f ₀ of the target building 1 from Microtremor measured per object building 1, the square of the natural frequency f _0, the building structure You may make it obtain | require by multiplying the value of the item defined regarding.
Value of the item defined for the above building structure, for example, equivalent to the height H _e of the object building,
The rigidity reduction rate α ′ including the effective mass ratio.
Increasing the specific example, base shear coefficient C _y the above formula (3) obtained by the following equation.
Thus, the base shear coefficient C _y, the natural frequency of the square value obtained from Microtremor, by so obtained by multiplying the value of the item defined with respect to the building structure, be determined accurately base shear coefficient it can.

The useful life may be obtained by multiplying the basic useful life of a wooden house by a coefficient D2 determined from the floor plan, a coefficient B2 determined from the construction method, and a coefficient (D11 + D12) / 2 determined from the installation area of the target building 1.
That is, the service life = (basic service life) × (planning coefficient D2) × (construction coefficient B2) × regional coefficient ((D11 + D12) / 2) may be used.
If the basic useful life is 30,
Service life = 30 ・ D2 ・ B2 ・ (D11 + D12) / 2
It becomes.

  A wooden house generally has a useful life of 30 to 40 years, but this useful life is greatly affected by the floor plan, construction method, installation area, and the like. Therefore, by determining these factors as coefficients and multiplying the basic useful life, the useful life can be obtained with higher accuracy. The construction method is, for example, the form of the outer wall, the eaves, the arrangement of the ventilation openings, and the like. The installation area is, for example, an area classification determined by the degree of infestation of termites, eagle, etc., an annual average temperature, or the like. These differences in construction method and installation area greatly affect the service life.

The floor plan coefficient D2 depends on the total floor area, the ratio of the surrounding area, and the like. The larger the total floor area, the longer the service life. Moreover, since the surrounding area is in an environment containing a lot of moisture, the useful life is shorter than the other parts of the building. For this reason, the ratio of the area around the water and the ratio of the other areas are respectively multiplied by the corresponding coefficient of the above-mentioned standard, and the value obtained by adding these multiplication results is determined as the floor plan coefficient D2, so that the accuracy of evaluation of the service life can be achieved. It leads to improvement.
To give a specific example, the coefficient D2 determined from the floor plan determines the coefficient of the reference for each of the water circulation part and other parts, and the ratio of the water circulation area and the ratio of the other area to the entire floor area, Each is obtained by multiplying the corresponding coefficient of the reference, and a result obtained by adding the multiplication results.
As a numerical example, when the reference coefficient of the other part is 1.5 and the reference coefficient of the surrounding part is 0.5, the ratio of the other area is 86% and the ratio of the surrounding area is 14 %, And two significant digits are shown,
D2 = 1.5 × 0.86 + 0.5 × 0.14 = 1.36≈1.4
It becomes.

If the total floor area is unknown, calculate the ratio of the total floor area and water area by the following simple calculation method.
In this simple calculation method, a standard area is appropriately set for each room type such as a living room, kitchen, bath, washroom, toil, etc., and a value obtained by multiplying the standard area for each room type by the corresponding number of rooms is This is a method of adding up all the room types. Similarly, the ratio of the area around the water is determined from the reference area and the number of rooms for each room type.

As shown in Tables 1 and 2, for 22 wooden houses, the ratio of the total floor area and water area obtained by this simple calculation method is compared with the ratio of the total floor area and water area obtained from the drawings. As can be seen from Table 1, the difference between the two was small, and it was confirmed that there was no problem even if the simple calculation method was used.
The following formula is an example of a formula for obtaining the ratio of the area around the water from the floor plan.

The construction coefficient B2 is, for example, the sum of a coefficient determined from the type of the outer wall, a coefficient determined from the type of eaves on the first floor (for example, the eaves of the eaves), and a coefficient determined from the arrangement of the ventilation openings. Specifically, as shown in Table 3, the coefficients of 1.4, 1.2, 1.0, and 0.8 are determined according to the type of the outer wall surface material, and 0.2 by the eaves type. , 0.0, and -0.1 are determined, and 1.3, 1.0, and 0.8 are determined by the arrangement of the ventilation openings. In this case, for example, if the outer wall material is a type having a coefficient of 1.2, a type of eaves is −0.1, and an arrangement of ventilation openings is 1.3, the construction coefficient B2 Is
B2 = (1.2 + (− 0.1) +1.3) /2=1.2
It becomes.

Of the coefficients D11 and D12 determined from the area, for example, as shown in the left half of Table 4, D11 is determined by the classification of whether the area is inhabited by termites and eel, or the coastal area that is inland. There is a coefficient. In this table, it is 1.0 or 0.8 depending on the category. D12 is a coefficient determined according to the classification of the annual average temperature. For example, as shown in the right half of Table 4, it is set to 0.0 to 1.2 depending on the classification. When D11 = 0.8 and D12 = 0.9 and the other coefficients are the above numerical examples, the estimated useful life is a value according to the following equation.
Service life = 30 (years) · D2 · B2 · (D11 + D12) / 2
= 30 × 1.4 × ((1.2 + (− 0.1)) + 1.3) / 2
= 42 years

  FIG. 42 shows an example in which the service life obtained by this simple method and the service life obtained by a detailed survey are compared for 22 surveyed properties of wooden houses. In the simplified method, items that were difficult to judge by verification at the survey property were deleted and improved (coefficient change, input method change). Items that have been deleted or improved by this simplified method are the ratio of the underfloor vent, exterior wall construction, 1st floor eaves, termite distribution, regional classification, annual average temperature, and water area. As shown in the figure, there is no large difference between the service life obtained by the simplified method and the service life obtained by detailed investigation, and it can be seen that the simplified method can be put into practical use.

As described above, the soundness level is defined as a check item indicating whether or not it corresponds to each factor of deterioration of the building, and an evaluation score is obtained from a check result of the plurality of check items according to a predetermined rule. A point may be the soundness level. In other words, the soundness level is a state of deterioration. The degree of soundness, which is the state of deterioration, is determined based on the rules determined by the points described above based on the check results of these multiple check items. By obtaining the points, appropriate values can be obtained and appropriate values and coefficients can be determined.
When the soundness level is determined by an evaluation score, the soundness level described above may be used for obtaining the score Is ′.

When a specific example of soundness evaluation is shown, the check items shown in FIG. The check items in the figure are the same as in the above example.
Also, the soundness level used to create the fragility curve is set to the value shown in FIG. 44 according to the check contents of the check items in FIG. For the checked items, different values may be defined for the deterioration coefficient when obtaining the score Is ′ and the soundness degree when obtaining the fragility curve.

  Based on the contents of the above check, the deterioration coefficient determined by points and the deterioration coefficient calculated in detail by the general diagnosis were compared for 10 surveyed buildings, and it was confirmed that there was no difference of 0.1 or more. It was.

The damage prediction using the fragility curve created as described above will be described. The earthquake resistance evaluation method for an existing wooden house according to this embodiment can perform damage prediction of the target building 1 using the fragility curve created by the fragility curve creation method.
According to this method, since the method for creating a fragility curve is used, damage prediction for the target building can be easily and accurately obtained. For example, when a seismic intensity value is given to a fragility curve, a damage probability at that seismic intensity is obtained, and according to the above fragility curve, a damage probability that results in complete destruction of a building and a damage probability that results in partial destruction are obtained.
As described above with reference to FIG. 15, the probability of occurrence of seismic intensity 5 to 6 at the installation location of the target building 1 is obtained, and evaluated together with the damage probability that becomes the building complete destruction and the damage probability that becomes half destruction at the seismic intensity, Expected earthquake loss.

