Abstract
Recent earthquakes, that stroked Italian regions in past decades (Umbria— Marche 1997; Molise 2002; L’Aquila 2009), pointed out the high vulnerability of reinforced concrete existing buildings causing severe damages in the structures and consequently life losses. This is mainly due to the fact that such structures were often built without reference to seismic actions or on the basis of old standard provisions. Nowadays in Italy, Public Authorities are requested to evaluate the seismic vulnerability of their building stock assessing the actual capacity of such structures, as a consequence of new hazard levels and seismic microzonation introduced by new standards. According to Eurocode 8 or Italian standard NTC 2008, the seismic analysis of existing reinforced concrete buildings can be performed by one of the established procedure (i.e. Linear Static Analysis LSA, Linear Dynamic Analysis LDA, Nonlinear Static Analysis NSA, Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis NDA), depending on the achieved knowledge level about the structural system and materials. In order to compare efficiency and differences of previously described approaches, a deep investigation was executed on a reinforced concrete existing building whose dynamic behaviour was evaluated by an experimental dynamic analysis. In such a way, updated models were obtained and adopted for seismic analysis performed by using linear and nonlinear approaches, taking into account the stiffness and strength contribution of masonry infill walls. It was so possible to get useful indications on the reliability and discrepancies of different modelling approaches as well as on the influence of masonry infills on the seismic response of existing r.c. buildings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allemang RJ (2003) The modal assurance criterion—twenty years of use and abuse. Sound Vib 8: 14–21
Braga F, Dolce M, Liberatore D (1982) A statistical study on damaged buildings and ensuing review of MSK-76 Scale. In: Proceedings of the 7th European conference on earthquake engineering, Athens, Greece, vol 7, pp 431–450
Braga F, Manfredi V, Masi A, Salvatori A, Vona M. (2011) Performance of non-structural elements in RC buildings during the L’Aquila, 2009 earthquake. Bull Earthquake Eng 9: 307–324
Brownjohn JMW, Xia PQ, Hao H, Xia Y (2001) Civil structure condition assessment by FE model updating: methodology and case studies. Finite Elements Anal Des 37(10): 761–775
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 43(3, Paper No. 472):75–104
Caprili S, Nardini L, Salvatore W, Bortone GF, Signorini N (2010) Evaluation of seismic vulnerability of a complex RC existing building. In: Proceedings of the 14th European conference of earthquake engineering, Ohrid, Makedonia, 31th August–3rd September 2010
Carr A (2003) SIMQKE—a program for artificial motion generation. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, New Zealand
CEN: (2004) European standard EN1992-1-1. Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures—Part 1-1: general rules and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels
CEN: (2005) European standard EN1998-1. Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1: general rules, seismic action and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels
CEN: (2005) European standard EN1998-3. Eurocode 8: design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures—Part 3: assessment and retrofitting of buildings. European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels
CEN (2010) Corrigenda to EN 1998-3, EN 1998-3:2005/AC. European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels
Circolare 10/04/1997 no. 65, Istruzioni per l’applicazione delle “Norme Tecniche per le costruzioni in zone sismiche” di cui al D.M. 16-1-1996. Ministero dei Lavori Pubblici (in Italian)
Conn AR, Scheinberg K, Vicente LN (2009) Introduction to derivative-free optimization. MPS-SIAM book series on optimization, SIAM, Philadelphia
Cosenza E, Manfredi G, Verderame GM (2002) A new strategy for the seismic assessment of existing RC buildings. Ann Geophys 45(6): 817–831
Crisafulli FJ (1997) Seismic behaviour of reinforced concrete structures with masonry infills, PhD Thesis, University of Canterbury, New Zealand
Decanini LD et al (2004) Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the 2002 Molise, Italy, earthquake. Earthq Spectra 20(S1): S221–S255
Dolce M, Kappos A, Masi A, Penelis G, Vona M. (2006) Vulnerability assessment and earthquake damage scenarios of the building stock of Potenza (Southern Italy) using Italian and Greek methodologies. Eng Struct 28: 357–371
Faccioli E et al (1999) A study on damage scenarios for residential buildings in Catania city. J Seismol 3: 327–343
Fajfar P (2000) A nonlinear analysis method for performance based seismic design. Earthq Spectra 16(3): 573–592
