Requalification of RC Frame Apartment Buildings: Comparison of Seismic Retrofit Solutions Based on a Multi-Criteria Approach

Increasing environmental concerns are leading to measures and incentives aimed at reducing the energy consumption of buildings, which must be accompanied by substantial mitigation of seismic and structural risk. As for technical issues, it is important to select effective solutions specifically for medium-size RC apartment buildings (e.g., 3–6 storeys), which is where a large share of the Italian population lives today. To this end, it is important to compare, among other factors, the direct and indirect costs related to alternative techniques, thus allowing stakeholders (mainly private) and designers to select the most suitable solution for each case at hand and, finally, to speed up the design process. In this paper, different seismic strengthening techniques are designed and applied to a case study RC frame building that is representative of the EU building stock. An in-depth comparison is made with the aim of showing the advantages and disadvantages of different choices, mainly based on required costs and possible disruptions, keeping the targeted structural performance equal. Specifically, the possibility of disruption is a key point in hastening or, more frequently, hindering the implementation of the decision. In fact, people’s hesitation to leave their home, as well as the difficulty and high costs involved in finding temporary apartments if many people are involved, generally prevent such interventions from taking place. For this reason, some state-of-the-art techniques—that have minimum impact on non-structural elements, that can be applied only on the outside, and that can still provide an effective seismic retrofit—are examined and critically compared in the paper through a multi-criteria decision-making method.

[1]  Marco Di Ludovico,et al.  Reconstruction process of damaged residential buildings outside historical centres after the L’Aquila earthquake: part I—"light damage" reconstruction , 2017, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[2]  G. Santarsiero,et al.  Numerical Evaluation of the Steel Plate Energy Absorption Device (SPEAD) for Seismic Strengthening of RC Frame Structures , 2020 .

[3]  Angelo Masi,et al.  Fragility curves of gravity-load designed RC buildings with regularity in plan , 2015 .

[4]  Felice Carlo Ponzo,et al.  Seismic waves generated by oscillating buildings: analysis of a release test , 2003 .

[5]  R. Pinho,et al.  Integrated economic and environmental building classification and optimal seismic vulnerability/energy efficiency retrofitting , 2021, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[6]  G. Santarsiero,et al.  Analysis of a Large Database of Concrete Core Tests with Emphasis on Within-Structure Variability , 2019, Materials.

[7]  Chiara Passoni,et al.  Design of dissipative and elastic high-strength exoskeleton solutions for sustainable seismic upgrades of existing RC buildings , 2020 .

[8]  Paolo Castaldo,et al.  Seismic reliability of base-isolated structures with friction pendulum bearings , 2015 .

[9]  Giuliana Scuderi Building Exoskeletons for the Integrated Retrofit of Social Housing , 2016 .

[10]  Paolo Negro,et al.  Balanced Evaluation of Structural and Environmental Performances in Building Design , 2018 .

[11]  Andrea Prota,et al.  Reconstruction process of damaged residential buildings outside historical centres after the L’Aquila earthquake: part II—“heavy damage” reconstruction , 2016, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[12]  Bozidar Stojadinovic,et al.  Experimental and analytical investigation of the inelastic behavior of structures isolated using friction pendulum bearings , 2017 .

[13]  Andrea Prota,et al.  Conceptual design of integrated seismic and energy retrofit interventions , 2021 .

[14]  Nicola Caterino,et al.  Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Seismic Retrofitting of RC Structures , 2008 .

[15]  S. Lagomarsino,et al.  Towards the updated Italian seismic risk assessment: exposure and vulnerability modelling , 2021, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[16]  M. Fardis,et al.  Degradation of Shear Strength of Reinforced Concrete Members with Inelastic Cyclic Displacements , 2004 .

[17]  Edoardo Cosenza,et al.  The Italian guidelines for seismic risk classification of constructions: technical principles and validation , 2018, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[18]  João Manuel Carvalho Estevão,et al.  Cost-benefit analysis of traditional seismic retrofitting strategies integrated in the renovation of stone masonry buildings , 2020 .

[19]  Gaetano Manfredi,et al.  A simulated design procedure for the assessment of seismic capacity of existing reinforced concrete buildings , 2010, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[20]  M. Fardis,et al.  Deformations of Reinforced Concrete Members at Yielding and Ultimate , 2001 .

[21]  A. Sextos,et al.  Analytical investigation of the effect of a deformable sliding layer on the dynamic response of seismically isolated structures , 2020 .

[22]  Angelo Masi,et al.  The High-Performance Dissipating Frame (HPDF) System for the Seismic Strengthening of RC Existing Buildings , 2021, Sustainability.