Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Two frugal options to assess class fragility and seismic safety for low-rise reinforced concrete school buildings in Southern Italy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A study is presented on the seismic fragility of a sample of 15 reinforced-concrete school buildings built between 1960 and 1980s in the province of Foggia, Southern Italy, for which near-perfect information is provided on geometrical and mechanical parameters. In particular, the focus is on the application of two probabilistic methods, employing different compromises in terms of complexity versus accuracy. First, a Eurocode 8 compatible nonlinear static approach is employed, which is augmented via the use of the regression expressions of the SPO2FRAG tool to incorporate record-to-record variability. Second, a nonlinear dynamic approach is used to directly account for record-to-record variability via a constrained multi-stripe analysis. In particular, in view of practitioners’ needs (analysis time, computational efforts, software used), a practical mode for application of the multi-stripe analyses is proposed, based on conducting few stripe analyses, in order to predict the behavior of structures in both the elastic and inelastic ranges of response. Both the static and the dynamic approaches are shown to be viable alternatives, offering fairly matching results at the individual building-level and even closer predictions at the level of ensemble regional fragility curves that incorporate both inter-building and intra-building uncertainties.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aiello MA, Ciampoli PL, Fiore A, Perrone D, Uva G (2017) Influence of infilled frames on seismic vulnerability assessment of recurrent building typologies. Ing Sismica 34(4):58–80

    Google Scholar 

  • ASCE 7–16 (2017) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures: commentary. Am Soc Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784412916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Augenti N, Cosenza E, Dolce M, Manfredi G, Masi A, Samela L (2004) Performance of school buildings during the 2002 Molise, Italy earthquake. Earthq Spectra 20(S1):S257–S270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakalis K, Vamvatsikos D (2018) Seismic fragility functions via nonlinear response history analysis. J Struct Eng 144(10):04018181. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker JW (2015) Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthq Spectra 31(1):579–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltzopoulos G, Baraschino R, Iervolino I et al (2017) SPO2FRAG: software for seismic fragility assessment based on static pushover. Bull Earthq Eng 15:4399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltzopoulos G, Baraschino R, Iervolino I (2018) On the number of records for structural risk estimation in PBEE. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borzi B, Pinho R, Crowley H (2008) Simplified pushover-based vulnerability analysis for large scale assessment of RC buildings. Eng Struct 30(3):804–820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caprili S, Nardini L, Salvatore W (2012) Evaluation of seismic vulnerability of a complex RC existing building by linear and nonlinear modeling approaches. Bull Earthq Eng 10:913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Celarec D, Dolsek M (2012) Practice-oriented probabilistic seismic performance assessment of infilled frames with consideration of shear failure of columns. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42:1339–1360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CEN (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance, EN 1998. European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Clementi F, Quagliarini E, Maracchini G, Lenci S (2015) Post-World War II Italian school buildings: typical and specific seismic vulnerabilities. J Build Eng 4:152–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombi M, Borzi B, Crowley H, Onida M, Meroni F, Pinho R (2008) Deriving vulnerability curves with Italian earthquake damage data. Bull Earthq Eng 6(3):485–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornell CA, Krawinkler H (2000) Progress and challenges in seismic performance assessment, PEER News

  • Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch D (2002) Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC federal emergency management agency steel moment frame guidelines. J Struct Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:4(526)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CSI (2018) SAP2000, Advanced 18 structural analysis program–manual. Computer and Structures Inc., Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Ayala D, Meslem A, Vamvatsikos D, Porter K, Rossetto T (2015) Guidelines for analytical vulnerability assessment of low/mid-rise buildings. GEM Technical Report 2014-12. Global Earthquake Model Foundation, Pavia, Italy. https://doi.org/10.13117/GEM.VULN-MOD.TR2014.12

  • De Luca F, Vamvatsikos D, Iervolino I (2013) Near-optimal piecewise linear fits of static pushover capacity curves for equivalent SDOF analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42(4):523–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Gaudio C, Ricci P, Verderame GM, Manfredi G (2015) Development and urban-scale application of a simplified method for seismic fragility assessment of RC building. Eng Struct 91:40–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Gaudio C, Ricci P, Verderame GM, Manfredi G (2016) Observed and predicted earthquake damage scenarios: the case study of Pettino (L’Aquila) after the 6th April 2009 event. Bull Earthq Eng 14(10):2643–2678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Ludovico M, Digrisolo A, Moroni C et al (2018) Remarks on damage and response of school buildings after the Central Italy earthquake sequence. Bull Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0332-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DM 17/01/2018 (2008) Aggiornamento delle Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni. Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 42. del 20/02/2018. Rome (in Italian)

  • Dolce M, Di Bucci D (2017) Comparing recent Italian earthquakes. Bull Earthq Eng 15:497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolce M, Goretti A (2015) Building damage assessment after the 2009 Abruzzi earthquake. Bull Earthq Eng 13:2241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA (2009) Quantification of building seismic performance factors. FEMA P-695, prepared by Applied Technology Council for Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC

  • Fiore A, Porco F, Uva G, Mezzina M (2013) On the dispersion of data collected by in situ diagnostic of the existing concrete. Constr Build Mater 47:208–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galanis PH, Moehle JP (2015) Development of collapse indicators for risk assessment of older-type reinforced concrete buildings. Earthq Spectra. https://doi.org/10.1193/080613EQS225M

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giardini D et al (2013) Seismic hazard harmonization in Europe (SHARE): online data resource. https://doi.org/10.12686/SED-00000001-SHARE. http://portal.share-eu.org:8080/jetspeed/portal/

  • Hannewald P, Michel C, Lestuzzi P, Crowley H, Pinguet J, Fäh D (2020) Development and validation of simplified mechanics-based capacity curves for scenario-based risk assessment of school buildings in Basel. Eng Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iervolino I, Baltzopoulos G, Vamvatsikos D (2016) SPO2FRAG V1.0: software for pushover-based derivation of seismic fragility curves ECCOMAS Congress 2016. In: Proceedings of the 7th European congress on computational methods in applied sciences and engineering

  • ISTAT (2011) 15° Censimento generale della popolazione e delle abitazioni. https://www.istat.it/it(in Italian)

  • Jalayer F (2003) Direct probabilistic seismic anaysis: implementing non-linear dynamic assessments. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford

  • Jalayer F, Cornell CA (2009) Alternative non-linear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38(8):951–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalayer F, Ebrahimian H (2020) Seismic reliability assessment and the nonergodicity in the modelling parameter uncertainties. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 49:434–457. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalayer F, Franchin P, Pinto PE (2007) A scalar damage measure for seismic reliability analysis of RC frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36(13):2059–2079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katsanos EI, Sextos AG, Manolis GD (2010) Selection of earthquake ground motion records: a state-of-the-art review from a structural engineering perspective. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(4):157–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazantzi AK, Vamvatsikos D (2015) Intensity measure selection for vulnerability studies of building classes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 44(15):2057–2073. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohrangi M, Vamvatsikos D (2016) INNOSEIS ground motion set for medium seismicity European sites. http://innoseis.ntua.gr/medium_record_set.rar.

  • Kohrangi M, Bazzurro P, Vamvatsikos D, Spillatura A (2017a) Conditional spectrum based ground motion record selection using average spectral acceleration. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46(10):1667–1685. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohrangi M, Vamvatsikos D, Bazzurro P (2017b) Site dependence and record selection schemes for building fragility and regional loss assessment. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46(10):1625–1643. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liel AB, Haselton CB, Deierlain GG (2011) Seismic collapse safety of reinforced concrete buildings. II: Comparative assessment of nonductile and ductile moment frames. J Struct Eng 137(4):492–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin T, Haselton CB, Baker JW (2013) Conditional spectrum-based ground motion selection. Part I: hazard consistency for risk-based assessments. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42(12):1847–1865

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maffei J, Bazzurro P (2004) Special Issue on the 2002 Molise, Italy earthquake. Earthq Spectra 20(1):358

    Google Scholar 

  • Masi A, Chiauzzi L, Santarsiero G et al (2016) Seismic response of RC buildings during the Mw 6.0 August 24, 2016 Central Italy earthquake: the Amatrice case study. Bull Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0277-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melo J, Varum H, Rossetto T (2015) Experimental cyclic behaviour of RC columns with plain bars and proposal for Eurocode 8 formula improvement. Eng Struct 88:22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.01.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moehle J, Deierlein GG (2004) A framework methodology for performance based earthquake engineering. In: Proceedings of 13th world conference on earthquake engineering CD-ROM. Canadian Association for Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2017) Modeling techniques for the seismic assessment of the existing Italian RC frame structures. J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1360224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2018) Quantification of modelling uncertainty in existing Italian RC frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 47(4):1054–1074. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly G, Perrone D, Fox M, Monteiro R, Filiatraut A (2017) Seismic assessment and loss estimation of existing school buildings in Italy. Eng Struct 168:142–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly GJ, Perrone D, Fox M, Monteiro R, Filiatrault A, Lanese I, Pavese A (2019) System identification and seismic assessment modeling implications for Italian school buildings. J Perform Constr Facil. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cf.1943-5509.0001237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porco F, Ruggieri S, Uva G (2018) Seismic assessment of irregular existing building: appraisal of the influence of compressive strength variation by means of nonlinear conventional and multimodal static analysis. Ing Sismica 35(3):64–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter KA (2003) An overview of PEER’s performance-based earthquake engineering methodology. In: Proceedings of 9th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (ICASP9), Civil Engineering Risk and Reliability Association CERRA, San Francisco

  • R.D.L 2229 Norme per l’esecuzione di opere in conglomerato cementizio semplice o armato (1939) (in Italian)

  • Rossetto T, Elnashai A (2003) Derivation of vulnerability functions for European-type RC structures based on observational data. J Eng Struct 25:1241–1263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rota M, Penna A, Strobbia CL (2008) Processing Italian damage data to derive typological fragility curves. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 28(10–11):933–947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggieri S, Porco F, Uva G (2020a) A practical approach for estimating the floor deformability in existing RC buildings: evaluation of the effects in the structural response and seismic fragility. Bull Earthq Eng 18:2083–2113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00774-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggieri S, Perrone D, Leone M, Uva G, Aiello MA (2020b) A prioritization RVS methodology for the seismic risk assessment of RC school buildings. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 51:101807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savoia M, Buratti N, Vincenzi L (2017) Damage and collapses in industrial precast buildings after the 2012 Emilia earthquake. Eng Struct 137:162–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shome N, Cornell CA, Bazzurro P, Carballo JE (1998) Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear responses. Earthq Spectra 14(3):469–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva V, Akkar S, Baker JW, Bazzurro P, Castro JM, Crowley H, Dolsek M, Galasso C, Lagomarsino S, Monteiro R, Perrone D, Pitilakis K, Vamvatsikos D (2019) Current challenges and future trends in analytical fragility and vulnerability modelling. Earthq Spectra. https://doi.org/10.1193/042418EQS101O

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sousa L, Silva V, Marques M, Crowley H (2016) On the treatment of uncertainties in the development of fragility functions for earthquake loss estimation of building portfolios. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavridis A, Koutromanos I, Shing PG (2011) Shake-table tests of a three-story reinforced concrete frame with masonry infill walls. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 41:1089–1108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uva G, Porco F, Fiore A (2012) Appraisal of masonry infill walls effect in the seismic response of RC framed buildings: a case study. Eng Struct 34:514–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uva G, Porco F, Fiore A, Mezzina M (2013) Proposal of a methodology for assessing the reliability of in situ concrete tests and improving the estimate of the compressive strength. Constr Build Mater 38:72–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31(3):491–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2006) Direct estimation of the seismic demand and capacity of oscillators with multi-linear static pushovers through IDA. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 35:1097–1117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang TY (2009) Performance-based earthquake engineering. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), University of California, Berkeley. http://peer.berkeley.edu/∼yang/ATC58website/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department DICATECh, Polytechnic University of Bari, Via Orabona, 4, 70126, Bari, Italy

    Sergio Ruggieri, Francesco Porco & Giuseppina Uva

  2. Metal Structures Laboratory, School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University, Heroon Polytechneiou 9, 15780, Athens, Greece

    Dimitrios Vamvatsikos

Authors
  1. Sergio Ruggieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesco Porco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giuseppina Uva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dimitrios Vamvatsikos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergio Ruggieri.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ruggieri, S., Porco, F., Uva, G. et al. Two frugal options to assess class fragility and seismic safety for low-rise reinforced concrete school buildings in Southern Italy. Bull Earthquake Eng 19, 1415–1439 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-01033-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-01033-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation