The Italian guidelines for seismic risk classification of constructions: technical principles and validation

The Italian “Guidelines for the seismic risk classification of constructions” approved in February 2017 define the technical principles for exploiting tax deductions with respect to seismic strengthening interventions on existing buildings (Sismabonus). Tax deductions represent a unique opportunity to improve the seismic safety of the existing Italian building stock. The guidelines are very simple and allow practitioners to deal with the sophisticated concepts behind modern seismic design, such as expected annual losses (EAL) and repair costs (expressed as a fraction of the Reconstruction Cost: %RC). The seismic risk classes of buildings and the class upgrade due to strengthening interventions can be assessed using the principles included in the guidelines. The seismic risk class is the minimum between the class defined by the building safety index at the ultimate limit state and the one related to the EAL. The latter class depends on the area under the curve of the expected losses, which is easily obtained by computing the safety index converted in the return period (annual frequency) at different limit states and the relevant %RC. This paper illustrates the technical principles at the base of the guidelines and the procedure used to calibrate the repair costs associated with the different limit states using the actual repair costs monitored in the reconstruction process following recent Italian earthquakes. Finally, simple tools to estimate the cost of the strengthening interventions to improve the seismic capacity at the life-safety limit states are provided.

[1]  Ibrahim Almufti,et al.  The REDi Rating System: A Framework to Implement Resilience-based Earthquake Design for New Buildings , 2014 .

[2]  S. Lagomarsino,et al.  Macroseismic and mechanical models for the vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings , 2006 .

[3]  M. Dolce,et al.  Estimation of repair costs for RC and masonry residential buildings based on damage data collected by post-earthquake visual inspection , 2017, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[4]  Taucer Fabio,et al.  Field Manual for Post-Earthquake Damage and Safety Assessment and Short Term Countermeasures (AeDES) , 2007 .

[5]  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.

[6]  Stefano Pampanin,et al.  Repair Costs of Existing RC Buildings Damaged by the L'Aquila Earthquake and Comparison with FEMA P-58 Predictions , 2017 .

[7]  Gregory G. Deierlein,et al.  Cost-Benefit Evaluation of Seismic Risk Mitigation Alternatives for Older Concrete Frame Buildings , 2013 .

[8]  A. Prota,et al.  Experimental Investigation of Exterior RC Beam-Column Joints Retrofitted with FRP Systems , 2014 .

[9]  Ciro Del Vecchio,et al.  Modelling beam-column joints and FRP strengthening in the seismic performance assessment of RC existing frames , 2016 .

[10]  Gian Michele Calvi Choices and Criteria for Seismic Strengthening , 2013 .

[11]  Ciro Del Vecchio,et al.  Comparison of available shear strength models for non-conforming reinforced concrete columns , 2017 .

[12]  Keith Porter,et al.  An Overview of PEER's Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Methodology , 2003 .

[13]  James Michael LaFave,et al.  Multi-hazard approaches to civil infrastructure engineering , 2016 .

[14]  Donatello Cardone,et al.  Damage and Loss Assessment of Pre-70 RC Frame Buildings with FEMA P-58 , 2017 .

[15]  Angelo Masi,et al.  The Italian communication campaign “I Do Not Take Risks - Earthquake" , 2016 .

[16]  Andrea Prota,et al.  Implications of the spandrel type on the lateral behavior of unreinforced masonry walls , 2014 .

[17]  Kevin R. Mackie,et al.  A Framework for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering of Bridge-Abutment Systems , 2012 .

[18]  Antonio Tralli,et al.  Damage assessment of fortresses after the 2012 Emilia earthquake (Italy) , 2014, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[19]  Andrea Prota,et al.  Local Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Structures as a Strategy for Seismic Risk Mitigation at Regional Scale , 2015 .

[20]  Paolo Ricci,et al.  Empirical fragility curves from damage data on RC buildings after the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake , 2017, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[21]  Stefano Pampanin,et al.  Seismic performance of alternative risk-reduction retrofit strategies to support decision making , 2018, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[22]  P. Fajfar,et al.  A Nonlinear Analysis Method for Performance Based Seismic Design , 2001 .

[23]  G. Grünthal European macroseismic scale 1998 : EMS-98 , 1998 .

[24]  Andrea Prota,et al.  Seismic Retrofit of Real Beam-Column Joints Using Fiber-Reinforced Cement Composites , 2018 .

[25]  Gian Michele Calvi,et al.  Energy Efficiency and Seismic Resilience: A Common Approach , 2016 .

[26]  Serena Cattari,et al.  A Seismic Loss Assessment Procedure for Masonry Buildings , 2015 .

[27]  Timothy J. Sullivan,et al.  Probabilistic seismic assessment and retrofit considerations for Italian RC frame buildings , 2018, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.