  In addition, by calculating the useful life and soundness when the target building 1 is repaired, and recreating the fragility curve using the useful life and soundness in that case, complete destruction of the seismic intensity 5 to 6 after repair , By finding the probability of damage or seismic loss expected to be half-destructed and comparing it with the value before repair, the damage reduction effect can be obtained and proposed.

The overall earthquake resistance evaluation method of this embodiment is a method of performing an earthquake resistance diagnosis of a target building 1 made of an existing wooden house using a computer,
The input process of inputting the microtremor measurement data of the target building, the building structure of the target building, the factors affecting the deterioration, and the data in the installation area questionnaire format, and analyzing these input data An analysis process for obtaining the results of sex assessment, damage prediction, and proposal for improvement, and an output process for outputting the results obtained in this analysis process as report data.
The above-mentioned method for creating the fragility curve of an existing wooden house is used.

  In conventional seismic diagnosis, a specialized engineer took time to investigate the floor, the back of the shed, the room, the exterior, etc., and analyzed it according to the survey results, so it takes time and requires a specialized engineer, There is also a problem that the result depends on the judgment of a professional engineer. However, according to the comprehensive seismic evaluation method of this embodiment, analysis is performed from measurement data of microtremors and data in a questionnaire format, and since the fragility curve creation method of this embodiment is used, it is a specialized technology with advanced knowledge. Even without relying on a person, it is possible to easily and quickly perform appropriate seismic evaluation, damage prediction, and improvement proposal.

An example of a program and apparatus for executing this fragility curve creation method will be described.
As shown in the flowchart of FIG. 11, the fragility curve creation program 17 in FIG. 7 includes an input processing procedure T0, a base shear coefficient calculation procedure T1, a useful life calculation procedure T2, a soundness calculation procedure T3, a fragility curve creation procedure T5, and an output. Processing procedure T5 is included.
The input processing procedure T0 is a procedure for displaying and inputting the input screen (FIG. 12) as described above, and storing the input items in a predetermined storage area.
The output processing procedure T5 is a procedure for storing the fragility curve created in the fragility curve creating procedure T5 in a predetermined storage area for later calculation or the like. The output processing procedure T5 may include a procedure for evaluating the total destruction / half-destruction probability (A5a) and proposing damage reduction effects (A5b).

In base shear coefficient calculation procedure T1, it calculates the base shear coefficient C _y showing the earthquake resistance of the building 1 from the second floor 1a and ground portion 1b Microtremors data measured per object building 1 by predetermined calculation rules. This calculation is performed using the aforementioned equation (3).
In the service life calculation procedure T2, from the inputted floor plan, construction method, and information on the installation area of the target building, a coefficient determined from the floor plan, a coefficient determined from the construction method, and a coefficient determined from the installation area are set to the predetermined calculation formula ( Calculated by 3), the basic life of the wooden house set is multiplied by the coefficient determined from the floor plan, the coefficient determined from the construction method, and the coefficient determined from the installation area to obtain the service life.

  In the soundness calculation procedure T3, an evaluation score is obtained according to a predetermined rule from an input of a check result for a predetermined check item indicating whether or not each factor of deterioration of the building corresponds, and the evaluation score is deteriorated. Is output as a soundness level indicating the degree of progress. The “predetermined rule” is an evaluation based on the aforementioned points.

  The fragility curve creation procedure T5 represents the target building 1 in terms of the relationship between the load and the deformation angle, using the base shear coefficient, the service life, and the soundness level indicating the degree of progress of deterioration calculated in each of the procedures. Modeled into a building model having a value of a deformation angle when a predetermined damage state is obtained, and using the value of the deformation angle when the predetermined damage state is obtained from the building model and the base shear coefficient or yield strength To create a fragility curve of the target building. As described in the above-described fragility curve creation method, the specific content of the fragility curve creation procedure T5 is to create the building model of FIG. 34 and create a fragility curve from this model.

The fragility curve creating apparatus 2b of FIG. 9 is an apparatus that performs the fragility curve creating method of this embodiment, and includes an input processing unit 19, a fragility curve creating unit 26, and an output processing unit 21. The fragility curve creating unit 26 includes a base shear coefficient computing means 28, a useful life computing means 29, a soundness degree computing means 30, and a fragility curve creating means 31. Each of the means 26 to 31 constituting the fragility curve creating unit 26 executes the base shear coefficient calculation procedure T1, the useful life calculation procedure T2, the soundness calculation procedure T3, and the fragility curve creation procedure T4 of the fragility curve creation program 17, respectively. It is a procedure.
The input processing means 19 and the output processing means 21 are procedures for executing the input processing procedure T0 and the output processing procedure T5 of the fragility curve creation program 17, respectively.

  According to this fragility curve creation program 17 and the fragility curve creation device 2b, this fragility curve creation method can be carried out, and as described above for this curve creation method, an existing wooden house can be immediately created by investigation, and a fragility curve can be created. In addition, because the building model is created by combining the seismic evaluation results by microtremor measurement, the deformability evaluation results based on durability and soundness, a highly accurate fragility curve can be created, and it becomes a practical level.

  FIG. 35 is a diagram showing correction of the score with reference to the building model of FIG. When there is no reduction in the proof stress Q, it is assumed that there is a relationship between the proof stress and the deformation indicated by the broken circle in the figure. In addition, considering the correction coefficient x1 for the joint type (joint and foundation conditions) and the correction coefficient x2 based on defect information by deterioration diagnosis, the relationship between deformation and yield strength is, for example, a circle indicated by a solid line in FIG. It becomes the relationship.

The effects of the comprehensive earthquake resistance evaluation method in this embodiment are summarized below.
-With simple input and operation, seismic performance evaluation from survey to result display can be performed in a short time and with high accuracy.
Since the result is obtained by program processing from the microtremor measurement by the sensor 3 and the input of simple hearing contents for the resident, the difference due to the judgment of the operator is small, and a highly reproducible result is obtained.
・ The seismic performance can be comprehensively evaluated from microtremor measurement data and hearing data (address, building structure and specifications, floor plan information, deterioration information, lifestyle information).
・ Especially, the seismic diagnosis score can be estimated from the microtremor measurement data and the above hearing data, and the natural frequency can be calculated and the result displayed, so the seismic diagnosis score can be obtained accurately without damaging the building. And can be matched to the precision seismic diagnosis score.

・ Furthermore, for existing wooden houses, a fragility curve can be created immediately by surveys, and a building model is created by combining seismic evaluation results by microtremor measurement, durability, and deformability evaluation results based on soundness. This makes it possible to create a highly accurate fragility curve, which is a practical level.
・ Since multiple items related to earthquake resistance are displayed in a chart, it is easy to understand and judge comprehensively.
・ The vertical axis of the comprehensive evaluation chart represents the degree of safety against earthquakes, and the horizontal axis represents the overall health level, making it easy to understand and judge comprehensively.
・ By changing the selection years of lifestyle information, the probability of occurrence of earthquake motion that matches the years of lifestyle information can be confirmed.
・ The probability of earthquake occurrence is displayed as the number of marks as the probability of an earthquake. For this reason, the probability of earthquake occurrence is easy to understand. The strength of the building is displayed as the number of marks, making it easy to understand the strength of the building.

