4.6 Article

Failure Analysis of Apennine Masonry Churches Severely Damaged during the 2016 Central Italy Seismic Sequence

期刊

BUILDINGS
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/buildings11020058

关键词

collapses; masonry churches; Central Italy earthquake; damage; nonlinear static analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to create a coherent sensitivity study on several specific case studies to understand the impact of geometry and irregularities on church structures. Pushover analysis demonstrates that masonry behaves as a nonlinear material with different tensile and compressive strengths.
This paper presents a detailed study of the damages and collapses suffered by various masonry churches in the aftermath of the seismic sequence of Central Italy in 2016. The damages will first be analyzed and then compared with the numerical data obtained through 3D simulations with eigenfrequency and then nonlinear static analyses (i.e., pushover). The main purposes of this study are: (i) to create an adequately consistent sensitivity study on several definite case studies to obtain an insight into the role played by geometry-which is always unique when referred to churches-and by irregularities; (ii) validate or address the applicability limits of the more widespread nonlinear approach, widely recommended by the Italian Technical Regulations. Pushover analyses are conducted assuming that the masonry behaves as a nonlinear material with different tensile and compressive strengths. The consistent number of case studies investigated will show how conventional static approaches can identify, albeit in a qualitative way, the most critical macro-elements that usually trigger both global and local collapses, underlining once again how the phenomena are affected by the geometry of stones and bricks, the texture of the wall face, and irregularities in the plan and elevation and in addition to hypotheses made on the continuity between orthogonal walls.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据