JP3956293B2 - Simple seismic diagnosis method - Google Patents

Description

[0001]
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
  The present invention relates to a simple seismic diagnosis method for diagnosing the seismic performance of a building.
[0002]
[Prior art]
As a technique related to seismic diagnosis, it is possible to continuously monitor a floor under an existing building, a ceiling, an attic, etc. in real time using a monitoring means (for example, see Patent Document 1), Calculates the center of gravity, rigid center, wall center, etc. based on the position, length, and effective magnification, and diagnoses earthquake resistance (see, for example, Patent Document 2). Displays the equipment to be diagnosed at the site by inputting it into a computer, inputs the results of the earthquake resistance diagnosis (see, for example, Patent Document 3), and detects the degree of deformation of a predetermined structural element such as a building pillar Such as those that determine seismic resistance from the actual deformation data and data on the magnitude of the earthquake according to a predetermined calculation standard (for example, Patent Document 4) Colors and proposals have been made.
[0003]
[Patent Document 1]
JP 2002-89052 A
[0004]
[Patent Document 2]
Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 2001-338012
[0005]
[Patent Document 3]
Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 11-237321
[0006]
[Patent Document 4]
JP 07-311126 A
[0007]
[Problems to be solved by the invention]
However, when viewed as a tool for seismic diagnosis or disaster prevention diagnosis, there are detailed diagnostic tools for the purpose of seismic reinforcement and replacement, but the method is detailed and specialized, and the survey is complicated and diverse. Such a diagnosis requires a plurality of specialists in construction, structure, equipment, etc., and it is necessary to compile the diagnosis results into a report, so there is a problem of immediacy.
[0008]
[Means for Solving the Problems]
The present invention solves the above-described problems and makes it possible to perform seismic diagnosis in a short time even without special expertise.
[0009]
  Therefore, the present invention diagnoses the seismic performance of buildings.DoA simple seismic diagnosis method,
It is classified into the diagnosis items of the five evaluation elements of the ground, foundation, building main structure, building secondary member, and workpiece, and the ground diagnosis items are landslide / slope failure, land subsidence, ease of ground shaking, liquefaction phenomenon The basic diagnostic items are always in the diagnosis sub-items (separate settlement), seismic safety, liquefaction / flow safety sub-diagnostic items, the main structure of the diagnostic items are seismic performance, planar shape, Diagnosis items for elevation shape and aging deterioration, diagnosis items for secondary parts of buildings for diagnosis items for inner and outer walls, openings, and fall hazards, diagnosis items for workpieces for rooftop and outdoor workpieces Classify them into sub-items,
A diagnostic fine item weighting factor is set for each of the diagnostic subitems of the ground, and the score inputted to each of the diagnostic subitems and the diagnostic subitem weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the diagnostic item of the ground Ground diagnosis processing means for obtaining the score of,
A diagnostic subitem weighting factor is set for each of the basic diagnostic subitems, and the score and the diagnostic subitem weighting factor input to each of the subdiagnostic subitems are calculated and aggregated to calculate the basic diagnostic item. Basic diagnosis processing means for obtaining the score of,
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the building main structure, and a score input to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the building owner A building main structure diagnostic processing means for obtaining a score of a structural diagnostic item;
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the building secondary member, and a score input to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the building A building secondary member diagnosis processing means for obtaining a score of a diagnostic item of the secondary member;
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the workpiece, and a score inputted to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the Work piece diagnosis processing means for obtaining a score of a diagnostic item,
A diagnostic item weighting coefficient is set for each of the diagnostic items, and the total score of the seismic diagnosis is obtained by calculating and summing each of the diagnostic item scores and the diagnostic item weighting coefficient totaled by the respective diagnostic processing means. Comprehensive diagnosis processing means for obtaining
Output means for outputting a diagnosis result including each score and total score of each diagnosis item obtained by each diagnosis processing means;
And input the score of each diagnostic sub-item based on the judgment information for each input score of the survey item further subdivided into each diagnostic sub-item or the check information showing the judgment information and the reference information or score reference table In each of the diagnostic processing means, a diagnostic fine item weighting coefficient is set so that the score when the seismic resistance is all high is a perfect score, and in the comprehensive diagnostic processing means, each of the diagnostic processing When all the scores obtained by the means are full scores, set the diagnostic item weighting factor that is apportioned so that the total score becomes a perfect score, and input the score of each diagnostic subitem based on the check sheet or score reference table The diagnosis results including the respective scores and the overall score of each diagnostic item output by the output means, the earthquake resistance of each diagnostic item is high Performing a low of diagnosis and comprehensive diagnosis of whether the high or low earthquake resistance of buildingsIt is characterized by this.
[0010]
  For each of the diagnostic detailsScoreThere are three levels of input: whether the earthquake resistance is low, high, normal, or neitherScore judgment information or judgment information and reference information or score reference tableIt is characterized by using a check sheet indicating the above.
[0011]
  Of the basic diagnostic detailsScoreTo enterThe basic form and the score of the subdivision diagnosis itemAccording to three stages that combineScore judgment information or judgment information and reference information or score reference tableIt is characterized by using a check sheet indicating the above.
[0012]
  The output means includes theeachThe score of each diagnostic item by the diagnostic processing means is divided into 5 ranks. Corresponding to the 5 ranks, the earthquake resistance is considerably low, the earthquake resistance is relatively low, the earthquake resistance is normal, the earthquake resistance is relatively high, and the earthquake resistance is Any of the findings that are considerably high is output, and the score of each diagnosis item is output on a radar chart with five evaluation axes.
[0013]
  The output means divides the score of the comprehensive diagnosis by the comprehensive diagnosis processing means into three ranks, and the earthquake resistance is high corresponding to the three ranks, it is necessary to perform the earthquake resistance diagnosis and check the earthquake resistance, the earthquake resistance is low It outputs any findings that require diagnosis based on reinforcement.
[0014]
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining an embodiment of a simple seismic diagnosis system according to the present invention, and FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of an importance pair comparison table of diagnostic items used for weighting calculation setting. In the figure, 1 is a ground item input processing unit, 2 is a basic item input processing unit, 3 is a building main structure item input processing unit, 4 is a building secondary member item input processing unit, 5 is a workpiece item input processing unit, 6 Is a ground item diagnostic processing unit, 7 is a basic item diagnostic processing unit, 8 is a building main structure item diagnostic processing unit, 9 is a building secondary member item diagnostic processing unit, 10 is a workpiece item diagnostic processing unit, and 11 is a comprehensive diagnostic processing. , 12 is a weight calculation setting unit, and 13 is a diagnosis result output unit.
[0015]
The simple seismic diagnosis system according to the present invention includes five evaluation elements: (A) ground item, (B) basic item, (C) building main structure item, (D) building secondary member item, and (E) workpiece item. The diagnostic items (hereinafter also referred to as major items) are classified into the five evaluation elements, and further classified into the middle diagnostic items (hereinafter also referred to as intermediate items). By setting a weighting factor for each sub-item and entering a score for each sub-diagnostic item (hereinafter also referred to as score input), the respective scores and total scores for each diagnostic item are obtained according to each weighting factor, and earthquake resistance As shown in FIG. 1, the input processing units 1 to 5 perform score input processing on each medium item for each large item, and the weight calculation setting unit 12 outputs the diagnosis result. Set weight count Accordingly, the diagnosis processing units 6 to 10 obtain the score of each intermediate item to perform the diagnosis process, the comprehensive diagnosis processing unit 11 obtains the score and perform the comprehensive diagnosis, and the diagnosis result output unit 13 outputs the diagnosis result. To do.
[0016]
In FIG. 1, first, the ground item input processing unit 1 classifies major items of the ground into landslide / slope collapse, ground subsidence, ease of ground shaking, and liquefaction phenomenon, and inputs scores. . Similarly, the basic item input processing unit 2 categorizes major basic items into normal items (separate settlement), earthquake safety, liquefaction / flow safety, and inputs scores. . The building main structure item input processing section 3 classifies the major items of the building main structure into the middle items of possessed seismic performance, planar shape, elevation shape, and aging deterioration, and inputs scores. The building secondary member item input processing unit 4 classifies the large items of the inner wall of the building secondary member into the inner and outer walls, openings, and middle items of fall risk and inputs the score. And the workpiece item input process part 5 classifies the large item of a workpiece into a rooftop workpiece and a middle item of an outdoor workpiece, and inputs a score.
[0017]
In each middle item, for example, a score (determination index) is input with 1 point or less, but in order to simplify the score, by using 3 steps, 1 point is given for items with high earthquake resistance, normal or A score of 0.5 points is entered for those that cannot be said, and a score of 0 is entered for those that have low earthquake resistance. Of course, it may be possible to input a score of 100 points or less with a full score of 100, 5 levels of 1,0.75, 0.5, 0.25, 0, and 1 point or less (100 points or less) The score may be arbitrarily input, but if the score becomes finer, the more strict evaluation is required, and conversely, the difference in personal evaluation becomes large.
[0018]
The ground item diagnosis processing unit 6 performs a weighting operation on the score of each medium item in the ground and obtains a score, thereby diagnosing the ground item, and the basic item diagnosis processing unit 7 weights the score of each medium item in the foundation The building main structure item diagnosis processing unit 8 performs a weighting operation on the score of each medium item of the building main structure to obtain the score by calculating the basic score by calculating the score and calculating the score. The building secondary member item diagnosis processing unit 9 performs a weighting operation on the score of each intermediate item of the building secondary member to obtain a score, thereby diagnosing the building secondary member item, and a workpiece item. The diagnosis processing unit 10 performs a weighting operation on the score of each medium item of the workpiece to obtain a score, thereby diagnosing the workpiece item. In each diagnosis processing unit, for example, the total is 100 and weights are set for each middle item. The scores are weighted and tabulated to obtain a score with 100 points as a perfect score.
[0019]
The comprehensive diagnosis processing unit 11 calculates a total score by performing a weighting calculation in the same manner as the above-mentioned middle items are set for the scores of the respective diagnosis items of the ground, foundation, building main structure, building secondary member, and workpiece. The weight calculation setting unit 12 calculates and sets the weight values of the middle items and the diagnosis items. For example, as shown in FIG. An index value that is the reciprocal number is set for the other item, and a calculation such as a geometric average is performed from the index value to set a weighting value in each processing unit.
