Evaluation of different approaches for the estimation of the seismic vulnerability of masonry towers

A series of simplified approaches are evaluated for their effectiveness to estimate the seismic vulnerability of historical masonry towers. First, collapse loads are evaluated on sixteen “idealized” benchmark cases with different slenderness and shear area. Both analytical and computational approaches are used, namely the analytical procedure proposed by the Italian Guidelines on the Built Heritage and pushover analyses conducted using the commercial codes UDEC and 3Muri. The sixteen towers are representative cases which can be encountered in practice. Their geometry is idealized into parallelepiped blocks with hollow square cross-sections, thus favoring the utilization of 2D approaches, beneficial to drastically reduce the effort required for repeated computations. In addition, a Monte Carlo MC upper bound limit analysis strategy is proposed, in order to have an insight into the possible failure mechanisms for the different cases investigated. Deliberately is avoided the introduction of any form of irregularity and they are supposed isolated from the neighboring buildings, to obtain results exclusively dependent from geometric features. Among all the possible collapse mechanisms, five of them are selected according to the probability of occurrence based on past earthquake experiences. Five million cloud points of collapse accelerations are obtained by carrying the height, slenderness and shear area of the idealized towers. The approach is very fast and allows identifying different regions where single mechanisms are active. The results are confirmed repeating MC simulations with a triangular FE upper bound limit analysis discretization of the idealized towers. A series of equations are provided in order to assist engineers and practitioners to obtain a preliminary estimation of their expected collapse acceleration. For validation purposes, the results obtained previously with refined full 3D FE models of 25 towers located in the Northern Italy are reported. Satisfactory agreement between the predictions provided by simplified methods and sophisticated analyses are obtained.

[1]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Seismic Assessment of a Medieval Masonry Tower in Northern Italy by Limit, Nonlinear Static, and Full Dynamic Analyses , 2012 .

[2]  Vasilis Sarhosis,et al.  Discrete element modelling of the in-plane and out-of-plane behaviour of dry-joint masonry wall constructions , 2017 .

[3]  Federico Perotti,et al.  Seismic analysis of the Asinelli Tower and earthquakes in Bologna , 1998 .

[4]  Paulo B. Lourenço,et al.  The effect of skew angle on the mechanical behaviour of masonry arches , 2014 .

[5]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Effects of Geometrical Features on the Seismic Response of Historical Masonry Towers , 2018 .

[6]  Serena Cattari,et al.  TREMURI program: An equivalent frame model for the nonlinear seismic analysis of masonry buildings , 2013 .

[7]  Mario Como,et al.  Statics of Historic Masonry Constructions , 2012 .

[8]  Paulo B. Lourenço,et al.  Numerical models for the seismic assessment of an old masonry tower , 2010 .

[9]  Katalin Bagi,et al.  Minimum thickness of semi-circular skewed masonry arches , 2017 .

[10]  Giuseppina Uva,et al.  Comparative seismic vulnerability analysis on ten masonry towers in the coastal Po Valley in Italy , 2013 .

[11]  Y. Sheng,et al.  Influence of brick–mortar interface on the mechanical behaviour of low bond strength masonry brickwork lintels , 2015 .

[12]  Cristina Padovani,et al.  Numerical modelling of the structural behaviour of Buti's bell tower , 2004 .

[13]  Paulo B. Lourenço,et al.  Abbreviated Title : Homogenised limit analysis of masonry , failure surfaces , 2007 .

[14]  A. Marrie,et al.  Appendicectomia con accesso laparotomico per appendicite , 2008 .

[15]  Vasilis Sarhosis,et al.  Identification of material parameters for low bond strength masonry , 2014 .

[16]  E. Oñate,et al.  A plastic-damage model for concrete , 1989 .

[17]  Abdurrahman Şahin,et al.  Numerical damage assessment of Haghia Sophia bell tower by nonlinear FE modeling , 2010 .

[18]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Seismic behavior of the San Pietro di Coppito church bell tower in L’Aquila, Italy , 2012 .

[19]  Giuseppe Lacidogna,et al.  Numerical assessment of three medieval masonry towers subjected to different loading conditions , 2006 .

[20]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Computational Modeling of Masonry Structures Using the Discrete Element Method , 2016 .

[21]  Sarhosis,et al.  Parametric seismic analysis on masonry bell towers , 2017 .

[22]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Non-linear dynamic and static analyses on eight historical masonry towers in the North-East of Italy , 2016 .

[23]  P. Cundall.  A computer model for simulating progressive, large-scale movements in blocky rock systems , 1971 .

[24]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Collapse of the clock tower in Finale Emilia after the May 2012 Emilia Romagna earthquake sequence: Numerical insight , 2014 .

[25]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Seismic assessment of historical masonry towers by means of simplified approaches and standard FEM , 2016 .

[26]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Role of inclination in the seismic vulnerability of bell towers: FE models and simplified approaches , 2017, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[27]  Gabriele Milani,et al.  Homogenised limit analysis of masonry walls, Part II: Structural examples , 2006 .

[28]  Francesco Fabbrocino.  Estimation of the natural periods of existing masonry towers through empirical procedure , 2016 .