Developing a Direct Approach for Estimating Expected Annual Losses of Italian Buildings

References

• Baker, J. W. 2015. Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthquake Spectra: February 2015 31 (1): 579–99. doi:10.1193/021113EQS025M.
   Google Scholar
• Cardone, D. 2007. Nonlinear static methods vs. experimental shaking table test results. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 11 (6): 847–75. doi:10.1080/13632460601173938.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardone, D. 2016. Fragility curves and loss functions for RC structural components with smooth rebars. Earthquakes and Structures 10 (5): 1181–212. doi:10.12989/eas.2016.10.5.1181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardone, D., and A. Flora. 2018. Multiple inelastic mechanisms analysis (MIMA): A simplified method for the estimation of the seismic response of RC frame buildings. Engineering Structures 145: 368–80. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.05.026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardone, D., G. Gesualdi, and G. Perrone. 2019. Cost-Benefit analysis of alternative retrofit strategies for RC Frame Buildings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 23 (2): 208–41. doi:10.1080/13632469.2017.1323041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardone, D., and G. Perrone. 2015. Developing fragility curves and loss functions for masonry infill walls. Earthquakes and Structures 9 (1): 257–79. doi:10.12989/eas.2015.9.1.257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardone, D., and G. Perrone. 2017. Damage and loss assessment of pre-70 RC frame buildings with FEMA P-58. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 21 (1): 23–61. doi:10.1080/13632469.2016.1149893.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardone, D., T. J. Sullivan, G. Gesualdi, and G. Perrone. 2017. Simplified estimation of the expected annual loss of reinforced concrete buildings. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 46 (12): 2009–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CIAMI (Collegio degli Ingegneri e degli Architetti di Milano). 2014. Prezzo tipologie edilizie. Rome, Italy: DEI Tipografia del Genio Civile. (in Italian).
   Google Scholar
• Cosenza, E., C. Del Vecchio, M. Di Ludovico, M. Dolce, C. Moroni, A. Prota, and E. Renzi. 2018. The Italian guidelines for seismic risk classification of constructions: Technical principles and validation. Bull Earthquake Eng 16: 5905. doi:10.1007/s10518-018-0431-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crisafulli, F. J., A. J. Carr, and R. Park. 2000. Analytical modelling of infilled frame structures - A general review. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineerin 33 (1): 30–47.
   Google Scholar
• Del Vecchio, C., M. Di Ludovico, S. Pampanin, and A. Prota. 2018. Repair costs of existing RC buildings damaged by the L’Aquila earthquake and comparison with FEMA P-58 predictions. Earthquake Spectra: February 2018 34 (1): 237–63. doi:10.1193/122916EQS257M.
   Google Scholar
• Di Ludovico, M., A. Prota, C. Moroni, G. Manfredi, and M. Dolce. 2017. Reconstruction process of damaged residential buildings outside historical centres after the L’Aquila earthquake: part II—“heavy damage” reconstruction. Bull Earthquake Eng 15: 693. doi:10.1007/s10518-016-9979-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DM (Decreto Ministeriale) n. 58/2017. 2017. Linee Guida per la Classificazione del Rischio Sismico delle Costruzioni. Rome, Italy: Italian Ministry of Infrastructures and Trasport.
   Google Scholar
• Dolce, M., and G. Manfredi. 2015. Libro bianco sulla ricostruzione privata fuori dai centri storici nei comuni colpiti dal sisma dell’Abruzzo del 6 aprile 2009. Doppiavoce, Napoli, 153, (in Italian).
   Google Scholar
• Dolsek, M., and P. Fajfar. 2008. The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response of a four-storey reinforced concrete frame—a deterministic assessment. Engineering Structures 30: 1991–2001. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.01.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FEMA 356. 2000. Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• FEMA P-58. 2012. Next-generation seismic performance assessment for buildings, volume 1 – methodology, volume 2 – implementation guide. Washington, DC: ATC - Applied Technology Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• FEMA P-695. 2009. Quantification of building seismic performance factors. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• HAZUS. 1997. Earthquake loss estimation methodology. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Ibarra, L. F., R. A. Medina, and H. Krawinkler. 2005. Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 34: 1489–511. doi:10.1002/eqe.495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kircher, C. A., A. A. Nassar, O. Kustu, and W. T. Holmes. 1997a. Development of building damage functions for earthquake loss estimation. Earthquake Spectra 13 (4): 663–82. doi:10.1193/1.1585974.
   Google Scholar
• Kircher, C. A., R. K. Reitherman, R. V. Whitman, and C. Arnold. 1997b. Estimation of earthquake losses to buildings. Earthquake Spectra 13 (4): 703–20. doi:10.1193/1.1585976.
   Google Scholar
• Koduru, S. D., and T. Haukaas. 2010. Probabilistic seismic loss assessment of a Vancouver high-rise building. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering 136 (3): 235–45. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000099.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mander, J. B., J. Sircar, and I. Damnjanovic. 2012. Direct loss model for seismically damaged structures. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 41 (3): 571–86. doi:10.1002/eqe.1148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masi, A., A. Digrisolo, and V. Manfredi. 2015. Fragility curves of gravity-load designed RC buildings with regularity in plan. Earthquakes and Structures 9 (1): 1–27. doi:10.12989/eas.2015.9.1.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKenna, F., M. H. Scott, and G. L. Fenves. 2010. Nonlinear finite-element analysis software architecture using object composition. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 24 (1): 95–107. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montaldo, V., and C. Meletti. 2007. Valutazione del valore della ordinata spettrale a 1sec e ad altri periodi di interesse ingegneristico. Progetto DPC-INGV S1 (Deliverable D3): 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Norme Tecniche, N. T. C. 2018. Per Le Costruzioni. Rome, Italy: Dipartimento della Protezione Civile.
   Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, G. J., D. Perrone, M. Fox, R. Monteiro, and A. Filiatrault. 2018b. Seismic assessment and loss estimation of existing school buildings in Italy. Engineering Structures 168: 142–162.7. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.04.056.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, G. J., and T. J. Sullivan. 2015. Influence of modelling parameters on the fragility assessment of pre-1970 Italian RC structures. COMPDYN 2015-5th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Crete Island.
   Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, G. J., and T. J. Sullivan. 2017a. Modeling techniques for the seismic assessment of the existing Italian RC frame structures. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 1–35. doi:10.1080/13632469.2017.1360224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, G. J., and T. J. Sullivan. 2017b. Modelling uncertainty in existing Italian RC frames. COMPDYN 2017-6th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Rhodes Island. doi: 10.7712/120117.5445.16952.
   Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, G. J., and T. J. Sullivan. 2018a. Probabilistic seismic assessment and retrofit considerations for Italian RC frame buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 16 (3): 1447–85. doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0257-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, G. J., and T. J. Sullivan. 2018b. Quantification of modelling uncertainty in existing Italian RC frames. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 47 (4): 1054–74. doi:10.1002/eqe.3005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, G. J., T. J. Sullivan, and R. Monteiro. 2018a. On the seismic assessment and retrofit of infilled RC frames structures. 16th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Thessaloniki, Greece.
   Google Scholar
• Pagano, M. 1963. Strutture, vol. I. Napoli, Italy: Liguori. (in Italian).
   Google Scholar
• Pampanin, S., G. M. Calvi, and M. Moratti. 2002. Seismic behaviour of RC beam-column joints designed for gravity loads. 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, vol. 726, London, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Piazza, A. 2013. “Development of a simplified displacement-based procedure for the seismic design and assessment of RC frame structures. MSc Thesis, IUSS Pavia.
   Google Scholar
• Ramirez, C. M., and E. Miranda. 2009. Building specific loss estimation methods & tools for simplified performance based earthquake engineering. Report No 171 2009, Blume.
   Google Scholar
• Regio Decreto 16/11/1939 n. 2229. 1939. Norme per la esecuzione delle opere in conglomerato cementizio semplice ed armato, (in Italian).
   Google Scholar
• Rossetto, T., and A. Elnashai. 2003. Derivation of vulnerability functions for European-type RC structures based on observational data. Engineering Structures 25 (10): 1241–63. doi:10.1016/S0141-0296(03)00060-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santarella, L. 1956. Il cemento armato – La tecnica e la statica, I volume. Milano, Italy: Edizione Hoepli. (in Italian).
   Google Scholar
• Sassun, K., T. J. Sullivan, P. Morandi, and D. Cardone. 2016. Characterising the in-plane seismic performance of infill masonry. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 49 (1): 100–17. doi:10.5459/bnzsee.49.1.98-115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan, T. J. 2016. Use of limit state loss versus intensity models for simplified estimation of expected annual loss. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 20 (6): 954–74. doi:10.1080/13632469.2015.1112325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vamvatsikos, D., and C. A. Cornell. 2002. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 31 (3): 491–514. doi:10.1002/eqe.141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verderame, G. M., G. Manfredi, and G. Frunzio. 2001a. Le proprietà meccaniche degli acciai impiegati nelle strutture in cemento armato realizzate negli anni ’60 . X Congresso Nazionale “l’ingegneria Sismica in Italia”, Potenza-Matera 9–13 (settembre): 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Verderame, G. M., G. Manfredi, and G. Frunzio. 2001b. Le proprietà meccaniche dei calcestruzzi impiegati nelle strutture in cemento armato realizzate negli anni ’60 . X Congresso Nazionale “l’ingegneria Sismica in Italia”, Potenza-Matera 9–13 (settembre): 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Verderame, G. M., P. Ricci, G. De Carlo, and G. Manfredi. 2009. Cyclic bond behaviour of plain bars. Part I: Experimental investigation. Construction and Building Materials 29 (2009): 3499–511. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.07.002.
   Google Scholar
• Vona, M., and A. Masi. 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 (in Italian).
   Google Scholar
• Welch, D. P., T. J. Sullivan, and G. M. Calvi. 2014. Developing direct displacement-based procedures for simplified loss assessment in performance-based earthquake engineering. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 18 (2): 290–322. doi:10.1080/13632469.2013.851046.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitman, R. V., T. Anagnos, C. A. Kircher, H. J. Lagorio, R. S. Lawson, and P. Schneider. 1997. Development of a national earthquake loss estimation methodology. Earthquake Spectra 13 (4): 643–61. doi:10.1193/1.1585973.
   Google Scholar