Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 13, Issue 10, pp 2995–3014 | Cite as

Seismic vulnerability of building aggregates through hybrid and indirect assessment techniques

  • Rui Maio
  • Romeu Vicente
  • Antonio Formisano
  • Humberto Varum
Original Research Paper

Abstract

This work approaches the seismic vulnerability assessment of an old stone masonry building aggregate, located in San Pio delle Camere (Abruzzo, Italy), slightly affected by the 2009 April 6th earthquake occurred in L’Aquila and its districts. This building aggregate has been modelled by using the 3muri® software for seismic analysis of masonry constructions. On one hand, static non-linear numerical analyses were performed to obtain capacity curves together with the prediction of damage distributions for the input seismic action (hybrid technique). On the other hand, indirect techniques, based on different vulnerability index formulations, were used for assessing the building aggregate’s behaviour under earthquake action. The activities carried out have provided a clear framework on the seismic vulnerability of building aggregates, as well as aid future retrofitting interventions.

Keywords

Seismic vulnerability Building aggregates Macro-elements Fragility curves Damage distributions Vulnerability index 

References

  1. Ademović N, Oliveira DV (2012) Seismic assessment of a typical masonry residential building in Bosnia Herzegovina. In: Proceeding of the 15th world conference of earthquake engineering—WCEE, Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  2. Benedetti D, Petrini V (1984) Sulla Vulnerabilità Sismica degli Edifici in Muratura: proposta di un Metodo di Valutazione. L’industria Italiana delle Costruzioni 149(1):66–74 (In Italian)Google Scholar
  3. Bernardini A, Giovinazzi S, Lagomarsino S, Parodi S (2007) Vulnerabilità e previsione di Danno a Scala Territoriale secondo una metodologia Macrosismica coerente con la Scala EMS-98. In: Proceedings of the 12th Italian conference on earthquake engineering, 10–14 June, Pisa, Italy (in Italian)Google Scholar
  4. Binda L, Baronio G, Cardani G, Penazzi D, Tedeschi C, Tongini FR (2001) Il Progetto di Conservazione, 174–197. S. Pesenti, Alinea (in Italian)Google Scholar
  5. Calvi GM, Pinho R, Magenes G, Bommer JJ, Restrepo-Vélez LF, Crowley H (2006) Development of seismic vulnerability assessment methodologies over the past 30 years. ISET J Earthq Technol 472(43):75–104Google Scholar
  6. Candela M, Cattari S, Lagomarsino S, Fonti R, Pagliuca E (2011) Prove in situ per la Valutazione della Risposta nel Piano di un Pannello Murario in un Edificio a L’Aquila. In: Proceedings of the 14th Italian conference on earthquake engineering—ANIDIS. Italian National Association of Earthquake Engineering, Bari, Italy (in Italian)Google Scholar
  7. Carocci CF, (2001) Guidelines for the safety and preservation of historical centres in seismic areas. In: Historical constructions, Guimarães, Portugal, pp 145–166Google Scholar
  8. Chever L (2012) Use of seismic assessment methods for planning vulnerability reduction of existing building stock. In: Proceedings of the 15th world conference on earthquake engineering—WCEE, Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  9. Chopra AK, Goel RK (1999) Capacity-demand-diagram methods based on inelastic design spectrum. Earthq Spectra 15:637–656. doi:10.1193/1.1586065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. DM (2008) Decreto Ministeriale 14/01/2008. Nuove Norme tecniche delle Costruzioni (in Italian)Google Scholar
  11. Erdik M (2007) Earthquake disaster scenario prediction and loss modelling for urban areas. Lessloss report. Risk mitigation for earthquakes and landslides. IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  12. FEMA (2003) Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology: earthquake model. Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, Washington, DC, Technical reportGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferreira TM, Vicente R, Varum H (2012) Vulnerability assessment of building aggregates: a macroseimic approach. In: Proceedings of the 15th world conference on earthquake engineering—WCEE, Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferreira TM, Vicente R, Mendes da Silva JAR, Varum H, Costa A (2013) Seismic vulnerability assessment of historical urban centres: case study of the old city centre in Seixal, Portugal. Bull Earthq Eng 11:1753–1773. doi:10.1007/s10518-013-9447-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fonti R, Formisano A, Mazzolani FM (2013) Le strutture ad arco negli aggregati su pendio: un caso studio nel centro storico di San Pio delle Camere (AQ). In: Proceedings of the 15th Italian conference on earthquake engineering, Padova University Press, Padova, Italy (in Italian)Google Scholar
  16. Formisano A (2012) Seismic behaviour and retrofitting of the Poggio Picenze Historical Centre damaged by the L’Aquila earthquake. In: Topping BHV, (ed) Proceedings of the eleventh international conference on computational structures technology, Civil-Comp Press, Stirlingshire, UK, Paper 199. doi:10.4203/ccp.99.199
  17. Formisano A, Di Feo P, Grippa, MR, Florio G (2010a) L’Aquila earthquake: a survey in the historical centre of Castelvecchio Subequo. In: Proceedings of the COST action C26 final conference “urban habitat constructions under catastrophic events”. Federico M. Mazzolani, Chair, Naples, 16–18 September 2010, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp 371–376, ISBN: 978-0-415-60685-1Google Scholar
  18. Formisano A, Mazzolani FM, Florio G, Landolfo R (2010b) A Quick Methodology for seismic vulnerability assessment of historical masonry aggregates. In: Proceedings of the COST action C26 final conference “urban habitat constructions under catastrophic events”, Federico M. Mazzolani, Chair, Naples, 16–18 September 2010, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp 577–582, ISBN: 978-0-415-60685-1Google Scholar
  19. Formisano A, Florio G, Landolfo R, Mazzolani FM (2011) Numerical calibration of a simplified procedure for the seismic behaviour assessment of masonry building aggregates. In: Topping BHV, Tsompanakis Y (ed) Proceedings of the thirteenth international conference on civil, structural and environmental engineering computing, Civil-Comp Press, Stirlingshire, UK, Paper 172. doi:10.4203/ccp.96.172
  20. Formisano A, Castaldo C, Mazzolani FM (2013) Non-linear analysis of masonry building compounds: a comparison of numerical and theoretical results. In: Topping BHV, Iványi P (eds) Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on civil, structural and environmental engineering computing, Civil-Comp Press, Stirlingshire, UK, Paper 66. doi:10.4203/ccp.102.66
  21. Freeman SA (1998) Development and use of capacity spectrum method. In: Proceedings of the 6th US NCEE conference on earthquake engineering, Seattle, Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Giovinazzi S (2005) The vulnerability assessment and damage scenario in seismic risk analysis, PhD Thesis, University of Florence, Florence, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  23. Giovinazzi S, Lagomarsino S (2006) Damage assessment of current buildings at territorial scale: a mechanical model calibrated on a macroseismic vulnerability model. Genoa, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  24. GNDT-SSN (1994) Scheda di esposizione e vulnerabilità e di rilevamento danni di primo livello e secondo livello (muratura e cemento armato). Grupo Nazionale per la Difesa dai Terrmoti, Rome, Italy (in Italian)Google Scholar
  25. Grünthal G (1998) European Macroseismic Scale 1998 (EMS-98), European Seismological Commission, Subcommission on Engineering Seismology, Working Group Macroseismic Scales 15:101Google Scholar
  26. Guagenti E, Petrini V (1989) Il caso delle Vecchie Costruzioni: verso una nuova legge danni-intensità. In: Proceedings of the 12th Italian conference on earthquake engineering—ANIDIS. Italian National Association of Earthquake Engineering, Pisa, Italy (in Italian)Google Scholar
  27. Indirli MS, Kouris LA, Formisano A, Borg RP, Mazzolani FM (2013) Seismic damage assessment of unreinforced masonry structures after the Abruzzo 2009 earthquake: the case study of the historical centers of L’Aquila and Castelvecchio. Int J Archit Herit 7:536–578. doi:10.1080/15583058.2011.654050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lagomarsino S, Giovinazzi S (2006) Macroseismic and mechanical models for the vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 4:415–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Maio R (2013) Seismic vulnerability assessment of old stone masonry building aggregates. MSc Thesis, Civil Engineering Department of the University of Aveiro, Aveiro, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  30. Mannari A, Scaramuzzino L, Stefanelli S et al (2011) Studi E Indagini Sul Rischio Sismico Del Centro Storico Di San Pio Delle Camere (AQ). Studi e Indagini sul Rischio Sismico del Centro Storico di San Pio delle Camere, 8800381:245 (in Italian)Google Scholar
  31. Margottini C, Molin D, Narcisi B, Serva L (1992) Intensity versus ground motion: a new approach using Italian data. Eng Geol 33(1):45–58, ISSN 0013-7952. doi:10.1016/0013-7952(92)90034-V
  32. Marques R, Vasconcelos G, Lourenço PB (2012) Pushover analysis of a modern aggregate of masonry building through macro-element modelling. In: Proceedings of the 15th international brick and block masonry conference, Florianopolis, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  33. Mouroux P, Le Brun B (2006) Presentation of RISK-UE project. Bull Earthq Eng 4:323–339. doi:10.1007/s10518-006-9020-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Murphy JR, O’Brien LJ (1977) The correlation of peak ground acceleration amplitude with seismic intensity and other physical parameters. Bull Seismol Soc Am 67(3):877–915Google Scholar
  35. ReLUIS (2010) Linee Guida per il rilievo, l’analisi ed il progetto di interventi di riparazione e consolidamento sismico di edifici in muratura in aggregato, (draft version n.3). Developed by a joint working group: ReLUIS, Dipartimento Protezione Civile, Ufficio del Vice-Commissario Delegato per la Messa in Sicurezza dei Beni Culturali and Struttura Tecnica di Missione (in Italian)Google Scholar
  36. Salamon A, Amit R, Baer G et al. (2010) The Mw 6.3, 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, Central Italy: report of the GSI team visit to the affected area. Technical report, Jerusalem, IsraelGoogle Scholar
  37. Scheda di Aggregato (2010) Scheda di Aggregato No.8800378 of San Pio delle Camere, Italy. Technical report, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy (in Italian)Google Scholar
  38. Spence R, Bommer J, Re DDEL (2003) Comparing loss estimation with observed damage: a study of the 1999 Kocaeli Earthquake in Turkey. Bull Earthq Eng 1:83–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vicente R (2008) Estratégias e Metodologias para Intervenções de Reabilitação Urbana—Avaliação da Vulnerabilidade e do Risco Sísmico do Edificado da Baixa de Coimbra. PhD Thesis, Civil Engineering Department of the University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal (in Portuguese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rui Maio
    • 1
  • Romeu Vicente
    • 1
  • Antonio Formisano
    • 2
  • Humberto Varum
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal
  2. 2.Department of Structures for Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of Naples Federico IINaplesItaly
  3. 3.Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations