Advertisement

Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 369–388 | Cite as

Performance-based assessment of the Great Mosque of Algiers

  • M. RossiEmail author
  • S. Cattari
  • S. Lagomarsino
Original Research Paper

Abstract

The seismic Performance-Based Assessment (PBA) of monumental buildings requires to consider safety and conservation objectives, including also the possible presence of artistic assets. In order to face these issues, the case study of the Great Mosque of Algiers is analysed in this paper: in fact, besides to be one of the remaining Almoradiv architecture and the oldest mosque of the city, it is also characterized by the presence of a mihrâb, a decorated arched niche that represents an interesting artistic asset to be included in the PBA. Within this context, particular attention has been paid to the choice of the most reliable modelling strategy for the application of the displacement approach in the PBA procedure, as a function of different possible seismic behaviours. In the case of Great Mosque both the current state of the building and a virtual strengthened condition are analysed. It is worth noting that, while in the current state the seismic behaviour of the asset is well described by a set of macroelements that may be analysed independently (through 2D models), in the second case the strengthening intervention leads to the adoption of a 3D global model (indeed, the roof bracing promotes a “box-type” behaviour). In the paper, the integrate use of three different modelling strategies of different complexity is discussed: the finite element model, the equivalent frame approach and the macro-block model. The results of nonlinear analyses performed (static and kinematic) constitute the main tool to interpret the seismic response of the asset, perform the PBA and address the choice on the rehabilitation decisions. These latter in this case are mainly affected by the occurrence of too high deformations in local portions of the building, including that in which the artistic asset is located.

Keywords

Performance-based assessment Masonry modelling Nonlinear static analysis Nonlinear kinematic analysis Historical buildings 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under Grant agreement No. 244229 (www.perpetuate.eu). The authors are grateful to Zekagh Abdelwahab (Ecole Polytecnique d’Architecture et d’Urbanisme, Algeria) and to Prof. Djillali Benouar (University of Bab Ezzouar, Algeria) and Chergui Samia (University Said Dahleb, Algeria) for the data and support provided.

