Investigation of Drift-based Damage Limit States for Historical Masonry Structures

References

• Alejo, L. E., N. Mendes, P. B. Lourenço, and G. Martínez. 2021. Protecting the historic buildings of Mexico: the barrel vault of San Agustin church in morelia. J Perform Constr Facil 35 (2):04020146. doi:10.1061/(asce)cf.1943-5509.0001556.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altunişik, A. C., F. Sunca, A. F. Genç, and C. Tavşan. 2021. Post-earthquake damage assessments of historic mosques and effects of near-fault and far-fault ground motions on seismic responses. Int J Archit Herit 1–36. doi:10.1080/15583058.2021.2011475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aşıkoğlu, A., Ö. Avşar, P. B. Lourenço, and L. C. Silva. 2019. Effectiveness of seismic retrofitting of a historical masonry structure: Kütahya Kurşunlu Mosque, Turkey. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 17 (6):3365–95. doi:10.1007/s10518-019-00603-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aşıkoğlu, A., G. Vasconcelos, and P. B. Lourenço. 2021. Overview on the nonlinear static procedures and performance-based approach on modern unreinforced masonry buildings with structural irregularity. Buildings 11 (4):147. doi:10.3390/buildings11040147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aşıkoğlu, A., G. Vasconcelos, P. B. Lourenço, and B. Pantò. 2020. Pushover analysis of unreinforced irregular masonry buildings: Lessons from different modeling approaches. Eng Struct 218:110830. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110830.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchini, N., N. Mendes, C. Calderini, et al. 2022. Seismic response of a small-scale masonry groin vault : Experimental investigation by performing quasi-static and shake table tests. Bull Earthq Eng 20:1739–65. doi:10.1007/s10518-021-01280-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchini, N., N. Mendes, and P. Lourenço. 2020. Seismic evaluation of Bagan heritage site (Myanmar): The Loka-Hteik-Pan temple. Structures 24:905–21. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2020.01.020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calvi, G. M. 1999. A displacement-based approach for vulnerability evaluation of classes of buildings. J Earthq Eng 3 (3):411–38. doi:10.1080/13632469909350353.
   Google Scholar
• Cattari, S., B. Calderoni, I. Caliò, and G. Camata. 2021. Nonlinear modeling of the seismic response of masonry structures : Critical review and open issues towards engineering practice. Bull Earthq Eng. doi:10.1007/s10518-021-01263-1.
   Google Scholar
• Cattari, S., and G. Magenes. 2021. Benchmarking the software packages to model and assess the seismic response of unreinforced masonry existing buildings through nonlinear static analyses. Bull Earthq Eng. doi:10.1007/s10518-021-01078-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çetin, K. Ö., G. Mylonakis, A. Sextos, and S. J. P. et al. 2020. Seismological and Engineering Effects of the M 7.0 Samos Island (Aegean Sea) earthquake. Greece: Hell Assoc Earthq Eng Athens. doi:10.18118/G6H088.
   Google Scholar
• Eurocode 8. (2005). Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 3: Assessment and retrofitting of buildings. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• FEMA 306. (1998a). Evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and masonry wall buildings. Applied technology council (ATC-55 Project).Washington DC: Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• FEMA. 1998b. Evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and masonry wall buildings: Basic procedures manual, 307. Washington DC: Applied Technology Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Frumento, S., G. Magenes, P. Morandi, and G. M. Calvi . (2009). Interpretation of experimental shear tests on clay brick masonry walls and evaluation of q-factors for seismic design. Pavia: EUCENTRE, IUSS PRESS.
   Google Scholar
• Funari, M. F., L. C. Silva, N. Savalle, and P. B. Lourenco. 2021. A concurrent micro/macro FE-model optimized with a limit analysis tool for the assessment of dry-joint masonry structures. International Journal for Multiscale Computational Engineering. doi:10.1615/IntJMultCompEng.2021040212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FX+ for DIANA (2013) Midas FX+ for DIANA, Customized Pre/Post-processor for DIANA
   Google Scholar
• General Directorate of Cultural Heritage and Museums of Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Tourism. (2021). Immovable cultural heritage. https://kvmgm.ktb.gov.tr/TR-44798/turkiye-geneli-korunmasi-gerekli-tasinmaz-kultur-varlig-.html
   Google Scholar
• GERMHS. 2017. A guideline for earthquake risk management of historical structures in Turkey. Ankara, Turkey: General Directorate of Foundations.
   Google Scholar
• Graziotti, F., U. Tomassetti, S. Kallioras, et al. 2017. Shaking table test on a full scale URM cavity wall building. Bull Earthq Eng 15:5329–64. doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0185-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grünthal, G. (1998). European macroseismic scale. Luxembourg: European Seismological Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Italian Code. (2009). Technical standards for constructions - DM 14/01/2008.Gazzetta Ufficiale Serie Generale, n. 47 del 26/02/2009. Italy
   Google Scholar
• Jokilehto, J. 1999. A history of architectural conservation. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kallioras, S., A. A. Correia, F. Graziotti, et al. 2020. Collapse shake-table testing of a clay-URM building with chimneys. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 18 (3): 1009–1048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kallioras, S., G. Guerrini, U. Tomassetti, et al. 2018. Experimental seismic performance of a full-scale unreinforced clay-masonry building with flexible timber diaphragms. Eng Struct 161:231–49. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.02.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagomarsino, S., and S. Cattari. 2015. PERPETUATE guidelines for seismic performance-based assessment of cultural heritage masonry structures. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 13 (1):13–47. doi:10.1007/s10518-014-9674-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lourenço, P. B., N. Mendes, A. A. Costa, and A. Campos-Costa. 2017. Methods and challenges on the out-of-plane assessment of existing masonry buildings. Int J Archit Herit 11:1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marino, S., S. Cattari, and S. Lagomarsino. 2019. Are the nonlinear static procedures feasible for the seismic assessment of irregular existing masonry buildings? Eng Struct 200:109700. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109700.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morandi, P., L. Albanesi, F. Graziotti, T. Li Piani, A. Penna, G. Magenes 2018. Development of a dataset on the in-plane experimental response of URM piers with bricks and blocks. Construction and Building Materials 190:593–611. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.09.070.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nara Document. (1994). The nara document on authenticity. (ICOMOS)
   Google Scholar
• NTC. 2018. Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni. DM 17/1/2018. Gazz Uff della Repubb Ital.
   Google Scholar
• NTC2008 Italian Code for Structural Design (Norme tecniche per le costruzioni - NTC). D.M. 14/January/2008, Official Bullettin no. 29 of February 4th, 2008, In Italian
   Google Scholar
• Parisse, F., S. Cattari, R. Marques, et al. 2021. Benchmarking the seismic assessment of unreinforced masonry buildings from a blind prediction test. Structures 31:982–1005. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2021.01.096.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roca, P. (2006). The Study and Restoration of Historical Structures: From Principles to Practice, Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions. New Delhi. In ed. P. B. Lourenço, P. Roca, C. Modena, and S. Agrawal, 9–24.
   Google Scholar
• Scacco, J., G. Salazar, N. Bianchini et al (2019). Seismic assessment of the church of Carmo convent Congress on Numerical Methods in Engineering July Guimaraes, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Senaldi, I. E., G. Guerrini, P. Comini, F. Graziotti, A. Penna, K. Beyer, and G. Magenes. 2020. Experimental seismic performance of a half-scale stone masonry building aggregate. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 18 (2):609–43. doi:10.1007/s10518-019-00631-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva, L. C., N. Mendes, P. B. Lourenço, and J. Ingham. 2018. Seismic Structural Assessment of the Christchurch Catholic Basilica, New Zealand. Structures 15:115–30. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2018.06.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva, L. C. M., and G. Milani. 2022. applied sciences A FE-based macro-element for the assessment of masonry structures : linear static, vibration, and non-linear cyclic analyses. Appl Sci 12 (3):1248. doi:10.3390/app12031248.
   Google Scholar
• TBEC. 2018. Turkish earthquake code: specifications for building design under earthquake effects, Ankara.
   Google Scholar
• Tomaževič, M. 1999. Earthquake-resistant design of masonry building. London: Imperial College Press.
   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. Bull Earthq Eng 15 (12):5435–79. doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0188-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, G., E. Del Rey Castillo, L. Wotherspoon, and J. Ingham. 2021. Performance-based seismic assessment of an historic high-rise masonry building considering soil-structure interaction. Structures 32:38–53. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2021.02.060.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zizi, M., C. Chisari, J. Rouhi, G. Matteis, and De. 2022. Comparative analysis on macroscale material models for the prediction of masonry in-plane behavior. Bull Earthq Eng 20 (2):963–96. doi:10.1007/s10518-021-01275-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar