• F. Javier Molina
Part of the NATO Security through Science Series book series


The ELSA laboratory is equipped with a large reaction-wall facility and has acquired its best expertise on the development and implementation of innovative experimental techniques mainly related to testing large-scale specimens by means of the pseudodynamic method. Apart from the relevant achievements within the testing techniques, such as the continuous pseudodynamic test and the development of effective techniques for the assessment of the experimental errors, the role of a reference laboratory in Europe has allowed ELSA to rely on the collaboration of many important research institutions that have contributed through the projects with and added maximum scientific value to the results of the tests. An example of pioneering tests performed for a relevant collaborative project are represented by the bi-directional tests performed on a multi-storey building, where the combination of sophisticated techniques have allowed for the first time to obtain most valuable information on the seismic experimental response of a torsionally unbalanced existing building in its original and retrofitted configurations.


Reinforced Concrete Earthquake Engineer Frequency Response Function Reinforced Concrete Building Floor Slab 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. De Luca, A., Mele, E., Molina, F. J., Verzeletti, G., Pinto, A. V., 2001, Base isolation for retrofitting historic buildings: evaluation of seismic performance through experimental investigation, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 30:1125–1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Donea J., Magonette G., Negro P., Pegon P., Pinto A., 1996, Verzeletti, G. Pseudodynamic capabilities of the ELSA laboratory for earthquake testing of large structures. Earthquake Spectra, 12:163–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Magonette, G., Pegon, P., Molina, F. J., Buchet, Ph., 1998, Development of fast continuous substructuring tests, Proceedings of the 2nd World Conference on Structural Control.Google Scholar
  4. Magonette, G., F. Marazzi, H. Försterling, 2003, Active control of cable-stayed bridges: large scale mock-up experimental analysis, ISEC-02 - Second International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference, Rome.Google Scholar
  5. Maia, N. M. M. and Silva, J. M. M. (editors), 1997, Theoretical and Experimental Modal Analysis, Research Studies Press, John Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Mola, E., Negro, P., Pinto, A. V., 2004, Evaluation of current approaches to the analysis and design of multi-storey torsionally unbalanced frames, Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Paper N. 3304.Google Scholar
  7. Molina, F. J., Pegon, P. and Verzeletti, G. 1999a, Time-domain identification from seismic pseudodynamic test results on civil engineering specimens, 2nd International Conference on Identification in Engineering Systems, University of Wales Swansea.Google Scholar
  8. Molina, F. J., Verzeletti, G., Magonette, G., Buchet, Ph., Geradin, M., 1999b, Bi-directional pseudodynamic test of a full-size three-storey building, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 28:1541–1566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Molina, F. J., Gonzalez, M. P., Pegon, P., Varum H. and Pinto, A., 2000. Frequency and Damping Evolution During Experimental Seismic Response of Civil Engineering Structures. COST F3 Conference on System Identification & Structural Health Monitoring. Google Scholar
  10. Molina, F. J., Magonette, G., Pegon, P., 2002a, Assessment of systematic experimental errors in pseudodynamic tests, Proc. of 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Elsevier Science, Paper 525.Google Scholar
  11. Molina F. J., Verzeletti, G., Magonette, G., Buchet, Ph., Renda, V., Geradin, M., Parducci, A, Mezzi, M, Pacchiarotti, A, Federici, L., Mascelloni, S., 2002b, Pseudodynamic tests on rubber base isolators with numerical substructuring of the superstructure and strain-rate effect compensation, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 31:1563–1582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Molina, F. J., S. Sorace, G. Terenzi, G. Magonette, B. Viaccoz, 2004, Seismic tests on reinforced concrete and steel frames retrofitted with dissipative braces, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 33:1373–1394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Negro, P., Mola, E., 2005, Full scale PsD testing of the torsionally unbalanced SPEAR structure in the ‘as-built’ and retrofitted configurations, SPEAR Workshop, EC-JRC Ispra, Italy. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation; Scholar
  14. Phillips, C. L. and Harbor, R. D., 1999, Feedback Control Systems, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  15. Pinto, A. V., Pegon, P., Magonette, G., Tsionis, G., 2004, Pseudo-dynamic testing of bridges using non-linear substructuring, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 33:1125–1146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pinto, A. V., Pegon, P., Taucer, F., 2006, Shaking table facilities and testing for advancement of earthquake engineering: international cooperation, experiences, values, chances, First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology.Google Scholar
  17. Shing, P. B., Mahin, S. A., 1987, Cumulative experimental errors in pseudo-dynamic tests, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 15:409–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Takanashi, K., Nakashima, M., 1986, A State of the Art: Japanese Activities on on-Line Computer Test Control Method, Report of the Institute of Industrial Science, 32, 3, University of Tokyo.Google Scholar
  19. Thewalt, C. and Roman, M., 1994, Performance Parameters for Pseudodynamic Tests, ASCE Journal of Struct. Eng., 120, 9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Javier Molina
    • 1
  1. 1.Joint Research Centre (Ispra, I)European Commission ELSA Laboratory(Varese)Italy

Personalised recommendations