Improved Urban Seismic Vulnerability Assessment Using Typological Curves and Accurate Displacement Demand Prediction

Diana, Lorenzo; Lestuzzi, Pierino; Podestà, Stefano; Luchini, Chiara

doi:10.1080/13632469.2019.1597784

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After creating the habitability scales and identifying which urban modiner levéis are most strongly correlated with structural and no structural damage, we then combined levéis for each type of structure (masonry and concrete) that had a 70% or higher probabñity of experiencing damage in each kind of son. The resulting building typologies allowed us to rate the habitability of the housing stock and check the findings of other studies including the real building stock (Diana et al 2019). These typologies were generated for both class B and class C son and used to map habitability in the study áreas.…”

Section: Analysis and Results Building Habitability Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 95%

Assessing Building Habitability after an Earthquake Using Building Typology and Damage Grade. Application in Lorca, Spain

Martínez-Cuevas

Balsera

Benito

et al. 2020

Journal of Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study proposes a statistical methodology to rate the habitability of different types of buildings after an earthquake. The first step was to rank variables that affect the vulnerability of a building and formúlate a statistical study with a discrimination Índex that makes it possible to identify buildings as habitable or non-habitable. This ranking applied the criteria established in various international guidelines that are used to distinguish between habitable (undamaged/no structural damage) and non-habitable buildings (structural damage). The proposed methodology was applied to a datábase with information about buildings and damage grade experienced following the 2011 earthquake in Lorca. The approach presented could be extended to other regions where neccessary data are available. 65 23 42 2008 aaPAGER Global 81 9 72 2013 EMCA Central Asia 16 6 10 2017 CSA Central and South Asia 29 9 20 '45 WHE subtypes over 14 load-bearing typologies ** 81 typologies over nine classes of materials

show abstract

Section: Analysis and Results Building Habitability Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 95%

Assessing Building Habitability after an Earthquake Using Building Typology and Damage Grade. Application in Lorca, Spain

Martínez-Cuevas

Balsera

Benito

et al. 2020

Journal of Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The specific typology is based on a detailed survey involving the construction drawings collected in the city archives for a limited number of buildings. Five new building types were defined (Diana et al, 2021): A1, A2, B2, C and D2 (Figure 4). Type A1 corresponds to unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings with a reinforced concrete (RC) basement floor.…”

Section: Building Typologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Milutinovic and Trendafiloski, 2003;Risk-UE, 2003;Mouroux and Le Brun, 2006) was applied to both cities, considering the particularities of the Swiss territory in terms of seismicity and the specific features of the Swiss building stock (Lestuzzi et al, 2016;Lestuzzi et al, 2017). The reliability of the results was afterwards further improved by considering typological curves and accurate displacement demand prediction (Rota et al, 2008;Diana et al, 2018;Diana et al, 2021). The investigations were performed using building stock databases from 2015 surveys.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Could building replacements significantly contribute to seismic vulnerability mitigation at urban scale? Case studies of two typical swiss cities

Lestuzzi

2022

Front. Built Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contains an investigation on the potential decrease of seismic vulnerability related to building replacements for the cities of Sion and Martigny in Switzerland. Those two cities were identified for the present research based on the accuracy of the corresponding available information. Seismic assessment at urban scale was recently achieved for both cities and new buildings are systematically indexed according to the construction regulation of the canton of Wallis (Valais). Sion and Martigny belong to the largest cities of the canton of Wallis and this region is characterized by the highest seismicity within Switzerland. The investigation focuses on a 4-year period between 2016 and 2019. Cases for which an existing building is demolished and replaced by a new one were identified and checked. Those cases do not represent general practice. The majority of new buildings are built on free land. Consequently, the building replacement rate is too low to lead to a significant decrease of the seismic vulnerability at urban scale. In addition to the systematic appropriate seismic design of new buildings, retrofitting of existing buildings therefore remains the adequate strategy for seismic vulnerability mitigation. In case of replacement, low-rise buildings are generally replaced by mid-rise buildings. Moreover, unreinforced masonry buildings are usually replaced by reinforced concrete shear-wall buildings. This slightly impacts the building stock distributions but the seismic vulnerability is not significantly changed, since the demolished buildings are not the most vulnerable ones. Nevertheless, few obvious isolated vulnerability decreases occurred with respect to the demolition of soft-story buildings for instance. By contrast, seismic vulnerability may also be increased in the case where a new building is built against an existing one with a different story level and without an adequate seismic separation joint.

show abstract

“…Different types of methods, widely developed in the last 50 years, are particularly suitable to this aim; they are generally classified as three different approaches [7,8]: (i) empirical procedures that identify building categories, called "vulnerability class", on the basis of recurrent typological and structural features to define corresponding vulnerability functions calibrated using damage observed after past earthquakes or combine the evaluation of a few parameters (geographical position, general characteristics of the structure, and possible damage), to obtain a final seismic vulnerability index to establish a relation between the seismic action and response of the buildings [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]; (ii) mechanical/analytical procedures that define vulnerability functions as a relation between structural capacity and seismic demand by means of structural analysis of one or more numerical models representative of samples of buildings. However, these types of methodologies are in many cases burdensome for large-scale applications, requiring very detailed knowledge about the building features and time-consuming structural calculations [21][22][23][24]; and (iii) hybrid procedures that calibrate the results of the mechanical/analytical assessment with postearthquake observational damages, useful in the cases of partial absence of damage data or difficulty with the calibration or validation of the results of analytical models [25,26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

GIS Multisource Data for the Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Buildings at the Urban Scale

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents a methodology of extraction, integration and elaboration of data from different sources using the geographic information system (GIS), to realize a georeferenced building database (GBD) useful for the seismic vulnerability assessment of existing buildings on a large scale. Three levels of GIS entities have been defined and equipped with the related information: census section (CS), urban block (UB), and individual building (IB), depending on the level of detail of dataset. Additional information about the typological and structural features has been extracted by CARTIS catalogue, to refine the data associated with each building. The data have been validated using detailed information gathered on a proper sample of buildings, which have been filed and analyzed one-by-one. The alphanumeric format of data allows for the automatic implementation of different methods available in the literature, which provide a qualitative seismic vulnerability index at different scales (whole urban district, an urban block, and a single building). Finally, the 3D representation of data and results have been elaborated, providing a tool easily searchable and constantly implementable. An application has been developed for a case study in Puglia, Italy: Bisceglie, for which 3726 IB have been assessed. The work addresses the issue of the lack of information typical of large-scale applications, exploiting all the available data sources to achieve nearly complete knowledge of existing building stock finalized to a rapid but extensive evaluation of the seismic vulnerability on an urban scale with very low computational efforts and the use of limited resources in terms of time and cost.

show abstract

Improved Urban Seismic Vulnerability Assessment Using Typological Curves and Accurate Displacement Demand Prediction

Cited by 11 publications

References 30 publications

Assessing Building Habitability after an Earthquake Using Building Typology and Damage Grade. Application in Lorca, Spain

Assessing Building Habitability after an Earthquake Using Building Typology and Damage Grade. Application in Lorca, Spain

Could building replacements significantly contribute to seismic vulnerability mitigation at urban scale? Case studies of two typical swiss cities

GIS Multisource Data for the Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Buildings at the Urban Scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About