Fragility Functions for Tall URM Buildings around Early 20th Century in Lisbon. Part 1: Methodology and Application at Building Level

References

• Appleton, J. G. 2005. Reabilitação de Edifícios “Gaioleiros”. 1st ed. Lisboa: Edições Orion (In Portuguese).
   Google Scholar
• Beyer, K., and S. Mangalathu. 2014. Numerical study on the peak strength of masonry spandrels with arches. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 18:169–86. doi:10.1080/13632469.2013.851047.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bracchi, S., M. Rota, Magenes G, and A. Penna. 2016. Seismic assessment of masonry buildings accounting for limited knowledge on materials by Bayesian updating. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 14 (8):2273–97. doi:10.1007/s10518-016-9905-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calderini, C., S. Cattari, and S. Lagomarsino. 2009. In-plane strength of unreinforced masonry piers. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 38:243–67. doi:10.1002/eqe.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Candeias, P. 2008. Avaliação da vulnerabilidade sísmica de edifícios de alvenaria. PhD Thesis. Universidade do Minho. Guimarães (In Portuguese).
   Google Scholar
• Cattari, S., and S. Lagomarsino. 2013a. Masonry structures. In Developments in the field of displacement based seismic assessment, ed. T. Sullivan, and G. M. Calvi, 524. IUSS Press (PAVIA) and EUCENTRE. ISBN: 978-88-6198-090-7.
   Google Scholar
• Cattari, S., and S. Lagomarsino. 2008. A strength criterion for the flexural behaviour of spandrels in un-reinforced masonry walls. Proceedings of the 14th Earthquake Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing.
   Google Scholar
• Cattari, S., and S. Lagomarsino. 2013b. Seismic assessment of mixed masonry-reinforced concrete buildings by non-linear static analyses. Earthquake and Structures 4 (3):241–64. doi:10.12989/eas.2013.4.3.241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cattari, S., S. Lagomarsino, and S. Marino. 2015. Reliability of nonlinear static analysis in case of irregular urm buildings with flexible diaphragms. SECED 2015 Conference: Earthquake Risk and Engineering towards a Resilient World, Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• CEN. 2004. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings Eurocode, EN 1998-1. European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• D’Ayala, D., and S. Paganoni. 2011. Assessment and analysis of damage in L’Aquila historic city centre after 6th April 2009. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 9 (1):81–104. doi:10.1007/s10518-010-9224-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Degli Abbati, S. 2016. Seismic Assessment of Single-Block Rocking Elements in Masonry Structures. PhD Thesis. Università Degli Studi de Genova. Genova.
   Google Scholar
• Degli Abbati, S., S. Cattari, I. Marassi, and S. Lagomarsino. 2014. Seismic out-of-plane assessment of Podestaà Palace in Mantua (Italy). Key Engineering Materials 624:88–96. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.624.88.
   Google Scholar
• Degli Abbati, S., S. Cattari, and S. Lagomarsino. 2018. Theoretically-based and practice-oriented formulations for the floor spectra evaluation. Earthquake and Structures 15 (5):565–581. doi:10.12989/eas.2018.15.5.565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Degli Abbati, S., and S. Lagomarsino. 2017. Out-of-plane static and dynamic response of masonry panels. Engineering Structures 150:803–20. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.07.070.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doherty, K., M. C. Griffith, N. Lam, and J. Wilson. 2002. Displacement-based seismic analysis for out-of-plane bending of unreinforced masonry walls. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 31 (4):833–50. doi:10.1002/eqe.126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, J., D. M. Seyedi, T. Ulrich, H. Modaressi, E. Foerster, K. Pitilakis, D. Pitilakis, A. Karatzetzou, G. Gazetas, E. Garini, et al. 2015. Evaluation of seismic hazard for the assessment of historical elements at risk: Description of input and selection of intensity measures. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 13 (1):49–65. doi:10.1007/s10518-014-9606-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endo, Y., L. Pelà, and P. Roca. 2017. Review of different pushover analysis methods applied to masonry buildings and comparison with nonlinear dynamic analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 21 (8):1234–55. doi:10.1080/13632469.2016.1210055.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erberik, M. A. 2008. Generation of fragility curves for Turkish masonry buildings considering in-plane failure modes. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 37 (3):387–405. doi:10.1002/eqe.760.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fajfar, P. 2000. A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 16 (3):573–92. doi:10.1193/1.1586128.
   Google Scholar
• Farinha, J., and A. Reis. 1993. Tabelas Técnicas. 2nd ed. Setúbal: Edição P.O.B. (In Portuguese).
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, V., and J. Farinha. 1974. Tabelas Técnicas para Engenharia civil. 7th ed. Lisboa: Técnica. Associação de Estudantes do Instituto Superior Técnico (In Portuguese).
   Google Scholar
• Franchin, P., and T. Pagnoni. 2018. A general model of resistance partial factors for seismic assessment and retrofit. 16th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Thessaloniki.