[0020]
In the case of the example shown in FIG. 2, the foundation is slightly more important in the comparison between the ground and the foundation, and the building main structure is more important in the comparison between the ground and the building main structure. Here, if the index value is 1 for the same degree, 3 for the somewhat important, 5 for the important, and 7 for the very important, the relative comparison value with the foundation is 1/3, and the relative comparison value with the building main structure is On the other hand, the relative comparison value with the ground is 3 for the foundation, and the relative comparison value with the ground is 5 for the building main structure. The diagnostic result output unit 13 outputs a diagnostic result of each item by each processing unit, and outputs, for example, a score, ranking, radar chart, or diagnosis result findings.
[0021]
For example, if the diagnosis result is ranked in 5 stages with a maximum score of 100, rank 1 is 0 to 20 points and the earthquake resistance is quite low, rank 2 is 21 to 40 points and the earthquake resistance is relatively low, rank 3 is 41-60 points are moderate (normal), rank 4 is 61-80 points, relatively high earthquake resistance, rank 5 is 81-100 points, and the earthquake resistance is quite high Scope and findings. In addition to comprehensive scores, comprehensive diagnosis is based on a 5-level evaluation result for each diagnostic item, and a comprehensive evaluation based on ranks A, B, and C. A: Judgment is high. B: Performs seismic diagnosis. It is possible to present findings such as the necessity of checking seismic performance, C: low seismic resistance, and detailed diagnosis on the premise of reinforcement.
[0022]
FIG. 3 is a diagram for explaining an outline of processing by the simple seismic diagnosis system of the present embodiment, and FIG. 4 is a diagram for explaining an example of an input pattern of survey item scores.
[0023]
For example, as shown in FIG. 3, the processing by the simple seismic diagnosis system of this embodiment first determines whether or not weighting has been set for each medium item and large item (step S11). Weighting is set for each item (step S12). Then, after inputting the score for each survey item (step S13), the score of each middle item is input while referring to the score of the input survey item (step S14). When the input of the score of each middle item is completed, the score of each middle item is calculated according to the weighting, thereby diagnosing each diagnostic item (step S15). Subsequently, comprehensive diagnosis is executed by calculating the diagnosis result of each item according to weighting (step S16), and the comprehensive diagnosis result is output (step S17).
[0024]
  In order to input the score of the middle item into which the diagnostic items are classified, further subdivide the middle item into survey items, first enter the score into those survey items, and then enter the score of the middle item from the score of the survey item Do. For example, as shown in FIG. 4 (A), judgment information corresponding to each score is shown in the lower column of the item name, and one of the scores is input based on the judgment information. Enter the corresponding check in the check box. In addition, as shown in FIG. 4B, another pattern shows more specific reference information about the judgment information, and the third pattern shows a lower column of item names as shown in FIG. 4C. By quoting the score reference table, it is possible to determine whether to check corresponding to any score based on the score reference table.
[0025]
Next, a specific example in which a diagnosis is performed by inputting a score for each survey item and inputting a score for a middle item using a check sheet showing determination indices in three stages will be described. FIG. 5 to FIG. 8 show examples of survey items and scores for each of the middle items into which the ground items are classified, and FIG. 5 is a diagram showing examples of specific survey items and scores for landslides and slope failures, FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of input of specific survey items and scores for land subsidence, FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of specific survey items and scores for ease of ground shaking, and FIG. 8 is a diagram of liquefaction phenomenon. It is a figure which shows the example of an input of a specific investigation item and a score.
[0026]
(A-1) Landslide / Slope failure, (A-2) Land subsidence, (A-3) Easiness of ground shaking, (A-4) Middle items of liquefaction phenomenon (diagnosis details) Among items, landslides and slope failures are further classified into topography, regionality, and place names as shown in FIG. 5, for example, and are indicated by respective score input patterns. The check items corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (A) include zero-point score judgment information with low earthquake resistance, as cliff / slope / valley, Other points are indicated as score judgment information of 0.5 points which is not normal or neither, as score judgment information of one point with high quake resistance. Therefore, for example, if the ground is a valley, a check is input to score 0, and if it is a plateau, a check is input to score 1. In addition, according to the check item corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4C, the place name investigation item has a score of 0, 0 based on the place name and the interview survey together with the relationship between the disaster and the place name in the score reference table. 5 and 1 are shown to be selected. Therefore, if there is a place name such as squirrel, sleet, flare, and Kawachi in the place name and interview survey, a score of 0 is entered as a check.
[0027]
If any of 0, 1, or 0.5 is entered for each of the survey items of topography / regionality and place name in the above landslide / slope failure, the landslide will be judged based on the overall score of each survey item.・ A score of 0, 1, or 0.5 for slope failure is input.