-From the hearing data (deterioration information), the degree of deterioration is displayed as a point as a health evaluation point, so that the degree of deterioration can be obtained easily and appropriately, and the indicated degree of deterioration is easy to understand.
-The health level (degradation level) is displayed as the number of marks, making it easy to understand.
-From the interview data (address, building structure / specification, floor plan information), durability is evaluated as a point of durability as a durability evaluation point, so durability is easily and appropriately determined, and the indicated durability is easy to understand .
-Lifetime is expressed by the number of marks and the service life is displayed, so the life is easy to understand. .
・ Floor area, roof area, outer circumference length, outer wall scaffolding area, temporary enclosure length are estimated from the floor plan information, and the estimated repair cost is displayed using the estimated various areas, so the floor area is unknown. Even in this case, the floor area can be easily and appropriately determined, and the cost for renovation is required.
・ Since the current building damage prediction and earthquake damage countermeasures (lightening of roofs, wall reinforcement, deterioration repairs) are displayed, it is easy to select countermeasures and schedule repairs.
・ In accordance with the years of use in the future, LCC evaluation will be performed when the current situation / reinforcement / reinforcement + repair is performed, and the optimal repair / reinforcement method will be displayed, making it easier to select measures and schedule repairs. .

-Since the report is prepared using the evaluation result of the input information and output information and the repair proposal, all necessary items can be understood from this report.
-Since the evaluation result is sent to the server, it can be used to modify the program.
・ Because it is possible to display information on earthquake-resistant repair methods and information on earthquake-resistant items, knowledge about earthquake-resistant methods can also be acquired.
・ The seismic performance evaluation index that takes earthquake risk into account provides the optimum level of seismic performance corresponding to the region.
-If the durability rating and the health rating score are used to indicate the long-lasting level, the long-lasting level with high accuracy is known.
-Since the repair method based on the evaluation, its estimated cost, and the degree of improvement in earthquake resistance are displayed, it is easy to consider the implementation of the repair.
・ Evaluation items are items related to seismic risk on site, estimated value of seismic performance, useful life, and degree of degradation, expressed as difficulty of earthquake, strength against earthquake, life span, and health, respectively. A comprehensive understanding of earthquake risks.

  47 to 51 show another embodiment of the present invention. In this embodiment, the matters other than those specifically described are the same as those of the first embodiment described above with reference to FIGS. In this embodiment, when the outline is explained, measurement and hearing (interview) of micro vibrations are performed before and after the earthquake-proof repair, and the effects before and after the repair are quantified and displayed in an easy-to-understand manner. In the embodiment described above, the score after reinforcement is calculated by calculation at the stage of the reinforcement plan, but it is not known whether the effect of the improvement actually appears after the earthquake-proof improvement. In addition, in past documents such as patent documents, since the repair effect is evaluated only by an original score or natural frequency, it is difficult to understand the seismic performance. This embodiment solves such a problem.

  As shown in FIG. 47, the earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation device 2B used in this embodiment is the same as the earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation device 2A (see FIG. 6) in the first embodiment. 51 is provided. As shown in FIG. 48, the seismic retrofit effect evaluation means 51 includes a comparison program 52 added to the main analysis program 15. The comparison program 52 may be abbreviated as “comparison PRG”. The seismic retrofitting effect evaluation means 51 and the comparison program 52 calculate a score after the seismic retrofit of the target building 1 to be described next, and compare the score stored in the evaluation result DB server 12 with the seismic retrofit. The main content is the process of finding the effect before and after.

  In the method for comprehensive evaluation of seismic resistance of an existing wooden house of this embodiment, as shown in FIG. 49, measurement of microtremor data at two locations of the second floor 1b and the ground 1a of the target building 1 is performed. Performing a seismic diagnosis score using the microtremor data before and after the seismic retrofit, and calculating a seismic diagnostic score using the microtremor data after the seismic retrofit. The calculation method of the simple seismic evaluation score of the existing wooden house explained in the first embodiment is used. Moreover, it compares and calculates | requires quantitatively by comparing the effect of earthquake-proof repair about the grade of the earthquake-resistant diagnosis before and behind the calculated earthquake-proof repair, and the item showing the performance of the said target building 1 calculated | required from the said score. Furthermore, as will be described later, for each of the other items, the effect of the seismic retrofit is quantitatively determined by comparing before and after the seismic retrofit. The method of calculating the rating of the seismic diagnosis before the seismic retrofit and obtaining other evaluation items are the same as the method described in the above embodiment. In FIG. 49, the left half shows the items before the earthquake-proof repair, and the right half shows the items after the earthquake-proof repair. The left half has the same contents as FIG. The right half is shown enlarged in FIG. The earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation devices 2A and 2B used before and after the earthquake resistance repair may be the same device or different devices.

