2022
DOI: 10.1080/13632469.2022.2096721
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparing the Observed and Numerically Simulated Seismic Damage: A Unified Procedure for Unreinforced Masonry and Reinforced Concrete Buildings

Abstract: In this paper, a unified procedure for assessing the effectiveness of modelling strategies for existing buildings is proposed. The procedure is applied to unreinforced masonry and reinforced concrete real buildings struck by recent earthquakes. A matching index (MI) suitable to be adopted across different structural types is proposed. It aims to synthetically compare numerical outcomes with the evidence of the damage experienced by the selected case-study buildings.Results confirmed a good reliability and effe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 98 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The mechanical parameters adopted are listed in Table 2 and were based on those calibrated for the Visso's school (Brunelli et al 2021a) through a very accurate numerical simulation of the actual response of this monitored asset. The reliability of those values was also con rmed in Cattari and Angiolilli (2022) and Angiolilli et al (2022). The strength values (τ 0 ) are slightly higher than that used for the school (about 10%), but still consistent with the reference values proposed by MIT (2019) for analogous masonry type.…”
Section: Global In-plane Responsesupporting
confidence: 76%
“…The mechanical parameters adopted are listed in Table 2 and were based on those calibrated for the Visso's school (Brunelli et al 2021a) through a very accurate numerical simulation of the actual response of this monitored asset. The reliability of those values was also con rmed in Cattari and Angiolilli (2022) and Angiolilli et al (2022). The strength values (τ 0 ) are slightly higher than that used for the school (about 10%), but still consistent with the reference values proposed by MIT (2019) for analogous masonry type.…”
Section: Global In-plane Responsesupporting
confidence: 76%
“…The seismic risk associated with one-storey existing precast buildings has been studied in various works [18,19,20,21,15]. The results obtained confirm the need to implement retrofit interventions to protect working activities and human lives.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…The mechanical parameters adopted are listed in Table 2 and were based on those calibrated for the Visso's school (Brunelli et al 2021) through a very accurate numerical simulation of the actual response of this permanently monitored asset. The reliability of those values was also confirmed in Cattari and Angiolilli (2022) and Angiolilli et al (2022). Some mechanical parameters were slightly modified with respect to those assumed for the Visso's school based on expert judgment and some preliminary sensitivity analyses performed on the aggregate for the aim of the numerical simulation of actual response reported in Brunelli et al (2022a).…”
Section: Global In-plane Responsementioning
confidence: 89%