Empirical fragility assessment of residential buildings using data from the Emilia 2012 sequence of earthquakes

Ιωάννου, Ιωάννα; Bertelli, S; Verrucci, Enrica; Arcidiacono, Vincenzo; Rossetto, Tiziana

doi:10.1007/s10518-021-01047-7

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, damage conversion rules must be introduced to provide a proper conversion into a synthetic DL. Focusing on unreinforced masonry (URM) structures, as recently discussed also in Ioannou et al (2021), the available methods differ in the considered component types and in the approach adopted to combine them. In particular, the method proposed by Dolce et al (2017aDolce et al ( , b, 2019 and implemented in the D.a.DO platform (http:// egeos.…”

Section: Overview Of the Literature Debate On The Definition Of Damag...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiscale procedure to assign structural damage levels in masonry buildings from observed or numerically simulated seismic performance

Cattari

Angiolilli

2022

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The damage level (DL) is a fundamental metric in earthquake engineering and is particularly effective for multiple purposes, such as correlating structural damage to consequences and losses (e.g. economic, casualties, etc.) as well as to physical and mechanical variables quantifiable from both experimental and numerical tests. Despite the relevance of the topic, the conversion of complex information on the damage spreading over a 3D building into a synthetic DL remains an open issue for which there are currently no agreed-upon scientific criteria in the literature. Within this context, the study focuses on unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings by providing an analytical multi-scale approach that integrates structural damage at the panel-scale and macro-element size (where the macro-element is intended as an assemblage of components, like vertical walls or diaphragms). The approach is specifically conceived to be applied consistently to both observed and numerically simulated damage. As a result, the method is particularly effective for supporting the validation of numerical models or synthetically interpreting the huge amount of results from nonlinear analyses as much as feasible using an objective basis. The paper proposes a comparison of DL interpretation arising from other approaches in the current literature, highlighting their pros and cons. The effectiveness of the proposed procedure is then assessed using four URM case studies, all of which exhibited primarily a ‘box-like behaviour’. They were specifically chosen based on the extremely detailed documentation available for both the damage and geometric/mechanical features of the buildings as well as aiming to reduce the uncertainty in the seismic input, making them ideal candidates also for validation purposes. To this end, the applicability of the procedure also to the damage simulated by nonlinear dynamic analyses was proven by adopting equivalent frame models of the case studies, developed and calibrated in previous researches. Definitely, the results encourage the adoption of the proposed procedure to interpret as analytically as possible the real damage that occurred on URM building, when accurate damage observations from field surveys are available, as well as that coming from numerical simulations.

show abstract

Section: Overview Of the Literature Debate On The Definition Of Damag...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiscale procedure to assign structural damage levels in masonry buildings from observed or numerically simulated seismic performance

Cattari

Angiolilli

2022

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conditional IM values were computed at the points of a regular grid with a spacing of 0.009 decimal degrees. Only these two earthquakes are considered because they are the most relevant in the framework seismic fragility assessment, since they produced most of the damage on buildings 22,47 …”

Section: Shakemaps For the Emilia 2012 Earthquakesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, shakemaps for a restricted number of IMs, even if very useful for a rapid estimate of the severity of a seismic event, may become a limitation if they are to be used as a basis for fragility analysis. [16][17][18] The need for shakemaps in terms of different IMs is justified by a vast literature on the efficiency of IMs, which shows that the inelastic behaviour (and damage) of different types of structures correlates with different IMs, 19,20 and that IMs that do no not depend of the natural period of vibration of structures, such as PGA, even if widely used for developing observational vulnerability or fragility models, 18,[21][22][23][24] have a very low efficiency.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Post‐earthquake estimates of different ground motion intensity measures for the 2012 Emilia earthquake

Buratti

Simoni

Mazzotti

2022

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimates of the earthquake ground motion intensity over a geographical area have multiple uses, that is, emergency management, civil protection and seismic fragility assessment. In particular, with reference to fragility assessment, it is of interest to have estimates of the values of different ground-motion intensity measures in order to correlate them with the observed damage. To this purpose, the present paper uses a procedure recently proposed in the literature to estimate the ground-motion intensity for the 2012 Emilia mainshocks, considering different ground motion intensity measures and directionality effects. Ground motion prediction equations based on different site effect models, and spatial correlation models are calibrated for the Emilia earthquakes. The paper discusses the accuracy of the shakemaps obtained using the different soil effect models considered and presents the obtained shakemaps as supplementary material. The procedure presented in the paper is aimed at providing ground motion intensity values for seismic fragility assessment and is not intended as a tool to estimate shakemaps for rapid emergency assessment.

show abstract

“…For this reason, only models that have been derived from the Emilia-Romagna region residential masonry buildings were employed in this study. The first model used has been recently proposed by Ioannou et al [18], and it is based on the analysis of damage data from the 2012 Emilia earthquake obtained from post-earthquake surveys. This dataset, however, is biased towards damaged buildings and the census [19] was used to complete the building stock with the undamaged buildings.…”

Section: Fragility Curves For Unreinforced Masonry Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data was aggregated at the level of municipalities. It has often been highlighted [18,20,21] that this practice, common for empirical fragility assessment, reduces the level of detail in the building typology definition. The ground motion intensity was estimated using the attenuation model proposed by Bindi et al [22].…”

Section: Fragility Curves For Unreinforced Masonry Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for the Assessment of Seismic Damage Scenarios in the Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy

Simoni¹,

Buratti²,

Mazzotti³

2021

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the immediate aftermath of an earthquake, it is essential that emergency plans and damage scenarios are available so that civil protection agencies and risk-management organizations can detect and contain critical situations. These tools rely on the knowledge of the specific features of the potentially affected area, both in terms of intrinsic characteristics (e.g. morphology, near surface geology, etc.) and of elements at risk (e.g. building typologies, population distribution, etc.). All these pieces of information are combined in seismic-risk or damage scenario assessment procedures. This paper presents a framework developed for estimating seismic damage scenarios for the Emilia Romagna region in Northern Italy. Models for estimating ground-motion shake maps, based on regional attenuation relationships, spatial correlation models and soil data are first presented. These maps, which are computed considering different ground-motion intensity measures, are then combined with data on the spatial distribution of buildings, and fragility models. In order to consider the different sources of uncertainty, i.e. ground-motion intensity, definition of the fragility models, etc., a Monte Carlo simulation approach is used for estimating the distribution of buildings with different damage levels in each municipality. Finally, the paper presents comparisons with damage data observed after the 2012 Emilia earthquake.

show abstract

Empirical fragility assessment of residential buildings using data from the Emilia 2012 sequence of earthquakes

Cited by 12 publications

References 24 publications

Multiscale procedure to assign structural damage levels in masonry buildings from observed or numerically simulated seismic performance

Multiscale procedure to assign structural damage levels in masonry buildings from observed or numerically simulated seismic performance

Post‐earthquake estimates of different ground motion intensity measures for the 2012 Emilia earthquake

A Framework for the Assessment of Seismic Damage Scenarios in the Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About