[0028]
For example, as shown in FIG. 6, ground subsidence is further subdivided into site surrounding conditions, soil quality, topography / regional characteristics, and is indicated by respective score input patterns. The check items corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (C) indicate the situation where land subsidence is expected in the score reference table as checkpoints for the site surrounding situation survey items. The items include the check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (A), and the score judgment information of 0 points with low seismic resistance, respectively, alluvial clay soil / humus soil, 1 point with high seismic resistance As the score judgment information, sandy soil / gravel, normal or neither of the other points are shown as 0.5 score judgment information, and the topography / regional survey items are shown in FIG. As a result of the check sheet corresponding to the second score input pattern shown in Fig. 2, the score judgment information of 0 points with low earthquake resistance is used as old river channel, (back) marsh, marshland site, lagoon site, triangle・ Score determination information of drowned valley buried land, reclaimed land / filled land / manufactured land, (shore) landfill, high earthquake resistance, mountain / hillside, plateau / fan, normal or neither 0. Others are shown as the score judgment information of 5 points, and the figure of the outline of medium terrain and micro terrain (cited from Geotechnical Society: Geotech Note "How to see the ground" (1999)) is shown as reference information It is.
[0029]
For example, as shown in Fig. 7, subsurface classification is further subdivided into surface earthquake amplification factor, ground type, alluvium thickness, topography / regionality, and place name. Indicated by Among them, the survey items of the surface ground motion amplification factor are indicated by the respective numerical ranges by the check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (A). The check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (A) indicates the first to third type ground, respectively. The survey items of the alluvium thickness are shown in FIG. 4 (A). Each numerical range is indicated by a check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown. In addition, for the survey items of topography and regionality, a check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (A) shows a score of 0 points with low earthquake resistance from the viewpoint of ground vibration and ease of shaking. Judgment information includes old river channels / wetlands, landfills / polders, alluvial lowlands / deltas, high-earthquake resistance, one-point score judgment information, fan / land, natural embankment / bottom plain, plain / sand dunes, normal or either Others are shown as score determination information of 0.5 points that cannot be said, and the check item corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. Corresponding to the score judgment information of 0 point with low earthquake resistance, the place name suggesting a relatively soft ground and kanji included, and corresponding to the score judgment information of 1 point with high earthquake resistance, a relatively hard ground Suggestion That place names and Chinese characters that is included is shown, further differences of shaking ease by the geological structure diagram ((company) Geotechnical Society: Geo Tech Notes "Reading the ground." (Quoted from 1999)) is shown as reference information.
[0030]
  For example, as shown in Fig. 8, the liquefaction phenomenon is further subdivided into liquefaction history / risk level, soil quality less than 10m, groundwater level, N ground level (below 10m), and topography / regional characteristics. , Indicated by each score input pattern. Among them, the liquefaction history / risk level survey items are based on the check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in Fig. 4 (C), taking into account past liquefaction experience and current liquefaction risk. In order to select the score, reference information and a reference map are shown. For each survey item of soil quality below 10 m, groundwater level, and sand ground N value (less than 10 m), the first item shown in FIG. Each numerical range is indicated by a check sheet corresponding to the score input pattern, and the topography and regionality survey items are liquid by the check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. As a score judgment information of 0 points with low seismic resistance from the viewpoint of decontamination phenomenon, old river / wetland ruins, marshland ruins / lagoon lake ruins, (shore) reclaimed land, delta / river terraces, high seismic score scoring As information , Hills, alluvial fan, plateau, as an ordinary or score judgment information of which 0.5 points not say, lowland Dunes, embankment and other is shown. Furthermore, topographical boundary diagrams that tend to cause liquefaction even in fan-shaped areas and dunes (cited from Geotechnical Society: Geotech Note “How to read the ground” (1999)) are shown as reference information.
[0031]
FIG. 9 to FIG. 11 show examples of survey items and scores input for each of the middle items into which the basic items are classified. FIG. 9 shows examples of input of specific survey items and scores for normal soundness (dissimilar settlement). FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a specific survey item and score input example of earthquake safety, and FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating a specific survey item and score input example of liquefaction / flow safety. is there. As is clear from the following explanation, the survey items in the basic items are characterized in that most are related to the scores of the survey items in the ground items.
[0032]
(B-1) Normal soundness (dissimilar settlement), (B-2) Earthquake safety, (B-3) Liquefaction / flow safety middle items (diagnosis sub-items) Among them, the normal soundness (dissimilar settlement) is further subdivided into basic forms, ground subsidences, and basic surrounding conditions as shown in FIG. 9, for example, and is indicated by each score input pattern. The survey items of the basic form and ground subsidence are input based on the basic form and the scores of the respective survey items shown in FIG. 6 by the check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. A score reference table of combinations of scores of the diagnosis sub-items of the ground subsidence is shown. Therefore, according to the score reference table, whether the foundation type is an independent foundation, a cloth foundation, a solid foundation, a pile foundation, or a different foundation, the score of the subsidence diagnosis item is 0, 1 or 0.5. The check input of the score shown in the table is made. The check items corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (C) indicate the situation and guideline where the uneven settlement is expected as the score reference table in the basic peripheral situation survey items.
[0033]
For example, as shown in FIG. 10, the safety at the time of earthquake is further classified into the foundation type, the ease of shaking of the ground, and the design age of the pile foundation, and is indicated by each score input pattern. The check items corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (C) are used to investigate the basic form and the ease of ground shaking shown in FIG. A score reference table for combinations of scores of diagnostic sub-items is shown, and the check items corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. Is shown.
[0034]
As shown in Fig. 11, for example, the safety during liquefaction / flow is further subdivided into basic items, liquefaction phenomena, liquefaction measures during construction, and site surrounding conditions, and is indicated by each score input pattern. It is. For each survey item of basic form and liquefaction phenomenon, liquefaction countermeasures during construction, and surrounding area of the site, check the form corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 8 is a combination of the scores of the diagnostic sub-items for the liquefaction phenomenon shown in FIG. 8, a combination of the precautions and the scores of the diagnostic sub-items for the liquefaction phenomenon shown in FIG. Each score combination of the diagnosis sub-items of the phenomenon is shown as a score reference table.
[0035]
12 to 15 show examples of input of survey items and scores for each of the middle items into which the building main structure items are classified, and FIG. 12 shows examples of input of specific survey items and scores of possessed seismic performance. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of input of specific survey items and scores of the planar shape, FIG. 14 is a diagram of examples of input of specific survey items and scores of the elevation shape, and FIG. 15 is a concrete example of deterioration over time. It is a figure which shows the example of an input of various investigation items and scores.
[0036]
(C-1) Seismic performance possessed, (C-2) Plane shape, (C-3) Elevated shape, (C-4) Middle items of deterioration over time (diagnostic items) Among them, for example, as shown in FIG. 12, the possessed seismic performance is further subdivided into the design age, the amount of short pillars, and the amount of walls as survey items, and is indicated by respective score input patterns. The survey items of the design age are indicated by the check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (A), and the respective numerical ranges are shown. As the score determination information of 0 points with low earthquake resistance, almost all are short pillars on one floor and 1 point with high earthquake resistance, according to the check sheet corresponding to the second score input pattern shown in FIG. There is no short column, normal or neither score judgment information of 0.5 points, part of the short floor is shown on the arbitrary floor, and the figure of the presence or absence of short columns from the elevation is shown as reference information, The check item corresponding to the second score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (B) is used for the survey item of the wall quantity, and as a score determination information of 0 points each having low earthquake resistance, one small point having high earthquake resistance Score judgment information As greater, as ordinary or score determination information for both the 0.5 point not say, with usually shown, the wall of a guide table is shown as reference information.
[0037]
For example, as shown in FIG. 13, the planar shape is further classified into planar irregularities and wall layouts as survey items, and is indicated by respective score input patterns. The check item corresponding to the second score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (B) is used as the zero-point score determination information with low earthquake resistance for the planar irregularity survey items. The score judgment information for one point is relatively shaped or shaped, and the score judgment information for normal or neither is relatively irregular. The check items corresponding to the second score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (B) are used as the 0-point score judgment information with low earthquake resistance, and the unevenness and earthquake resistance are indicated in the wall layout survey items. As the score determination information of one point with a high, 0.5 points score determination information that is almost equal, normal, or neither can be described as being slightly unevenly distributed, and the wall layout and structural balun Estimated is shown.
[0038]
For example, as shown in FIG. 14, the elevation shape is further subdivided into elevation irregularity and pilotity as survey items, and is indicated by respective score input patterns. The check item corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (C) shows the elevation / cross-sectional shape and the structural balance as a score reference table in the investigation item of the irregular shape of the elevation, The check items corresponding to the second score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (B) are used for the survey items of the piloti. As the score judgment information of 0 points having low earthquake resistance, one point score having high uneven distribution and earthquake resistance As judgment information, there is none, normal, or neither score judgment information of 0.5 points, which is present but equal is shown, and the presence or absence of a piloty from the elevation is shown as reference information.
[0039]
For example, as shown in FIG. 15, the aging deterioration is further subdivided into construction years, deterioration status / maintenance, disaster experience, extension / renovation / use change, and is indicated as a score input pattern. The survey items for the building years are indicated by the check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown in FIG. 4A, and the survey items for the deterioration status / maintenance are shown in FIG. The check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4) shows the standard of the deterioration status as a score reference table, and the investigation items of the disaster experience include the first score input pattern shown in FIG. With the corresponding check sheet, as the score judgment information of 0 points with low earthquake resistance, there is fire / earthquake disaster experience that affects structural members, as score judgment information of 1 point with high earthquake resistance, there is no disaster experience, A score of 0.5, which is normal or neither, is minor but has experienced disaster, and the survey items for extension / renovation / use change are shown in Fig. 4 (A). By using the check sheet corresponding to the first score input pattern shown, there is an extension / renovation / use change as the score judgment information of 0 points with low earthquake resistance, respectively, and the extension / renovation / use as the score judgment information of 1 point with high earthquake resistance As a score determination information of 0.5 points that is not changed, normal, or neither, a small degree of renovation is indicated.
[0040]
FIG. 16 to FIG. 18 show input examples of survey items and scores of each middle item into which building secondary member items are classified, and FIG. 16 is a diagram showing specific survey items and score input examples of inner and outer walls. FIG. 17 is a diagram showing a specific survey item and score input example of the opening, and FIG. 18 is a diagram showing a specific survey item and score input example of the drop risk.
[0041]
Among the middle items (diagnostic sub-items) of (D-1) inner and outer walls, (D-2) openings, and (D-3) fall hazards, which classify major items of building secondary members, As shown in FIG. 16, the survey items are further classified into deterioration status and soft / soft relationship, and are indicated by respective score input patterns. In the check item of the deterioration state, the check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4C shows a standard of the deterioration state of the inner and outer walls as a score reference table. In the check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4 (C), a guideline of the flexibility relationship between the main structure and the secondary member, the main structure, the secondary member, and the like are shown as a score reference table.
[0042]
For example, as shown in FIG. 17, the openings are also subdivided into deterioration conditions and soft / rigid relationships as survey items, as shown in FIG. 17, and are indicated by respective score input patterns. The items include a check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. 4C, an indication of the deterioration state of the opening, an indication of the flexibility relationship between the main structure and the secondary member, the main structure, the secondary Each member is shown as a score reference table.
[0043]
For example, as shown in FIG. 18, the fall risk is a survey item of the surrounding environment and the suppression effect. The check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. , The surrounding environment rank, and the suppression effect rank are shown as a score reference table.
[0044]
FIGS. 19 to 20 show examples of input of survey items and scores for each of the middle items into which the workpiece items are classified, and FIG. 19 is a diagram showing examples of input of specific survey items and scores of the rooftop workpiece. FIG. 20 is a diagram illustrating an example of input of specific survey items and scores of an outdoor workpiece.
[0045]
Among the items (E-1) rooftop workpieces that classify the major items of the workpiece and (E-2) middle items (diagnostic sub-items) of the outdoor workpiece, the rooftop workpiece is further rooftop as shown in FIG. 19, for example. The survey items are subdivided into equipment, rooftop accessories, and chimneys, and are indicated by their score input patterns. And, for each survey item of the rooftop equipment, rooftop accessories, and chimneys, the check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. Deformation of iron parts such as deformation, rust, and corrosion, deterioration of anchors such as rust and corrosion of fixed parts, deterioration of fixed jigs, and the state of rooftop work with checkpoints for reinforcement measures The survey reference, cooling tower, elevated water tank, gondola, tower antenna, advertising tower, billboards, handrails / fences, chimneys and other types of rooftop structures are shown in the score reference table.
[0046]
For example, as shown in FIG. 20, the outdoor work is further subdivided into an external evacuation staircase, a wall accessory, and an outer perimeter as survey items, and is indicated by each score input pattern. Then, for each of the survey items of the external escape staircase, the wall accessory, and the outer periphery, the check sheet corresponding to the third score input pattern shown in FIG. A guideline for checking the status of the workpiece and the type of the outdoor workpiece are shown as a score reference table.
[0047]
FIG. 21 is a diagram showing an example of output of a diagnostic sheet, FIG. 22 is a diagram showing an example of calculating weighting factors, and FIG. 23 is a diagram showing an example of output of a radar chart. FIG. 21 shows an output example of a diagnostic sheet in which diagnosis of each diagnostic item and comprehensive diagnosis are executed based on the score input of each investigation item in FIGS. 5 to 20 and the score input of each diagnosis sub-item. The diagnosis sheet shown here is obtained by inputting a survey score and a fine item score, obtaining a diagnostic item score according to a preset fine item weighting factor, and obtaining an overall score according to the diagnostic item weighting factor. The diagnostic item weighting factor (determined value) is obtained by calculating the weighting factor shown in FIG. 22 from the importance pair comparison table of the diagnostic item shown in FIG. Further, (A) ground, (B) foundation, (C) building main structure, (D) building secondary member, (E) fine item weight coefficient (determined value) of the workpiece as shown in FIG. A) For the ground (A-1), (A-2), ... by comparison of each diagnostic sub-item (medium item), (B) for the basis (B-1), (B-2), ... (C) The main structure of the building, (D) The secondary member of the building, and (E) The workpiece are similarly calculated and compared. Then, FIG. 23 shows an example in which the diagnosis result of each diagnosis item is output as a radar chart. This allows an overview of the earthquake-resistant diagnosis.
[0048]
In addition, this invention is not limited to the said embodiment, A various deformation | transformation is possible. For example, in the above embodiment, the score of the middle item (diagnostic item) is input with reference to the score input of the survey item. However, as with the middle item, a weighting factor is set for each survey item. The score of the middle item may be calculated by weighting from the survey items.