In order to obtain the score and each item after the earthquake-proof repair, a predetermined input for starting the comparison before and after the repair is made from the input device 5 (see FIGS. 47 and 48) to the earthquake-resistant comprehensive evaluation device 2B. By this input, the earthquake-resistant repair effect evaluation means 51 (comparison PR52) is activated, and a mode for performing evaluation after the earthquake-resistant repair is set. In this mode, first, pre-seismic retrofit data for the same target building 1 is fetched from the evaluation result DB server 12. This pre-earthquake retrofit data is data that has been previously registered in the evaluation result DB server 12 as a report etc. after performing various processes such as score calculation as described above before the seismic retrofit. Each item necessary for the earthquake and each evaluation result before the earthquake-proof repair are included.
However, since the items that have undergone the earthquake-proof repair are not included in the data before the earthquake-proof repair, interviews are conducted and the earthquake-proof repair items that can be understood from the results are input to the comprehensive earthquake resistance evaluation apparatus 2B. The hearing is performed according to a check list for earthquake-proof repair items, and the check result of the check list is input.

  After the hearing and the input of the result, the microtremor data is measured at two locations on the second floor 1b and the ground 1a for the target building 1 which has been subjected to earthquake-proof repair. The microtremor data may be measured prior to the hearing and its input or in parallel with the hearing and its input.

When the microtremor data after the seismic retrofit and the input of the hearing result are obtained in this way, as in the case before the retrofit, the seismic diagnosis score is calculated and other items are evaluated. The other items to be evaluated are, for example, comprehensive evaluation, earthquake resistance evaluation, deterioration evaluation, and durability evaluation, as shown in FIG. Each of these evaluations is performed in the same manner as the evaluation before the earthquake-resistant repair shown in the previous embodiment, and the obtained evaluation values are compared with the evaluation values before the earthquake-resistant repair, and the comprehensive evaluation before and after the repair, before and after the repair. Output as earthquake resistance evaluation, deterioration evaluation before and after repair, and durability evaluation before and after repair. The comparison of the evaluation values before and after the seismic retrofit may be performed by writing the evaluation values before and after in a graph or a table, or may be a process for obtaining the ratio of the evaluation values before and after. The output of the evaluation result may include matters that do not affect the seismic retrofit, for example, the probability of occurrence of an earthquake in the construction site of the target building 1.
In addition to the above output, a predetermined output regarding the effect before and after the repair, for example, a summary of the repair effect is obtained and output as the “renovation effect”.
Each output is collected as a report, printed, attached to an e-mail, transmitted to a customer or the like, and registered in the evaluation result server 12, that is, uploaded.
The said earthquake-proof repair effect evaluation means 51 (comparison PRG52) performs such a process.

  FIG. 51 shows an example of a report for evaluating the seismic retrofit effect. This report includes the owner's name, matters related to the location of the building, the structure, specifications, age of the target building, etc. (building age, presence / absence of extension / renovation, total area, exterior wall specifications, eaves depth, etc. The ventilation port, roof type, roof shape, etc.). In addition, information about the possibility of an earthquake occurring in the construction site is described together with information such as a map and nearby faults. The items described above are the same as the information before the earthquake-proof repair, except for the items subjected to the earthquake-proof repair, and are the contents obtained from the evaluation result DB server 12. The items subjected to the earthquake-proof repair are information obtained from the input contents of the checklist by the hearing.

  Outputs and display items related to the evaluation of seismic retrofit include display items 61 of microtremor measurement results (before renovation), display items 62 of microtremor measurement results (before renovation), and earthquake damage due to seismic renovation (ie, seismic reform) This is a display item 63 of the reduction effect.

As the display item 61 of the microtremor measurement result (after renovation), a table 64 showing the natural frequencies in the longitudinal direction and the short direction of the target building 1 and a graph 65 showing the relationship between the response magnification for each natural frequency, This is a comment (commentary) on these. An example of this comment is an explanation in the form of a sentence saying, “Some damage may occur in the event of a medium earthquake. • Major damage may occur in the event of a large earthquake.” .
The display item 62 of the microtremor measurement result (before modification) is the same as the display item 62 of the “microtremor measurement result (after renovation)” except for the difference in the contents of each value and the comment.

  The display items of the effect of reducing earthquake damage due to seismic retrofitting (seismic renovation) are shown in the graph showing the seismic intensity on the horizontal axis and the degree of damage on the vertical axis. It is said that it was shown after the seismic retrofit.

  Thus, according to the earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation method of the existing wooden house of this embodiment, when earthquake-proof repair is performed, the effect of the repair can be obtained quantitatively, and improvement in customer satisfaction can be expected. In addition, since the repair effect is confirmed by mechanical measurement, the repair effect can be confirmed together with the customer.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 ... Target building 2 ... Information processing apparatus 2A ... Earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation apparatus 2B ... Earthquake resistance comprehensive evaluation apparatus 3 ... Sensor 4 ... Processing apparatus main body 5 ... Input apparatus 6 ... Output apparatus 6a ... Image display apparatus 13 ... Comprehensive evaluation program 14 ... tremor measurement / natural frequency calculation program 15 ... main analysis program 16 ... simple earthquake resistance diagnosis score calculation program 17 ... fragility curve creation program 19 ... input processing means 20 ... comprehensive evaluation means 21 ... output processing means 2Aa ... simple earthquake resistance diagnosis score Calculation device 2 Ab ... Fragility curve creation device 23 ... Main analysis means 25 ... Score calculation unit (score calculation means)
26 ... Fragility curve creation unit 28 ... Base shear coefficient calculation means 29 ... Lifetime calculation means 30 ... Soundness calculation means 31 ... Fragility curve creation means 51 ... Earthquake resistance improvement effect evaluation means 52 ... Comparison program (comparison PRG)

Claims (8)

A method for calculating a rating of seismic diagnosis, which is a ratio of a holding capacity to a required capacity, of a target building for a seismic diagnosis consisting of a two-story existing wooden house,
The natural frequency of the target building is obtained from the data of microtremors measured on the second floor and the ground of the target building, and the building model of the target building is determined as a one-mass system model based on the obtained natural frequency. After calculating the proof stress assuming that it vibrates in the primary mode, the method of calculating the proof stress of the target building by calculating the proof stress of the first floor instead of distributing the effective mass ratio to a two-mass system model, Find the basic value to
The seismic diagnosis by correcting a basic value of the obtained score by using a correction coefficient for a form of a joint part of the structural member of the target building and a correction coefficient by a deterioration investigation by a questionnaire form of the target building It is characterized by calculating the score of
A simple earthquake-resistant diagnostic score calculation method for existing wooden houses. A method for calculating a rating Is ′ of seismic diagnosis, which is a ratio of a proof strength to a necessary proof strength of a target building of a two-story existing wooden house,
A method for calculating a simple seismic diagnosis score of an existing wooden house for obtaining the score Is ′ by the following equation (1).

