Consideration of aging and SSI effects on seismic vulnerability assessment of RC buildings

Pitilakis, Kyriazis; Karapetrou, S.; Fotopoulou, Stavroula

doi:10.1007/s10518-013-9575-8

Cited by 109 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results would be too dispersive and therefore unimportant for DSSI assessment. This is the reason why the authors have chosen to present in this paper the results of the 2D finite element model shown in Figure 5, using the same approach followed by many researchers [Pitilakis et al, 2013;Anastasopoulos et al, 2014;Gazetas, 2015;Conti et al, 2017;Karatzetzou et al, 2017]. Figure 5 shows the adopted FEM mesh, including the geometry, boundary and loading conditions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic behaviour of coupled soil-structure systems by means of FEM analysis for the seismic risk mitigation of INGV building in Catania (Italy)

Massimino¹,

Abate²,

Corsico³

et al. 2018

Annals of Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seismic design of new structures, as well as retrofitting and/or improving of existing ones should be definitely considered a multidisciplinary subject, which depends on many factors, such as: local site effects and the dynamic interaction between the foundation soil and the structure. The accurate investigation on the structure and the surrounding soil is the first fundamental step for a realistic evaluation of the structure seismic performance. The present paper deals with the Dynamic Soil Structure Interaction (DSSI) analysis concerning the INGV (National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology) building in Catania, by means of a FEM 2D modeling. The building is a prestigious masonry structure situated in an area characterized by a high seismic hazard. Several accelerograms scaled at the same PHA, with reference to the estimated seismicity of Catania, have been adopted. Soil properties were carefully investigated by means of static and dynamic in-situ and laboratory tests. Many investigations were also performed on the structure. Equivalent linear visco-elastic constitutive models have been adopted both for the soil and the structure. For considering soil nonlinearity, degraded shear modula (G) and increased soil damping ratios (D) have been evaluated for all the involved soil layers, according to two different approaches. Firstly, soil nonlinearity has been modeled basing on the EC8 [2003] suggestions; secondly, it has been modeled choosing the values of G and D according to the effective strain levels obtained for each soil layer and for each different input, by means of an iterative sub-routine. The dynamic response of the system has been analyzed in the time and frequency domains. Results are presented in terms of: acceleration amplification factors, Fourier and response spectra, amplification functions and shear forces per floor. The main goals of the paper are: i) to investigate the acceleration profiles along the soil and the structure considering and not considering the DSSI; ii) to investigate the soil filtering effect in terms of predominant frequency considering and not considering the DSSI; iii) to compare the obtained results with the ones given by a simpler 1D free-field soil analysis; iv) to compare the soil amplification factors and the response spectra obtained by 1D and 2D models with that by the Italian technical code [NTC, 2008]; v) to highlight the influence of DSSI in the seismic response of the structure; vi) to evaluate the influence of different modeling of soil nonlinearity on the dynamic response of the soil and structure.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic behaviour of coupled soil-structure systems by means of FEM analysis for the seismic risk mitigation of INGV building in Catania (Italy)

Massimino¹,

Abate²,

Corsico³

et al. 2018

Annals of Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The vulnerability is also varying with time, increasing or decreasing (for example after mitigation countermeasures or post earthquake retrofitting have been undertaken). On the other hand aging effects and material degradation with time increase the vulnerability (Pitilakis et al 2014b). Consequently the risk cannot be time independent.…”

Section: Time Dependent Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Earthquake Risk Assessment: Certitudes, Fallacies, Uncertainties and the Quest for Soundness

Pitilakis

2015

Perspectives on European Earthquake Engineering and Seismology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper addresses, from engineering point of view, issues in seismic risk assessment. It is more a discussion on the current practice, emphasizing on the multiple uncertainties and weaknesses of the existing methods and approaches, which make the final loss assessment a highly ambiguous problem. The paper is a modest effort to demonstrate that, despite the important progress made the last two decades or so, the common formulation of hazard/risk based on the sequential analyses of source (M, hypocenter), propagation (for one or few IM) and consequences (losses) has probably reached its limits. It contains so many uncertainties affecting seriously the final result, and the way that different communities involved, modellers and end users are approaching the problem is so scattered, that the seismological and engineering community should probably re-think a new or an alternative paradigm. IntroductionSeismic hazard and risk assessments are nowadays rather established sciences, in particular in the probabilistic formulation of hazard. Long-term hazard/risk assessments are the base for the definition of long-term actions for risk mitigation. However, several recent events raised questions about the reliability of such methods. The occurrence of relatively "unexpected" levels of hazard and loss (e.g., Emilia, Christchurch, Tohoku) and the continuous increase of hazard with time, basically due to the increase of seismic data, and the increase of exposure, make loss assessment a highly ambiguous problem.Existing models present important discrepancies. Sometimes such discrepancies are only apparent, since we do not always compare two "compatible" values. There

show abstract

“…Even if the 1980 Irpinia-Basilicata (southern Italy) earthquake is well documented with several contributions (e.g., [21][22][23][24]) and models proposed [25,26], the assessment of the role of the soil on the structural damage is still a relatively unexplored issue and this paper aimed to fill this gap. In particular, the principal aim was to propose numerical simulations of different soil conditions and assess the effects of the soil-structure interaction (SSI), which can significantly affect the seismic vulnerability of structures [27][28][29]. In this regard, when the superficial deposits overlie the bedrock, amplifications of the surface seismic accelerations may not be conservatively predicted by the codes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil–Structure Interaction Assessment of the 23 November 1980 Irpinia-Basilicata Earthquake

Mina

Forcellini

2020

Geosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aimed to present a systematic study of the effects caused by the strong earthquake that struck southern Italy on 23 November 1980 (Ms = 6.9) and affected the Campania and Basilicata regions. Two aspects are discussed here: The broadening of the knowledge of the response site effects by considering several soil free-field conditions and the assessment of the role of the soil–structure interaction (SSI) on a representative benchmark structure. This research study, based on the state-of-the-art knowledge, may be applied to assess future seismic events and to propose new original code provisions. The numerical simulations were herein performed with the advanced platform OpenSees, which can consider non-linear models for both the structure and the soil. The results show the importance of considering the SSI in the seismic assessment of soil amplifications and its consequences on the structural performance.

show abstract

Consideration of aging and SSI effects on seismic vulnerability assessment of RC buildings

Cited by 109 publications

References 34 publications

Dynamic behaviour of coupled soil-structure systems by means of FEM analysis for the seismic risk mitigation of INGV building in Catania (Italy)

Dynamic behaviour of coupled soil-structure systems by means of FEM analysis for the seismic risk mitigation of INGV building in Catania (Italy)

Earthquake Risk Assessment: Certitudes, Fallacies, Uncertainties and the Quest for Soundness

Soil–Structure Interaction Assessment of the 23 November 1980 Irpinia-Basilicata Earthquake

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About