4.3 Article

Seismic Vulnerability of Historical Masonry Aggregate Buildings in Oriental Sicily

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE
Volume 14, Issue 4, Pages 517-540

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15583058.2018.1553075

Keywords

Cultural heritage preservation; historical aggregate buildings; masonry buildings; macro-modeling approach; push-over analyses; Seismic vulnerability

Funding

  1. MIUR (Italian Ministry for University and Research) within the project of the University of Catania FIR 2014

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The seismic vulnerability assessment of historical UnReinforced Masonry (URM) buildings is a very complex task since it is strongly related to a great variety both of geometrical layouts and of masonry mechanical characteristics. In this article, some results of a Catania University research project, denomined FIR 2014, focused on the seismic vulnerability estimation of historical buildings, built in Catania after the 1963 earthquake, are presented. First, a detailed typological analysis of the considered urban fabric, characterized by typical residential masonry buildings, has been performed. Such analysis allowed recognizing an elementary structural modulus, which has been studied according to different geometrical layouts representative of isolated or aggregate buildings. The results of nonlinear static analyses, performed by applying an innovative macro-element approach, allowed for the assessment the seismic vulnerability of typical URM buildings coherently to the Italian seismic code. The adopted macro-element strategy for the seismic assessment of aggregate masonry buildings, although related to a specific historical center, may be applied to similar urban fabrics and can also be used for the calibration and validation of fast seismic assessment strategies, particularly useful for the evaluation of the seismic risk at urban scale.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available