Advertisement

Cultural Heritage Structures Strengthened by Ties Under Seismic Sequences and Uncertain Input Parameters: A Computational Approach

  • Angelos A. LioliosEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 962)

Abstract

The seismic analysis of existing Cultural Heritage framed structures that have been damaged and upgraded by using cable elements (tension-ties) is numerically investigated. Special attention is given to uncertainty concerning input parameters for the structural elements behaviour. A double discretization, in space by the Finite Element Method and in time by a direct approach, is applied. The unilateral behaviour of the cable elements that undertake only tension stresses is strictly taken into account. Damage indices are computed for the accumulating damage due to seismic sequences. The presented numerical approach is applied to a typical reinforced concrete (RC) frame-building of the recent Greek Cultural Heritage.

Keywords

Computational structural mechanics Seismic sequences Upgrading by ties Input parameters uncertainty 

References

  1. 1.
    Asteris, P.G., Plevris, V. (eds.): Handbook of Research on Seismic Assessment and Rehabilitation of Historic Structures. IGI Global, Hershey (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moropoulou, A., Labropoulos, K.C., Delegou, E.T., Karoglou, M., Bakolas, A.: Non-destructive techniques as a tool for the protection of built cultural heritage. Constr. Build. Mater. 48, 1222–1239 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moropoulou, A., et al.: NDT investigation of Holy Sepulchre complex structures. In: Radonjanin, V., Crews, K. (eds.) Proceedings of Structural Faults and Repair 2012, Proceedings in CD-ROM (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertero, V.V.: Seismic upgrading of existing buildings. In: Proc. Simposio Internacional de Ingeniería Civil, a los 10 Años de los Sismos de 1985, Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniería, Sísmica, AC Mexico, D.F., Mexico (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dritsos, S.E.: Repair and Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Structures. University of Patras, Greece (2001). (in Greek)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fardis, M.N.: Seismic Design, Assessment and Retrofitting of Concrete Buildings: Based on EN-Eurocode 8. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9842-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    FEMA P440A: Effects of strength and stiffness degradation on the seismic response of structural systems. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Greek Retrofitting Code-(KANEPE): Greek Organization for Seismic Planning and Protection (OASP), Greek Ministry for Environmental Planning and Public Works. Athens, Greece (2013). (in Greek). www.oasp.gr
  9. 9.
    Penelis, G.Gr., Penelis, Gr.G.: Concrete Buildings in Seismic Regions. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liolios, A., Chalioris, C.: Industrial reinforced concrete buildings strengthened by cable elements: a numerical investigation of the response under seismic sequences. In: Moropoulou, A. (ed.) Proceedings of Scientific Conference on “Scientific Support for Decision-Making on Sustainable and Compatible Materials and Interventions for the Preservation and Protection of Cultural Heritage”, Thalis Project, NTUA, Athens, pp. 244–257 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liolios, A.: A computational investigation for the seismic response of RC structures strengthened by cable elements. In: Papadrakakis, M., Papadopoulos, V., Plevris, V. (eds.) Proceedings of COMPDYN 2015: Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 5th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference, Crete Island, Greece, 25–27 May 2015, vol. II, pp. 3997–4010 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liolios, A., Chalioris, C.: Reinforced concrete frames strengthened by cable elements under multiple earthquakes: a computational approach simulating experimental results. In: Proceedings of 8th GRACM International Congress on Computational Mechanics, Volos, 12–15 July 2015Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Panagiotopoulos, P.D.: Hemivariational Inequalities. Applications in Mechanics and Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (1993).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-51677-1CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leftheris, B., Stavroulaki, M.E., Sapounaki, A.C., Stavroulakis, G.E.: Computational Mechanics for Heritage Structures. WIT Press, Southampton (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Papadrakakis, M., Stefanou, G. (eds.): Multiscale Modeling and Uncertainty Quantification of Materials and Structures. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06331-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Strauss, A., Frangopol, D.M., Bergmeister, K.: Assessment of existing structures based on identification. J. Struct. Eng. ASCE 136(1), 86–97 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vamvatsikos, D., Cornell, C.A.: Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dynam. 