[0049]
【The invention's effect】
  As is clear from the above description, according to the present invention, the earthquake-proof performance of the building can be diagnosed.DoA simple seismic diagnosis method,
It is classified into the diagnosis items of the five evaluation elements of the ground, foundation, building main structure, building secondary member, and workpiece, and the ground diagnosis items are landslide / slope failure, land subsidence, ease of ground shaking, liquefaction phenomenon The basic diagnostic items are always in the diagnosis sub-items (separate settlement), seismic safety, liquefaction / flow safety sub-diagnostic items, the main structure of the diagnostic items are seismic performance, planar shape, Diagnosis items for elevation shape and aging deterioration, diagnosis items for secondary parts of buildings for diagnosis items for inner and outer walls, openings, and fall hazards, diagnosis items for workpieces for rooftop and outdoor workpieces Classify them into sub-items,
A diagnostic fine item weighting factor is set for each of the diagnostic subitems of the ground, and the score inputted to each of the diagnostic subitems and the diagnostic subitem weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the diagnostic item of the ground Ground diagnosis processing means for obtaining the score of,
A diagnostic subitem weighting factor is set for each of the basic diagnostic subitems, and the score and the diagnostic subitem weighting factor input to each of the subdiagnostic subitems are calculated and aggregated to calculate the basic diagnostic item. Basic diagnosis processing means for obtaining the score of,
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the building main structure, and a score input to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the building owner A building main structure diagnostic processing means for obtaining a score of a structural diagnostic item;
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the building secondary member, and a score input to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the building A building secondary member diagnosis processing means for obtaining a score of a diagnostic item of the secondary member;
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the workpiece, and a score inputted to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the Work piece diagnosis processing means for obtaining a score of a diagnostic item,
A diagnostic item weighting coefficient is set for each of the diagnostic items, and the total score of the seismic diagnosis is obtained by calculating and summing each of the diagnostic item scores and the diagnostic item weighting coefficient totaled by the respective diagnostic processing means. Comprehensive diagnosis processing means for obtaining
Output means for outputting a diagnosis result including each score and total score of each diagnosis item obtained by each diagnosis processing means;
And input the score of each diagnostic sub-item based on the judgment information for each input score of the survey item further subdivided into each diagnostic sub-item or the check information showing the judgment information and the reference information or score reference table In each of the diagnostic processing means, a diagnostic fine item weighting coefficient is set so that the score when the seismic resistance is all high is a perfect score, and in the comprehensive diagnostic processing means, each of the diagnostic processing When all the scores obtained by the means are full scores, set the diagnostic item weighting factor that is apportioned so that the total score becomes a perfect score, and input the score of each diagnostic subitem based on the check sheet or score reference table The diagnosis results including the respective scores and the overall score of each diagnostic item output by the output means, the earthquake resistance of each diagnostic item is high Performing a low of diagnosis and comprehensive diagnosis of whether the high or low earthquake resistance of buildingsSo, just by entering the score according to each diagnostic detail item, you can easily make earthquake-resistant diagnosis in a short time without making complicated measurement and analysis by making use of the knowledge base of each specialist engineer. The cause analysis of the problem can be easily performed based on the score and the score of the item and the detailed diagnosis item.
[0050]
In addition, for the input of scoring for each diagnostic sub-item, a check sheet that shows a judgment index based on three levels of whether earthquake resistance is low, high, normal or neither can be combined 3 Use a check sheet that shows judgment indicators according to the stage, and use check sheets based on survey items that are further sub-classified for each diagnosis sub-item, so create a check sheet based on the expert's knowledge base accumulated so far However, the diagnostic result can be presented in a radar chart or a finding only by scoring using the check method.
[0053]
The output means divides the score of each diagnosis item by the diagnosis processing means into five ranks, and the earthquake resistance is considerably low, the earthquake resistance is relatively low, the earthquake resistance is normal, and the earthquake resistance is relatively high corresponding to the five ranks. , Output any of the findings that the earthquake resistance is quite high, output the score of each diagnostic item on a radar chart with 5 evaluation axes, divide the score of comprehensive diagnosis by comprehensive diagnosis processing means into 3 ranks, In response to the above, it is necessary to check the seismic performance by performing seismic diagnosis with high seismic performance. It can be presented in an easy-to-understand manner, and furthermore, diagnostic result information such as a diagnostic sheet can be easily sent by mail.
[Brief description of the drawings]
FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining an embodiment of a simple seismic diagnosis system according to the present invention.
FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of an importance pair comparison table of diagnostic items used for weighting calculation setting.
FIG. 3 is a diagram for explaining an overview of processing by the simple seismic diagnosis system of the present embodiment.
FIG. 4 is a diagram for explaining an example of an input pattern of survey item scores;
FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a specific survey item and score input example of landslide / slope failure.
FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of input of specific survey items and scores for land subsidence.
[Fig. 7] Fig. 7 is a diagram showing an example of input of specific survey items and scores for the ease of shaking of the ground.
FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a specific survey item and score input example of the liquefaction phenomenon.
FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a specific survey item and score input example of normal soundness (unsettled settlement).
FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of specific survey items and scores for earthquake safety.
FIG. 11 is a diagram showing a specific survey item and score input example of safety during liquefaction / flow.
FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating an example of input of specific survey items and scores of possessed seismic performance.
FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an example of input of specific survey items and scores of a planar shape.
FIG. 14 is a diagram showing an example of input of specific survey items and scores of the elevation shape.
FIG. 15 is a diagram showing an example of input of specific survey items and scores for aging degradation.
FIG. 16 is a diagram illustrating an example of input of specific survey items and scores on the inner and outer walls.
FIG. 17 is a diagram illustrating an example of input of specific survey items and scores of an opening.
FIG. 18 is a diagram showing an example of specific investigation items and scores for drop risk.
FIG. 19 is a diagram illustrating a specific survey item and score input example of a rooftop workpiece.
FIG. 20 is a diagram illustrating a specific survey item and score input example of an outdoor workpiece.
FIG. 21 is a diagram illustrating an output example of a diagnostic sheet.
FIG. 22 is a diagram illustrating a calculation example of weighting factors.
FIG. 23 is a diagram illustrating an output example of a radar chart.
[Explanation of symbols]
DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 ... Ground item input processing part, 2 ... Basic item input processing part, 3 ... Building main structure item input processing part, 4 ... Building secondary member item input processing part, 5 ... Workpiece item input processing part, 6 ... Ground item Diagnostic processing unit, 7 ... Basic item diagnostic processing unit, 8 ... Building main structure item diagnostic processing unit, 9 ... Building secondary member item diagnostic processing unit, 10 ... Workpiece item diagnostic processing unit, 11 ... General diagnostic processing unit, 12 ... Weight calculation setting part, 13 ... Diagnosis result output part

Claims (6)

A simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis method for performing a diagnosis of the seismic performance of buildings,
It is classified into the diagnosis items of the five evaluation elements of the ground, foundation, building main structure, building secondary member, and workpiece, and the ground diagnosis items are landslide / slope failure, land subsidence, ease of ground shaking, liquefaction phenomenon The basic diagnostic items are always in the diagnosis sub-items (separate settlement), seismic safety, liquefaction / flow safety sub-diagnostic items, the main structure of the diagnostic items are seismic performance, planar shape, Diagnosis items for elevation shape and aging deterioration, diagnosis items for secondary parts of buildings for diagnosis items for inner and outer walls, openings, and fall hazards, diagnosis items for workpieces for rooftop and outdoor workpieces Classify them into sub-items,
A diagnostic fine item weighting factor is set for each of the diagnostic subitems of the ground, and the score inputted to each of the diagnostic subitems and the diagnostic subitem weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the diagnostic item of the ground Ground diagnosis processing means for obtaining the score of,
A diagnostic subitem weighting factor is set for each of the basic diagnostic subitems, and the score and the diagnostic subitem weighting factor input to each of the subdiagnostic subitems are calculated and aggregated to calculate the basic diagnostic item. Basic diagnosis processing means for obtaining the score of,
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the building main structure, and a score input to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the building owner A building main structure diagnostic processing means for obtaining a score of a structural diagnostic item;
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the building secondary member, and a score input to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the building A building secondary member diagnosis processing means for obtaining a score of a diagnostic item of the secondary member;
A diagnostic sub-item weighting coefficient is set for each diagnostic sub-item of the workpiece, and a score inputted to each of the diagnostic sub-items and the diagnostic sub-item weighting factor are calculated and aggregated to calculate the Work piece diagnosis processing means for obtaining a score of a diagnostic item,
A diagnostic item weighting coefficient is set for each of the diagnostic items, and the total score of the seismic diagnosis is obtained by calculating and summing each of the diagnostic item scores and the diagnostic item weighting coefficient totaled by the respective diagnostic processing means. Comprehensive diagnosis processing means for obtaining
Output means for outputting a diagnosis result including each score and total score of each diagnosis item obtained by each diagnosis processing means;
And input the score of each diagnostic sub-item based on the judgment information for each input score of the survey item further subdivided into each diagnostic sub-item or the check information showing the judgment information and the reference information or score reference table In each of the diagnostic processing means, a diagnostic fine item weighting coefficient is set so that the score when the seismic resistance is all high is a perfect score, and in the comprehensive diagnostic processing means, each of the diagnostic processing When all the scores obtained by the means are full scores, set the diagnostic item weighting factor that is apportioned so that the total score becomes a perfect score, and input the score of each diagnostic subitem based on the check sheet or score reference table The diagnosis results including the respective scores and the overall score of each diagnostic item output by the output means, the earthquake resistance of each diagnostic item is high Simple Seismic diagnostic methods and performing low or diagnosis and overall diagnosis of whether the high or low earthquake resistance of buildings. In the input of the score of each diagnosis sub-item, score judgment information or judgment information and reference information or score reference table according to whether the earthquake resistance is low, high, normal or neither can be shown. The simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis method according to claim 1, wherein a check sheet is used. For the input of the score of the basic diagnostic sub-item, a check sheet showing score judgment information or judgment information and reference information or a score reference table in three stages combining the basic format and the score of the sub-diagnostic sub-item The simple earthquake-resistant diagnosis method according to claim 1, wherein: The output means divides the score of each diagnosis item by each diagnosis processing means into five ranks, and the earthquake resistance is considerably low, the earthquake resistance is relatively low, the earthquake resistance is normal, and the earthquake resistance is corresponding to the five ranks. relatively high, simple seismic diagnosis method according to claim 1, wherein the outputs any findings of earthquake resistance is quite high. And the output means, simple seismic diagnosis method according to claim 1, wherein the outputting the scores of each diagnostic item by a radar chart according to five evaluation axis. The output means divides the score of the comprehensive diagnosis by the comprehensive diagnosis processing means into three ranks, and the earthquake resistance is high corresponding to the three ranks, it is necessary to perform the earthquake resistance diagnosis and check the earthquake resistance, the earthquake resistance is low simple seismic diagnosis method according to claim 1, wherein the reinforcing diagnosis assuming that outputs one of findings required.

Images