References

  1. Anthoine A, Magonette G, Magenes G (1995) Shear compression testing and analysis of brick masonry walls. In: Proceedings of the 10th European conference on earthquake engineering, Vienna, 1995, pp 1657–1662Google Scholar
  2. Beyer K, Mangalathu S (2013) Review of strength models for masonry spandrels. Bull Earthq Eng 11:521–542. doi: 10.1007/s10518-012-9394-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Binda L, Tiraboschi C, Abbaneo S (1997) Experimental research to characterize masonry materials. Mason Int 10(3):92–101Google Scholar
  4. Calderini C, Lagomarsino S (2008) Continuum model for in-plane anisotropic inelastic behavior of masonry. J Struct Eng 134(2):209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Calderini C, Cattari S, Lagomarsino S (2009) In-plane strength of unreinforced masonry piers. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38(2):243–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Calderini C, Cattari S, Lagomarsino S, Rossi M (2010) Review of existing models for global response and local mechanisms, PERPETUATE (EU-FP7 Research Project), Deliverable D7. www.perpetuate.eu/final-results/reports/
  7. Calderini C, Degli Abbati S, Cotič P, Kržan M, Bosiljkov V (2014) In-plane shear tests on masonry panels with plaster: correlation of structural damage and damage on artistic assets. Bull Earthq Eng. doi: 10.1007/s10518-014-9632-y
  8. Cattari S, Lagomarsino S (2008) A strength criterion for the flexural behaviour of spandrel in unreinforced masonry walls. In: Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 12–17, Oct 2008Google Scholar
  9. Cattari S, Lagomarsino S (2013) Masonry structures. In: Sullivan T, Calvi GM (eds) Developments in the field of displacement based seismic assessment, IUSS Press (PAVIA) and EUCENTRE, pp. 524, ISBN 978-88-6198-090-7Google Scholar
  10. Cattari S, Lagomarsino S, Bosiljkov V, D’Ayala D (2014) Sensitivity analysis for setting up the investigation protocol and defining proper confidence factors for masonry buildings. Bull Earthq Eng. doi: 10.1007/s10518-014-9648-3
  11. CEN (2005) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 3: assessment and retrofitting of buildings. EN1998-3:2005. ComitéEuropéen de Normalisation, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  12. De Canio G, Clemente P, Mongelli M, Rinaldis D, Roselli I, Calderini C, Rossi M (2012) Results of experimental test on damage measures and reference values to be considered, PERPETUATE (EU-FP7 Research Project), Deliverable D12. www.perpetuate.eu/final-results/reports/
  13. Fajfar P (2000) A non linear analysis method for performance-based seismic design. Earthq Spectra 16(3):573–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Faouzi G, Nasser L (2013) Scalar and vector probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: application for Algiers City. J Seismol. doi: 10.1007/s10950-013-9380-5
  15. Heyman J (1966) The stone skeleton. Int J Solids Struct 2:249–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gambarotta L, Lagomarsino S (1997) Damage models for the seismic response of brick masonry shear walls. Part I: the mortar joint model and its applications. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 26:423–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lagomarsino S (2014) Seismic assessment of rocking masonry structures. Bull Earthq Eng. doi: 10.1007/s10518-014-9609-x
  18. Lagomarsino S, Modaressi H, Pitilakis K, Bosjlikov V, Calderini C, D’Ayala D, Benouar D, Cattari S (2010) PERPETUATE Project: the proposal of a performance-based approach to earthquake protection of cultural heritage. Adv Mater Res 133–134:1119–1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lagomarsino S, Abbas N, Calderini C, Cattari S, Rossi M, Ginanni Corradini R, Marghella G, Mattolin F, Piovanello V (2011) Classification of cultural heritage assets and seismic damage variables for the identification of performance levels. In: Proceedings of structural repairs and maintenance of heritage architecture conference, WIT Press, pp 697–708. doi:  10.2495/STR110581
  20. Lagomarsino S, Penna A, Galasco A, Cattari S (2012) TREMURI program: seismic analyses of 3D masonry buildings, Release 2.0, University of Genoa, Italy, mailto: tremuri@gmail.comGoogle Scholar
  21. Lagomarsino S, Penna A, Galasco A, Cattari S (2013) TREMURI program: an equivalent frame model for the nonlinear seismic analysis of masonry buildings. Eng Struct 56:1787–1799. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.08.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lagomarsino S, Ottonelli D (2012) A Macro-Block program for the seismic assessment (MB-PERPETUATE). PERPETUATE (EU-FP7 Research Project), Deliverable D29. www.perpetuate.eu/final-results/reports/
  23. Lagomarsino S, Cattari S (2014) PERPETUATE guidelines for seismic performance-based assessment of cultural heritage masonry structures. Bull Earthq Eng. doi:  10.1007/s10518-014-9674-1
  24. Magenes G, Calvi GM (1997) In-plane seismic response of brick masonry walls. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 26:1091–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mann W, Müller H (1980) Failure of shear-stressed masonry—an enlarged theory, tests and application to shear-walls. In: Proceedings of international symposium on load-bearing Brickwork, London, UK, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  26. Milani G, Lourenço P, Tralli A (2007) 3D homogenized limit analysis of masonry buildings under horizontal loads. Eng Struct 29:3134–3148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. NTC (2008) Decreto Ministeriale 14/1/2008. Norme tecniche per le costruzioni. Ministry of Infrastructures and Transportations. G.U. S.O. n.30 on 4/2/2008; 2008 (in Italian)Google Scholar
  28. Page AW (1983) The strength of brick masonry under biaxial tension-compression. Int J Mason Constr 3(1):26–31Google Scholar
  29. Roca P, Cervera M, Gariup G, Pelà L (2010) Structural analysis of masonry historical constructions. Classical and advanced approaches. Arch Comput Methods Eng 17:299–325. doi: 10.1007/s11831-010-9046-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rossi M, Cattari S, Lagomarsino S, Benouar D, Abdelwahab Z, Samia C (2014) Performance-based assessment of the Great Mosque of Algiers, Proc. of the \(2^{nd}\) International Conference on Protection of Historical Constructions, F.M. Mazzolani and G. Altay Eds, pp. 347–353, ISBN 978-975-518-361-9Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil, Chemical and Environmental Engineering (DICCA)University of GenoaGenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations