Suitability of Height Amplification Factors for Seismic Assessment of Existing Unreinforced Masonry Components

Abstract

What is it? Your original manuscript (sometimes called a "preprint") before you submitted it to a journal for peer review.How can I share it? You can share your AOM as much as you like, including via social media, on a scholarly collaboration network, your own personal website, or on a preprint server intended for noncommercial use (for example arXiv, bioRxiv, SocArXiv, etc.). Posting on a preprint server is not considered to be duplicate publication and this will not jeopardize consideration for publication in a Taylor & Francis or Routledge journal.If you do decide to post your AOM anywhere, we ask that, upon acceptance, you acknowledge that the article has been accepted for publication as follows:

Simulated seismic testing of two pitched roofs constructed using timber trusses extracted from vintage unreinforced masonry buildings

“…3,4 These effects generally include amplification of the ground motion, with a decrease in magnification if the building response becomes inelastic. In a review of empirical evidence, it was concluded 5 that the typical flexible timber diaphragms of URM buildings resulted in the input motion being amplified by a factor close to 2, on average, for many building/earthquake scenarios with PGA values as high as 0.35 g. Similarly, diaphragm stiffness can significantly influence both the magnitude and the distribution of the building base shear that is resisted by the in-plane loaded walls. 6 In addition to these effects of horizontal diaphragms, the diaphragm stiffness can also influence the earthquake damage patterns in URM buildings.…”

Validation of a practice-oriented floor spectra formulation through actual data from the 2016/2017 Central Italy earthquake

“…The main parameters affecting the phenomenon are the characteristics of the ground motion (amplitude, frequency content and duration- Rodriguez et al 2021), the dynamic response of the primary structure, the lateral load resisting system, the floor level and the level of nonlinearity of both primary structure and nonstructural element Kazantzi et al 2020aKazantzi et al , 2020b. Moreover, many additional parameters, such as diaphragm flexibility, torsional responses and also uncertainties in the inelastic behavior, can further amplify the seismic demands on nonstructural elements Derakhshan et al 2020). This research field is topical; thus, many numerical and experimental studies are available in literature, whose main findings are briefly summarized below.…”

“…This shift was ascribed by the authors to the decreasing of stiffness due to cracking but also due to inelastic rocking behavior of some piers in the prototype. Derakhshan et al (2020) reviewed empirical data from nine buildings obtained from the Centre for Engineering Strong Motion Data (CESMD 2019) for a qualitative evaluation of the effects of diaphragm flexibility. The building height of the considered samples varied from 6.7 to 12.6 m, while the horizontal diaphragms were made of timber sheathing on timber joists and/or steel framing.…”

Validation of a practice-oriented floor spectra formulation through actual data from the 2016/2017 Central Italy earthquake

“…The main parameters affecting the phenomenon are the characteristic of the ground motion (amplitude, frequency content and duration - Rodriguez et al, 2021), the dynamic response of the primary structure, the lateral load resisting system, the floor level and the level of nonlinearity of both primary structure and secondary element Kazantzi et al, 2020a;Kazantzi et al, 2020b). Moreover, many additional parameters, such as diaphragm flexibility, torsional responses and also uncertainties in the inelastic behavior, can further amplify the seismic demands on secondary elements Derakhshan et al, 2020). This research field is topical; thus, many numerical and experimental studies are available in literature, whose main findings are briefly summarized below.…”

“…This shift was ascribed by the authors to the decreasing of stiffness due to cracking but also due to inelastic rocking behavior of some piers in the prototype. Derakhshan et al (2020) reviewed empirical data from nine buildings obtained from the Centre for Engineering Strong Motion Data (CESMD 2019) for a qualitative evaluation of the effects of diaphragm flexibility. The building height of the considered samples varied from 6.7 m to 12.6 m, while the horizontal diaphragms were made of timber sheathing on timber joists and/or steel framing.…”