here,
f ₀ : natural frequency [Hz]
x1: Correction coefficient for joint type x2: Correction coefficient by deterioration investigation
H _e : Equivalent height [m]
Z: Earthquake area coefficient (= 0.7 to 1.0)
R _y : Interlayer deformation angle R _t : Vibration characteristic coefficient C ₀ : Layer shear coefficient g: Acceleration of gravity [9.8 m / s ² ]
α ′: Stiffness reduction rate including effective mass ratio B: Other correction coefficient However, the correction coefficient B in the above equation (1) may be omitted.   3. The method of calculating a simple seismic diagnosis score for an existing wooden house according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the correction coefficient for the joint type is a value divided by the year of construction of the target building. Simple earthquake-resistant diagnostic score calculation method.   In the calculation method of the simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score of the existing wooden house of any one of Claim 1 thru | or 3, the correction | amendment corresponding to the repair content at the time of repairing the said target building about the said any correction coefficient A method for calculating a simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis score of an existing wooden house, which calculates the score after repair using a coefficient. A method for comprehensive evaluation of seismic performance of existing wooden houses, using a computer to perform seismic diagnosis of the target buildings made of existing wooden houses,
The measurement process of microtremors of the target building and the input process of inputting data in the form of questionnaire on the structure of the target building, the building structure, the deterioration, and the installation area, and analyzing these input data An analysis process for obtaining the results of evaluation, damage prediction, and improvement proposal, and an output process for outputting the results obtained in this analysis process as report data,
The method for calculating a simple seismic diagnosis score of an existing wooden house according to any one of claims 1 to 4 is used in the analysis process.
Comprehensive seismic evaluation method for existing wooden houses. A device for calculating the rating of seismic diagnosis, which is the ratio of the possession strength to the required strength of the target building of the seismic diagnosis consisting of a two-story existing wooden house,
Simple seismic resistance of an existing wooden house, characterized by having input processing means for storing input items input by an input device in a predetermined storage area, and score calculation means for calculating the score Is ′ by the following equation (1) A diagnostic score calculator.

here,
f ₀ : natural frequency [Hz]
x1: Correction coefficient for joint type x2: Correction coefficient by deterioration investigation
H _e : Equivalent height [m]
Z: Earthquake area coefficient (= 0.7 to 1.0)
R _y : Interlayer deformation angle R _t : Vibration characteristic coefficient C ₀ : Layer shear coefficient g: Acceleration of gravity [9.8 m / s ² ]
α ′: Stiffness reduction rate including effective mass ratio B: Other correction coefficient However, the correction coefficient B in the above equation (1) may be omitted. A program that can be executed by a computer and calculates a score of seismic diagnosis, which is a ratio of a possession strength to a required strength of a target building of a seismic diagnosis consisting of a two-story existing wooden house,
An input processing process for storing the next input item input by the input device in a predetermined storage area;
A program for calculating a simple seismic diagnosis score for an existing wooden house, comprising a score calculation procedure for calculating the score Is ′ according to the following equation (1).

f ₀ : natural frequency [Hz]
x1: Correction coefficient for joint type x2: Correction coefficient by deterioration investigation
H _e : Equivalent height [m]
Z: Earthquake area coefficient (= 0.7 to 1.0)
R _y : Interlayer deformation angle R _t : Vibration characteristic coefficient C ₀ : Layer shear coefficient g: Acceleration of gravity [9.8 m / s ² ]
α ′: Stiffness reduction rate including effective mass ratio B: Other correction coefficient However, the correction coefficient B in the above equation may be omitted. A method for comprehensive evaluation of seismic performance of existing wooden houses, which evaluates the effect of seismic retrofitting of target buildings consisting of existing two-story wooden houses,
Measurement of microtremor data at the second floor of the target building and at two locations on the ground before and after seismic retrofit of the target building, and seismic resistance using the microtremor data before seismic retrofit The calculation of the score of diagnosis and the calculation of the score of seismic diagnosis using the data of microtremor after seismic renovation are respectively simplified earthquake resistance of the existing wooden house according to any one of claims 1 to 4. Performed using the evaluation point calculation method,
It is characterized by quantitatively comparing the effect of seismic renovation with respect to the items representing the performance of the target building obtained from the rating of the seismic diagnosis before and after the calculated seismic renovation, or the score,
Comprehensive seismic evaluation method for existing wooden houses.

Images