   Google Scholar
• Giongo, I., D. Dizhur, R. Tomasi, and J. M. Ingham. 2013. In-plane assessment of existing timber diaphragms in URM buildings via quasi-static and dynamic in situ tests. Advanced Materials Research 778:495–502. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.778.495.
   Google Scholar
• Griffith, M. C., N. T. K. Lam, J. L. Wilson, and K. Doherty. 2004. Experimental investigation of unreinforced brick masonry walls in flexure. Journal of Structural Engineering 130 (3):423–32. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:3(423).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grünthal, G. 1998. European Macroseismic Scale 1998: EMS-98. Chaiers Du Centre Européen de Géodynamique et de Séismologie, Luzembourg.
   Google Scholar
• Haddad, J., S. Cattari, and S. Lagomarsino. 2017 The use of sensitivity analysis for the probabilistic-based seismic assessment of existing buildings. 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Santiago Chile.
   Google Scholar
• Housner, G. W. 1963. The behavior of inverted pendulum structures during earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 53 (2):403–17.
   Google Scholar
• IPQ. 2010. Eurocódigo 8 - Projecto de estruturas para resistência aos sismos. Parte 1: Regras gerais, acções sísmicas e regras para edifícios, NP EN 1998-1:2010, Instituto Português Da Qualidade (IPQ), Caparica (In Portuguese).
   Google Scholar
• IPQ. 2017. Eurocódigo 8 – Projeto de estruturas para resistência aos sismos Parte 3: Avaliação e reabilitação de edifícios. NP EN 1998-3:2017, Instituto Português Da Qualidade (IPQ), Caparica (In Portuguese).
   Google Scholar
• JCSS, Joint Committee on Structural Safety. 2011. Probabilistic model code. Part 3: Resistance Models. 3.2. Masonry Properties. ISBN 978-3-909386-79-6.
   Google Scholar
• Kržan, M., S. Gostič, S. Cattari, and V. Bosiljkov. 2015. Acquiring reference parameters of masonry for the structural performance analysis of historical buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 13 (1):203–36. doi:10.1007/s10518-014-9686-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagomarsino, S., and S. Cattari. 2014. Fragility functions of masonry buildings. In SYNER-G: typology definition and fragility functions for physical elements at seismic risk, buildings, lifelines, transportation networks and critical facilities, geotechnical, geological and earthquake engineering, ed. K. Pitilakis, H. Crowley, and A. Kaynia, Vol. 27, 111–156. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7872-6_5.
   Google Scholar
• Lagomarsino, S. 2015. Seismic assessment of rocking masonry structures. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 13 (1):97–128. doi:10.1007/s10518-014-9609-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagomarsino, S., and S. Cattari. 2015. Seismic performance of historical masonry structures through pushover and nonlinear dynamic analyses. In Perspectives on European earthquake engineering and seismology, geotechnical, geological and earthquake engineering, ed. A. Ansal, Vol. 39, 265–292. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16964-4.
   Google Scholar
• Lagomarsino, S., A. Penna, A. Galasco, and Cattari. 2013. S. TREMURI program: An equivalent frame model for the nonlinear seismic analysis of masonry buildings. Engineering Structures 56:1787–99. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.08.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagomarsino, S., A. Penna, A. Galasco, and S. Cattari. 2012. TREMURI program: seismic analyses of 3D masonry buildings. Genoa: University of Genoa.
   Google Scholar
• Liel, A. B., C. B. Haselton, G. G. Deierlein, and J. W. Baker. 2009. Incorporating modelling uncertainties in the assessment of seismic collapse risk of buildings. Structural Safety 31:197–211. doi:10.1016/j.strusafe.2008.06.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lourenço, P. B., N. Mendes, L. F. Ramos, and D. V. Oliveira. 2011. Analysis of masonry structures without box behavior. International Journal of Architectural Heritage 5:369–82. doi:10.1080/15583058.2010.528824.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macedo, L., and J. M. Castro. 2017. SelEQ: An advanced ground motion record selection and scaling framework. Advances in Engineering Software 114:32–47. doi:10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.05.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marino, S., S. Cattari, and S. Lagomarsino. 2018 Use of nonlinear static procedures for irregular URM buildings in literature and codes. 16th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Thessaloniki.
   Google Scholar
• Mendes, N., P. B. Lourenço, and A. Campos-Costa. 2014. Shaking table testing of an existing masonry building: Assessment and improvement of the seismic performance. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 43 (2):247–66. doi:10.1002/eqe.2342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MIT. 2009. Istruzioni per l’applicazione delle “Norme tecniche per le costruzioni” di cui al Decreto Ministeriale 14/ 01/2008.Ministero Delle Infrastrutture e Dei Trasporti (MIT), Roma (In Italian).
   Google Scholar
• NTC. 2008. Norme tecniche per le costruzioni (NTC). Decreto Ministeriale 14/01/2008, Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti. G.U. S.O. n.30 del 4/2/2008, Roma (In Italian).
   Google Scholar
• NZSEE (2017) The seismic assessment of existing buildings. Technical guidelines for engineering assessments. Part C - Detailed Seismic Assessment. Part C8 - Unreinforced Masonry Buildings. New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering (NZSEE) Inc, Wellington.