31, 491–514 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vamvatsikos, D., Cornell, C.A.: Direct estimation of the seismic demand and capacity of oscillators with multi-linear static pushovers through IDA. Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dynam. 35(9), 1097–1117 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vamvatsikos, D., Fragiadakis, M.: Incremental dynamic analysis for estimating seismic performance sensitivity and uncertainty. Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dynam. 39(2), 141–163 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thomos, G.C., Trezos, C.G.: Examination of the probabilistic response of reinforced concrete structures under static non-linear analysis. Eng. Struct. 28, 120–133 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hatzigeorgiou, G., Liolios, A.: Nonlinear behaviour of RC frames under repeated strong ground motions. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 30, 1010–1025 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liolios, As., Liolios, A., Hatzigeorgiou, G.: A numerical approach for estimating the effects of multiple earthquakes to seismic response of structures strengthened by cable-elements. J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 43(3), 21–32 (2013). https://doi.org/10.2478/jtam-2013-0021MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maniatakis, C.A., Spyrakos, C.C., Kiriakopoulos, P.D., Tsellos, K.P.: Seismic response of a historic church considering pounding phenomena. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 16(7), 2913–2941 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Spyrakos, C.C., Maniatakis, Ch.A.: Retrofitting of a historic masonry building. In: 10th National and 4th International Scientific Conference on Planning, Design, Construction and Renewal in the Construction Industry (iNDiS 2006), Novi Sad, 22–24 November 2006, pp. 535–544 (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Spyrakos, C.C., Maniatakis, C.A.: Seismic protection of monuments and historic structures – the SEISMO research project. In: Proceedings of the VII European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering ECCOMAS 2016, 5–10 June 2016, Crete Island, Greece (2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee, T.H., Mosalam, K.M.: Probabilistic seismic evaluation of reinforced concrete structural components and systems. Report 2006/04, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. University of California, Berkeley, USA Google Scholar (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Melchers, R.E., Beck, A.T.: Structural Reliability Analysis and Prediction, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York (2018)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    JCSS: Probabilistic Model Code-Part 1: Basis of Design (12th draft). Joint Committee on Structural Safety, March 2001. http://www.jcss.ethz.ch/
  29. 29.
    Georgioudakis, M., Stefanou, G., Papadrakakis, M.: Stochastic failure analysis of structures with softening materials. Eng. Struct. 61, 13–21 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ang, A.H., Tang, W.H.: Probability Concepts in Engineering Planning and Design, vol. 2: Decision, Risk, and Reliability. Wiley, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Casciati, F., Augusti, G., Baratta, A.: Probabilistic Methods in Structural Engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2014)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kottegoda, N., Rosso, R.: Statistics, Probability and Reliability for Civil and Environmental Engineers. McGraw-Hill, London (2000)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dimov, I.T.: Monte Carlo Methods for Applied Scientists. World Scientific, Singapore (2008)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liolios, A., Moropoulou, A., Liolios, As., Georgiev, K., Georgiev, I.: A computational approach for the seismic sequences induced response of cultural heritage structures upgraded by ties. In: Margenov, S., Angelova, G., Agre, G. (eds.) Innovative Approaches and Solutions in Advanced Intelligent Systems. SCI, vol. 648, pp. 47–58. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32207-0_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chopra, A.K.: Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. Pearson Prentice Hall, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Carr, A.J.: RUAUMOKO - Inelastic Dynamic Analysis Program. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand (2008)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mitropoulou, C.C., Lagaros, N.D., Papadrakakis, M.: Numerical calibration of damage indices. Adv. Eng. Softw. 70, 36–50 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Park, Y.J., Ang, A.H.S.: Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete. J. Struct. Div. ASCE 111(4), 722–739 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Paulay, T., Priestley, M.J.N.: Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings. Wiley, New York (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    PEER: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. PEER Strong Motion Database (2011). http://peer.berkeley.edu/smcat

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringDemocritus-University of ThraceXanthiGreece

Personalised recommendations