Fajfar P, Dolšek M (2008) The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response of a four storey reinforced concrete frame—a deterministic assessment. Eng Struct 30(7): 1991–2001
Fajfar P, Kreslin M (2010) Seismic evaluation of an existing complex RC building. Bull Earthquake Eng 8(2): 363–385
Fardis MN (2009) Seismic design, assessment and retrofitting of concrete buildings: based on EN-Eurocode 8. Springer, Berlin
Friswell MI, Mottershead JE (1995) Finite element model updating in structural dynamics. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Klingner RE, Bertero VV (1978) Earthquake resistance of infilled frames. J Struct Div 104(6): 973–989
Maddaloni G, Magliulo G, Martinelli E, Monti G, Petti L, Saetta A, Spacone E. (2008) Nonlinear methods for seismic assessment of existing structures: a comparative study on italian r.c. buildings. In: Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, October 12–17, 2008, Beijing, China
Mainstone RJ (1974) Supplementary note on the stiffness and strength of infilled frames. Building Research Station. CP 13/74, Building Research Establishment, UK
Mander A et al (1997) Modeling of masonry infill panels for structural analysis. J Struct Eng 123(10): 1295–1302
Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R (1988) Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. J Struct Eng 114(8): 1804–1826
Masi A, Manfredi V, Vona M, Braga F, Salvatori F (2010) Prestazioni degli elementi non strutturali negli edifici in c.a.: implicazioni progettuali e costruttive alla luce dell’esperienza del terremoto dell’Abruzzo 2009. Progettazione Sismica 3
Masi A (2003) Seismic vulnerability assessment of gravity load designed R/C frames. Bull Earthquake Eng 1(3): 371–395
Menegotto M, Pinto PE (1973) Method of analysis for cyclically loaded R.C. plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behaviour of elements under combined normal force and bending. In: Symposium on the resistance and ultimate deformability of structures acted on by well defined repeated loads. International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering, Zurich, Switzerland, pp 15–22
Mpampatsikos V, Nascimbene R, Petrini L (2008) A critical review of the r.c. frame existing building assessment procedure according to Eurocode 8 and Italian seismic code. J Earthq Eng 12(S1): 52–82
NTC (2008) D. M. Infrastrutture Trasporti 14 gennaio 2008, Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni (in Italian)
Paulay T, Priestley MJN (1991) Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. Wiley, New York
Peeters B, et al (2005) Operational PolyMAX for estimating the dynamic properties of a stadium structure during a football game. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international modal analysis conference, Orlando, USA, 31 January–3 February 2005
Rai C, Kaushik HB, Jain SK (2006) Code approaches to seismic design of masonry- infilled reinforced concrete frames: a state-of-the-art review. Earthq Spectra 22(4): 961–983
Regio Decreto 16/11/1939 n. 2229 (1939) Norme per la esecuzione delle opere in conglomerato cementizio semplice ed armato (in Italian)
Romao X, Delgado R, Guedes J, Costa A. (2010a) A comparative application of different EC8-3 procedures for the seismic safety assessment of existing structures. Bull Earthquake Eng 8: 91–118
Romao X, Delgado R, Costa A. (2010b) Practical aspects of demand and capacity evaluation of RC members in the context of EC8-3. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39: 473–499
Sabetta F, Goretti A, Lucantoni A (1998) Empirical fragility curves from damage surveys and estimated strong ground motion. In: Proceedings of the 11th European conference on earthquake engineering, Paris
SeismoSoft (2010) SeismoStruct—a computer program for static and dynamic nonlinear analysis of framed structures. Available from URL:www.seismosoft.com
Smyrou E, Blandon C, Antoniou S, Pinho R, Crisafulli F. (2011) Implementation and verification of a masonry panel model for nonlinear dynamic analysis of infilled RC frames. Bull Earthquake Eng 9(5): 1519–1534
Sweeney et al (2002) Behaviour of Masonry-Infilled Nonductile Reinforced Concrete Frames. J Struct Eng 128(8): 1055–1063
Verderame GM et al (2010) Ultimate chord rotation of RC columns with smooth bars: some considerations about EC8 prescriptions. Bull Earthquake Eng 8: 1351–1373
VSCA (2004) Programma Regionale Vulnerabilità Sismica per gli Edifici in Cemento Armato, Regione Toscana (in Italian)
Whitmann RV, Reed JV, Hong ST (1973) Earthquake damage probability matrices. In: Proceedings of the 5th world conference on earthquake engineering, Rome, Italy, 1985, vol 2, pp 2531–2540
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Caprili, S., Nardini, L. & Salvatore, W. Evaluation of seismic vulnerability of a complex RC existing building by linear and nonlinear modeling approaches. Bull Earthquake Eng 10, 913–954 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9329-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9329-4