   Google Scholar
• Ottonelli, D., S. Cattari, and S. Lagomarsino. 2015. Urban risk assessment: Fragility functions for masonry buildings. In Recent advances in mechanics, mechatronics and civil, chemical and industrial engineering. Mathematics and computers in science and engineering series, 49, I. J. Rudas ed., 177–189. ISBN: 978-1-61804-325-2.
   Google Scholar
• Penna, A., P. Morandi, M. Rota, C. F. Manzini, F. Da Porto, and G. Magenes. 2014. Performance of masonry buildings during the Emilia 2012 earthquake. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 12 (5):2255–73. doi:10.1007/s10518-013-9496-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pitilakis, K., H. Crowley, and A. M. Kaynia. 2014. SYNER-G: Typology definition and fragility functions for physical elements at seismic risk. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7872-6.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, K., R. Kennedy, and R. Bachman. 2007. Creating fragility functions for performance-based earthquake engineering. Earthquake Spectra 23 (2):471–89. doi:10.1193/1.2720892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rebelo, A., J. M. Guedes, B. Quelhas, and T. Ilharco. 2015. Assessment of the mechanical behaviour of tabique walls through experimental tests. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Historic Earthquake-Resistant Timber Frames in the Mediterranean Region, Lisboa.
   Google Scholar
• Rota, M., A. Penna, and G. Magenes. 2010. A methodology for deriving analytical fragility curves for masonry buildings based on stochastic nonlinear analyses. Engineering Structures 32 (5):1312–23. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.01.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RSEU. 1903. Regulamento de Salubridade das Edificações Urbanas (RSEU), Decreto de 14/ 02/1903 (In Portuguese). Ministério das Obras Públicas.
   Google Scholar
• Rubinstein, R. Y. 2011. Simulation and the Monte Carlo method. Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Silva, V., H. Crowley, H. Varum, and R. Pinho. 2015. (2015) Seismic risk assessment for mainland Portugal. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 13:429–57. doi:10.1007/s10518-014-9630-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simões, A. 2018. Evaluation of the seismic vulnerability of the unreinforced masonry buildings constructed in the transition between the 19th and 20th centuries in Lisbon, Portugal. PhD Thesis. Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa.
   Google Scholar
• Simões, A., J. Milošević, H. Meireles, R. Bento, S. Cattari, and S. Lagomarsino. 2015. Fragility curves for old masonry building types in Lisbon. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 13 (10):3083–105. doi:10.1007/s10518-015-9750-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simões, A., J. G. Appleton, R. Bento, J. V. Caldas, P. B. Lourenço, and S. Lagomarsino. 2017. Architectural and structural characteristics of masonry buildings between the 19th and 20th Centuries in Lisbon, Portugal. International Journal of Architectural Heritage 11 (4):457–74. doi:10.1080/15583058.2016.1246624.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simões, A., R. Bento, S. Cattari, and S. Lagomarsino. 2014. Seismic performance-based assessment of “Gaioleiro” buildings. Engineering Structures 80:486–500. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.09.025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simões, A., R. Bento, S. Lagomarsino, and P. B. Lourenço. 2016 Simplified evaluation of seismic vulnerability of early 20th century masonry buildings in Lisbon. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions, Leuven.
   Google Scholar
• Simões, A. G., R. Bento, S. Lagomarsino, and P. B. Lourenço. 2018. The seismic assessment of masonry buildings between the 19th and 20th centuries in Lisbon - Evaluation of uncertainties. Proceedings of the 10th International Masonry Conference, Milan
   Google Scholar
• Simões, A. G., R. Bento, S. Lagomarsino, S. Cattari, and P. B. Lourenço (2019a) Fragility functions for tall URM buildings around early 20th century in Lisbon. Part 2: application to different classes of buildings. International Journal of Architectural Heritage (in revision). Taylor & Francis Online.
   Google Scholar
• Simões, A. G., R. Bento, S. Lagomarsino, S. Cattari, and P. B. Lourenço. 2019b. Seismic assessment of nineteenth and twentieth centuries URM buildings in Lisbon: Structural features and derivation of fragility curves. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, Springer. doi:10.1007/s10518-019-00618-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turnšek, V., and F. Čačovič (1970) Some experimental results on the strength of brick masonry walls. Proceedings of the 2nd International Brick Masonry Conference, Stoke-on-Trent.
   Google Scholar
• Turnšek, V., and P. Sheppard. 1980. The shear and flexural resistance of masonry walls. Proceedings of the International Research Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Skopje.
   Google Scholar
• Vanin, F., D. Zaganelli, A. Penna, and K. Beyer. 2017. Estimates for the stiffness, strength and drift capacity of stone masonry walls based on 123 quasi-static cyclic tests reported in the literature. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2017:1–45. doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0188-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, P., T. Nagae, J. McCormick, M. Ikenaga, M. Katsuo, and M. Nakashima. 2008. Friction-based sliding between steel and steel, steel and concrete, and wood and stone. Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.
   Google Scholar