SpringerLink
Log in

Probabilistic seismic assessment and retrofit considerations for Italian RC frame buildings

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent decades, the seismic assessment of existing buildings has developed significantly from traditional objectives that focused on ensuring life safety of the building. The economic impact of the 1994 Northridge earthquake in the US due to the extensive damage suffered by buildings, in addition to the overall disruption, highlighted the need for a paradigm shift in the way in which the performance of buildings ought to be defined. This paper considers the assessment of existing Italian reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings with masonry infill, which were typically gravity load designed (GLD) prior to the introduction of seismic design provisions in the 1970s. The assessment of GLD RC frames with masonry infill is discussed within a setting similar to that of the FEMA P58 guidelines that aim to provide practising engineers with the tools and procedures; both advanced and simplified, to quantify the performance of existing buildings in a more meaningful way that can be easily conveyed to decision makers. In this study, extensive numerical analysis was carried out on a variety of case study buildings to quantify and benchmark the performance; both in terms of expected demand and overall collapse capacity, where the impact of incorporating the potential shear failure in column members was shown to result in a reduction of up to 10% of the median collapse intensity due to the interaction with the masonry infill. Furthermore, loss estimation studies were carried out on these case study buildings to not only quantify the expected losses but also investigate ways in which shrewd retrofitting of both structural and non-structural elements can have maximum impact on the overall performance. On the contrary, it was shown that by adopting structural retrofitting schemes involving strengthening and/or stiffening of the structure in compliance with NTC 2008 requirements in these situations may actually lead to a worsening of the building performance defined in terms of expected annual loss. Overall, this paper provides insight into the probabilistic seismic assessment and retrofit considerations for existing GLD RC frames in Italy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ASCE 7–10 (2010) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE 7–10, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker JW (2015) Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthq Spectra 31(1):579–599. https://doi.org/10.1193/021113eqs025m

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker JW, Lee C (2017) An improved algorithm for selecting ground motions to match a conditional spectrum. J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1264334

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvi GM, Sullivan TJ, Welch DP (2014) A seismic performance classification framework to provide increased seismic resilience. In: 2nd European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Cardone D (2016) Fragility curves and loss functions for RC structural components with smooth rebars. Earthq Struct 10(5):1181–1212. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.5.1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Flora A (2017) Multiple inelastic mechanisms analysis (MIMA): a simplified method for the estimation of the seismic response of RC frame buildings. Eng Struct 145:368–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.05.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Perrone G (2015) Develo** fragility curves and loss functions for masonry infill walls. Earthq Struct 9(1):257–279. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.9.1.257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Perrone G (2017) Damage and loss assessment of pre-70 RC frame buildings with FEMA P-58. J Earthq Eng 21(1):23–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1149893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Gesualdi G, Perrone G (2017a) Cost-benefit analysis of alternative retrofit strategies for RC frame buildings. J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1323041

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Sullivan T, Gesualdi G, Perrone G (2017b) Simplified estimation of the expected annual loss of reinforced concrete buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2893

    Google Scholar 

  • Charleson A (2008) Seismic design for architects—outwitting the quake. Elsevier Ltd, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornell CA, Krawinkler H (2000) Progress and challenges in seismic performance assessment. PEER Cent News 3(2):1–2

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosenza E, Prota A, Di Ludovico M, Del Vecchio C (2017) Il metodo convenzionale per classificare il rischio sismico delle costruzioni. Costruire in Laterizio 171:70–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Crisafulli FJ, Carr AJ, Park R (2000) Analytical modelling of infilled frame structures—a general review. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 33(1):30–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Decreto Ministeriale (2017) Linee Guida per la Classificazione del Rischio Sismico delle Costruzioni—58/2017, Il ministero delle infrastrutture e dei trasporti. Rome

  • Del Gaudio C, De Martino G, Di Ludovico M, Manfredi G, Prota A, Ricci P, Verderame GM (2017) Empirical fragility curves from damage data on RC buildings after the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Bull Earthq Eng 15(4):1425–1450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-0026-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dipartimento della Protezione Civile (2013) Scheda di 1° livello di rilevamento danno, pronto intervento e agibilità per edific ordinari nll’emergenza post-sismica. http://www.protezionecivile.gov.it/resources/cms/documents/scheda_AeDES_07_2013_corretta_.pdf

  • Dolce M, Manfredi G (2015) Libro bianco sulla ricostruzione privata fuori dai centri storici nei comuni colpiti dal sisma dell’Abruzzo del 6 aprile 2009. Doppiavoce, Napoli

    Google Scholar 

  • EERI (2009) The Mw = 6.3 Abruzzo, Italy, Earthquake of 6 April 2009

  • Elnashai AS, Pinho R (1998) Repair and retrofitting of RC walls using selective techniques. J Earthq Eng 2(4):525–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469809350334

    Google Scholar 

  • Elwood KJ, Marquis F, Kim JH (2015) Post-earthquake assessment and repairability of RC buildings: lessons from Canterbury and emerging challenges. In: Proceedings of the tenth pacific conference on earthquake engineering, Sydney, Australia

  • EN 1998–1:2004 (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. EN 1998-1:2004, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Fajfar P (2000) A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design. Earthq Spectra 16(3):573–592. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fardis MN (2017) Impact of experimental research on the Eurocode 8 provisions for RC structures. In: 7th international conference on advances in experimental structural engineering, Pavia, Italy

  • FEMA P58-1 (2012) Seismic performance assessment of buildings: volume 1—methodology (P-58-1). FEMA P58-1, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA P58-3 (2012) Seismic performance assessment of buildings volume 3—performance assessment calculation tool (PACT) version 2.9.65 (FEMA P-58-3.1). FEMA P58-3, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA P695 (2009) Quantification of building seismic performance factors. FEMA P695, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Filiatrault A, Sullivan T (2014) Performance-based seismic design of nonstructural building components: the next frontier of earthquake engineering. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 13(1):17–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-014-0238-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galli M (2006) Evaluation of the seismic response of existing RC frame buildings with masonry infills. M.Sc. thesis, IUSS Pavia, Italy

  • Gokkaya BU, Baker JW, Deierlein GG (2016) Quantifying the impacts of modeling uncertainties on the seismic drift demands and collapse risk of buildings with implications on seismic design checks. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 45(10):1661–1683. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hak S, Morandi P, Magenes G, Sullivan TJ (2012) Damage control for clay masonry infills in the design of RC frame structures. J Earthq Eng 16(sup1):1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2012.670575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haselton CB, Liel AB, Taylor Lange S, Deierlein GG (2008) Beam-column element model calibrated for predicting flexural response leading to global collapse of RC frame buildings. PEER Report 2007/03, Berkeley, California

  • Ibarra LF, Medina RA, Krawinkler H (2005) Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34(12):1489–1511. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISTAT (2011) Censimento della popolazione e delle abitazioni 2011. Censimento Popolazione Abitazioni. http://dati-censimentopopolazione.istat.it/Index.aspx# (25 Oct 2016)

  • Kazantzi AK, Vamvatsikos D (2015) Intensity measure selection for vulnerability studies of building classes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 44(15):2677–2694. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohrangi M, Vamvatsikos D, Bazzurro P (2016) Implications of intensity measure selection for seismic loss assessment of 3-D buildings. Earthq Spectra 32(4):2167–2189. https://doi.org/10.1193/112215eqs177m

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohrangi M, Bazzurro P, Vamvatsikos D, Spillatura A (2017) Conditional spectrum-based ground motion record selection using average spectral acceleration. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2876

    Google Scholar 

  • Krawinkler H (2005) Van nuys hotel building testbed report: exercising seismic performance assessment. PEER Report 2005/11, Berkeley, California

  • McKenna F, Fenves G, Filippou FC, Mazzoni S (2000) Open system for earthquake engineering simulation (OpenSees). http://opensees.berkeley.edu/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

  • Melo J, Varum H, Rossetto T (2015) Experimental cyclic behaviour of RC columns with plain bars and proposal for Eurocode 8 formula improvement. Eng Struct 88:22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.01.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montaldo V, Meletti C (2007) Valutazione del valore della ordinata spettrale a 1sec e ad altri periodi di interesse ingegneristico. Progetto DPC-INGV S1, Deliverable D3. http://esse1.mi.ingv.it/d3.html

  • Morales E, Filiatrault A, Aref A (2017) Sustainable and low cost room seismic isolation for essential care units in develo** countries. In: 16th world conference on earthquake engineering, Santiago, Chile

  • NTC (2008) Norme Tecniche Per Le Costruzioni. NTC, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor JS, Morales E (2016) Reconnaissance of damaged structures after the 2016 Muisne–Ecuador earthquake (presentation). State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY. http://gsa.buffalo.edu/eeri/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2016/08/Enrique_OConnor_Seminar_Presentation.pdf

  • O’Reilly GJ (2016) Performance-based seismic assessment and retrofit of existing RC frame buildings in Italy. Ph.D. thesis, IUSS Pavia, Italy

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2015) Influence of modelling parameters on the fragility assessment of PRE-1970 Italian RC structures. In: COMPDYN 2015—5th ECCOMAS thematic conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2017a) Quantification of modelling uncertainty in existing Italian RC frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn (in press)

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2017b) Modelling uncertainty in existing Italian RC frames. In: COMPDYN 2017—6th international conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering, Rhodes Island, Greece

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2017c) Modelling techniques for the seismic assessment of existing Italian RC frame structures. J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1360224

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly GJ, Perrone D, Fox MJ, Lanese I, Monteiro R, Filiatrault A, Pavese A (2017a) System identification and seismic assessment modelling implications for Italian school buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn (accepted)

  • O’Reilly GJ, Perrone D, Fox MJ, Monteiro R, Filiatrault A (2017b) Seismic vulnerability of existing school buildings in Italy. Eng Struct (accepted)

  • O’Reilly G, Monteiro R, Perrone D, Lanese I, Fox M, Pavese A, Filiatrault A (2017c) System identification and structural modelling of Italian school buildings. In: Caicedo J, Pakzad S (eds) Conference proceedings of the society for experimental mechanics series on dynamics of civil structures, vol 2. Springer International Publishing, pp 301–303

  • Pampanin S, Calvi GM, Moratti M (2002) Seismic behaviour of RC beam-column joints designed for gravity loads. In: 12th European conference on earthquake engineering, London, UK

  • Porter KA, Beck JL, Shaikhutdinov RV (2004) Simplified estimation of economic seismic risk for buildings. Earthq Spectra 20(4):1239–1263. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1809129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priestley MJN, Calvi GM, Kowalsky MJ (2007) Displacement based seismic design of structures. IUSS Press, Pavia

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez CM, Miranda E (2009) Building specific loss estimation methods and tools for simplified performance based earthquake engineering. Blume report no. 171, Stanford, CA

  • Regio Decreto (1939) Norme per l’esecuzione delle opere conglomerato cementizio semplice od armato—2229/39. Rome

  • Rossetto T, Elnashai A (2003) Derivation of vulnerability functions for European-type RC structures based on observational data. Eng Struct 25(10):1241–1263. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0141-0296(03)00060-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sassun K (2014) A parametric investigation into the seismic behaviour of window glazing systems. M.Sc. thesis, IUSS Pavia, Italy

  • Sassun K, Sullivan TJ, Morandi P, Cardone D (2015) Characterising the in-plane seismic performance of infill masonry. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 49(1):100

    Google Scholar 

  • SEAOC (1995) Vision 2000: performance-based seismic engineering of buildings. SEAOC, Sacramento

    Google Scholar 

  • Taghavi S, Miranda E (2003) Response assessment of nonstructural building elements. PEER Report 2003/05, Berkeley, California

  • Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31(3):491–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2005) Direct estimation of seismic demand and capacity of multidegree-of-freedom systems through incremental dynamic analysis of single degree of freedom approximation. J Struct Eng 131(4):589–599. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(2005)131:4(589)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vona M, Masi A (2004) Resistenza sismica di telai in c.a. progettati con il R.D. 2229/39. XI Congresso Nazionale “L’Ingegneria Sismica in Italia”, Genova, Italia

  • Welch DP, Sullivan TJ, Calvi GM (2014) Develo** direct displacement-based procedures for simplified loss assessment in performance-based earthquake engineering. J Earthq Eng 18(2):290–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2013.851046

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the funding provided by the ReLUIS consortium and the first author acknowledges the funding provided by the IUSS Pavia doctoral programme. The constructive comments of two anonymous reviewers helped improve the overall quality of this paper. In addition, the assistance provided by Matteo Moratti in estimating repair costing for Italy is also gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS Pavia, Palazzo del Broletto, Piazza della Vittoria 15, 27100, Pavia, Italy

    Gerard J. O’Reilly

  2. Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Timothy J. Sullivan

Authors
  1. Gerard J. O’Reilly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy J. Sullivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerard J. O’Reilly.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

O’Reilly, G.J., Sullivan, T.J. Probabilistic seismic assessment and retrofit considerations for Italian RC frame buildings. Bull Earthquake Eng 16, 1447–1485 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0257-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0257-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation