2020
DOI: 10.1007/s10518-020-00912-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seismic vulnerability analysis of medieval rammed earth fortifications in southeastern Spain

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The nearby medieval tower of the Castillo de Lojuela in Murchas, also constructed of rammed earth, has been shown to be vulnerable to ‘very heavy damage’ at earthquake intensities higher than IX (9.2). The expected PGA (peak ground acceleration) there is around 0.357g [ 62 ]. Translating this for the El Castillejo case study would generate a magnitude of higher than M5.5 ± 0.5, identical to the values calculated from our analysis of the archaeoseismic damage to structures on the site and the so-called ‘site effect’ [ 7 , 63 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The nearby medieval tower of the Castillo de Lojuela in Murchas, also constructed of rammed earth, has been shown to be vulnerable to ‘very heavy damage’ at earthquake intensities higher than IX (9.2). The expected PGA (peak ground acceleration) there is around 0.357g [ 62 ]. Translating this for the El Castillejo case study would generate a magnitude of higher than M5.5 ± 0.5, identical to the values calculated from our analysis of the archaeoseismic damage to structures on the site and the so-called ‘site effect’ [ 7 , 63 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These effects would then have been further compounded by the choice of building materials at El Castillejo. In modern engineering studies rammed earth is usually classified as having high seismic vulnerability [58][59][60][61][62]. Although rammed earth walls are massive and heavy, their foundations are not deep and their unanchored corners are vulnerable to ground shaking.…”
Section: Plos Onementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, implementing earthquake damage scenarios is the best initial step since they reveal the geographical distribution of the damages and the vulnerable structures (Boukri et al, 2018;Ortega et al, 2019). In this context, multiple methods have been established in the past few years for assessing the seismic vulnerability of existing buildings at the inner-city scale (Liu et al, 2020), which may be evaluated in several ways, depending on the information at hand (Cacace et al, 2018;Ortega et al, 2019;Arto et al, 2020). Accordingly, the RISK-UE approach created by the RISK-EU project's partners for assessing the seismic vulnerability of seven European cities (Mouroux and Brun, 2006) is one of the most commonly used seismic risk assessment methodologies worldwide, especially in Europe.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Actions within the framework of preventive conservation [40] imply the definition of an effective and systematic methodology to identify [38], evaluate and control the threats that affect all cultural assets [41][42][43][44][45][46]. The aim of these actions is to minimize these threats [47][48][49][50], thanks to the evaluation of their degree of impact on the effects of deterioration and the development of appropriate measures to avoid or, at least, slow down their negative effects [39,51].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%