A methodology for deriving analytical fragility curves for masonry buildings based on stochastic nonlinear analyses

Engineering Structures

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1312-1323

  Rota, M ^a,b   Penna, A ^b   Magenes, G ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PAVIA   (Italy)

^b European Centre for Training and Research in Earthquake Engineering   (Italy)

Author keywords

Fragility curves; Masonry buildings; Monte Carlo simulation; Nonlinear analysis; Seismic vulnerability

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; BUILDING PROTOTYPES; COMPLEMENTARY CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTIONS; DAMAGE STATE; DISPLACEMENT DEMAND; FRAGILITY CURVES; GROUND MOTIONS; INPUT VARIABLES; MASONRY BUILDING; MECHANICAL PARAMETERS; MONTE CARLO SIMULATION; NON-LINEAR DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; NONLINEAR STATICS; SEISMIC VULNERABILITY; STOCHASTIC ANALYSIS;

BUILDINGS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FOUNDATIONS; MASONRY CONSTRUCTION; MASONRY MATERIALS; MECHANICAL PROPERTIES; MONTE CARLO METHODS; NONLINEAR ANALYSIS; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS; RANDOM PROCESSES; RANDOM VARIABLES; SEISMOLOGY; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION;

BUILDING; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DAMAGE MECHANICS; MASONRY; METHODOLOGY; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION; SEISMIC DESIGN; SEISMIC RESPONSE; STOCHASTICITY; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL RESPONSE;

EID: 77950339842     PISSN: 01410296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.01.009     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Rota M., Penna A., Strobbia C.L. Processing Italian damage data to derive typological fragility curves. Soil Dyn Earth Eng 2008, 28:933-947.
2. RISK-UE. The European risk-Ue project: An advanced approach to earthquake risk scenarios (2001-2004). 2004. http://www.risk-ue.net.
3. Lagomarsino S., Giovinazzi S. Macroseismic and mechanical models for the vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 2006, 4:415-443.
4. Restrepo-Velez LF, Magenes G. Simplified procedure for the seismic risk assessment of unreinforced masonry buildings. In: Proc. 13th WCEE. 2004. Paper No. 2561.
5. Magenes G. Masonry building design in seismic areas: Recent experiences and prospects from a European standpoint. In: Proc. 1st ECEES. 2006.
6. D'Ayala D.F. Force and displacement based vulnerability assessment for traditional buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 2005, 3:235-265.
7. Cattari S, Frumento S, Lagomarsino S, Parodi S, Resemini S. Multi-level procedure for the seismic vulnerability assessment of masonry buildings: The case of Sanremo (north-western italy). In: Proc. 1st ECEES. 2006.
8. Kappos A.J., Panagopoulos G., Panagiotopoulos C., Penelis G. A hybrid method for the vulnerability assessment of R/C and URM buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 2006, 4:391-413.
9. Bothara J.K., Mander J.B., Dhakal R.P., Khare R.K., Maniyar M.M. Seismic performance and financial risk of masonry houses. ISET J Earthq Technol 2007, 44(3-4):421-444.
10. Erberik M.A. Generation of fragility curves for Turkish masonry buildings considering in-plane failure modes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2008, 37(3):387-405.
11. Pasticier l., Amadio C., Fragiacomo M. Non-linear seismic analysis and vulnerability evaluation of a masonry building by means of the sap2000 v.10 code. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2008, 37(3):467-485.
12. Park J., Towashiraporn P., Craig J.I., Goodno B.J. Seismic fragility analysis of low-rise unreinforced masonry structures. Eng Struct 2009, 31(1):125-137.
13. Galasco A, Lagomarsino S, Penna A. TREMURI program: Seismic analyses of 3d masonry buildings. Italy: University of Genoa; 2009.
14. Penna A. A macro-element procedure for the non-linear dynamic analysis of masonry buildings. Ph.D. dissertation. Italy: Politecnico di Milano; 2002 [in Italian].
15. Tomaževič M., Klemenc I. Seismic behaviour of confined masonry walls. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1997, 26:1059-1071.
16. Tomaaževič M. Seismic damage to masonry buildings. Correlation between damage and seismic resistance of masonry walls and buildings 1999, Balkema, Rotterdam. A. Bernardini (Ed.).
17. OPCM 3274. Ordinanza del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri n. 3274 del 20 Marzo 2003: Primi elementi in materia di criteri generali per la classificazione sismica del territorio nazionale e di normative tecniche per le costruzioni in zona sismica. GU n. 72 del 8-5-2003, with further modifications in OPCM 3431. 2005 [in Italian].
18. Rossetto T. Vulnerability curves for the seismic assessment of reinforced concrete building populations. Ph.D. dissertation. London: Imperial College; 2004.
19. Rubinstein R.Y. Simulation and the Monte Carlo method 1981, Wiley, New York.
20. Pinto P.E., Giannini R., Franchin P. Methods for seismic reliability analysis of structures 2004, IUSS Press, Pavia (Italy).
21. Zárate F, Hurtado J, Oñate E, Rodríguez J. STAC program: Stochastic analysis computational tool, CIMNE, Centro Internacional de Métodos Numéricos en la Ingeniería. Barcelona, España: 2002.
22. Lagomarsino S, Penna A. A nonlinear model for pushover and dynamic analysis of masonry buildings. In: Proc. int. conf. computational and experimental engineering and sciences. 2003.
23. Penna A, Cattari S, Galasco A, Lagomarsino S. Seismic assessment of masonry structures by nonlinear macro-element analysis. In: Proc. 4th int. seminar SAHC. 2004.
24. Lagomarsino S, Galasco A, Penna A. Nonlinear macro-element dynamic analysis of masonry buildings. In: Proc. ECCOMAS conf. computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering. 2007.
25. Gambarotta L, Lagomarsino S. On dynamic response of masonry panels'. Gambarotta L, editor. Proc. Nat. Conf. La meccanica delle murature tra teoria e progetto. 1996 [in Italian].
26. Faella G, Manfredi G, Realfonzo R. Comportamento sperimentale di pannelli in muratura di tufo sottoposti ad azioni orizzontali di tipo ciclico. In: Proc. 5th it. conf. earthquake engineering. 1991 [in Italian].
27. ENV 1998-3 2005 Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 3: Assessment and retrofitting of buildings.
28. Galasco A, Lagomarsino S, Penna A. On the use of pushover analysis for existing masonry buildings. In: Proc. 1st ECEES. 2006. Paper No. 1080.
29. Vamvatsikos D., Cornell C.A. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2002, 31:491-514.
30. UBC Uniform Building Code. Structural engineering design provisions. In: International conference of building officials, vol. 2. 1997.
31. ENV 1998-1 2005 Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules. seismic actions and rules for buildings.
32. Bommer J.J., Acevedo A.B., Douglas J. The selection and scaling of real earthquake accelerograms for use in seismic design and assessment. Proc. ACI Int. conf. seismic bridge design and retrofit 2003, American Concrete Institute, La Jolla(California).
33. Dall'Ara A, Lai CG, Strobbia C. Selection of spectrum-compatible real accelerograms for seismic response analyses of soil deposits. In: Proc. 1st ECEES. 2006. Paper No. 1240.
34. Bommer J., Acevedo A.B. On the use of real earthquake accelerograms as input to dynamic analysis. J Earthq Eng 2004, 8(Special Issue 1):43-91.
35. FEMA. HAZUS earthquakes loss estimation methodology. Washington: US federal emergency management agency; 1999.
36. Dymiotis C., Kappos A.J., Chryssanthopoulos M.K. Seismic reliability of RC frames with uncertain drift and member capacity. ASCE J Struct Eng 1999, 1038-1047.