2018
DOI: 10.1080/13632469.2018.1531093
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling and Seismic Response Analysis of RC Precast Italian Code-Conforming Buildings

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Within this framework, different new building typologies were considered, including reinforced concrete (r.c.) buildings (Ricci et al 2018, steel buildings (Scozzese et al 2018), precast structures (Magliulo et al 2018), seismically isolated buildings (Ragni et al 2018) and unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings. The latter is still the most commonly adopted solution for structural masonry in Italy, although reinforced masonry is also an option.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Within this framework, different new building typologies were considered, including reinforced concrete (r.c.) buildings (Ricci et al 2018, steel buildings (Scozzese et al 2018), precast structures (Magliulo et al 2018), seismically isolated buildings (Ragni et al 2018) and unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings. The latter is still the most commonly adopted solution for structural masonry in Italy, although reinforced masonry is also an option.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…time history analyses, are performed for ten different intensity motion (IM), with increasing intensity, from PGA equal to 0.011 g to 1.077 g. Each IM has twenty records in both horizontal directions and it corresponds to a defined return pe-riod Tr (Table 1). The records were selected according to the conditional mean spectrum approach [48]. The value of the reference period was selected to be appropriate for the fundamental period of the considered structure (2.0 s).…”
Section: Seismic Inputmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Starting from the work of Bressanelli et al (2019) and Magliulo et al (2018), this research moves further by: investigating two different hysteretic models for the beam-to-column connections, such as the hysteretic uniaxial material model (Sousa et al, 2020) and the Modified Ibarra-Medina-Krawinkler Deterioration model (Lignos and Krawinkler, 2011); explicitly modelling the cladding panels in a pendulum configuration; removing the hypothesis of rigid diaphragm by introducing the roof elements and three types of beam-to-roof connections, namely hot-rolled, cold-formed and welded; explicitly modelling the overhead crane and the oscillating payload. The building collapse rates obtained from the comprehensive 3D model allowed to validate the collapse rates obtained from previous simplified analyses.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%