Case studies on seismic assessment of historical buildings using advanced analysis

被引:2
|
作者
Grant, Damian N. [1 ]
Dozio, Daniele [2 ]
Fici, Paolo [2 ]
Sturt, Richard [3 ]
机构
[1] Arup, London, England
[2] Arup, Milan, Italy
[3] Arup, Solihull, W Midlands, England
关键词
computational mechanics; reclamation & renovation; rehabilitation; seismic engineering; MODEL;
D O I
10.1680/jenhh.21.00003
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Seismic risk mitigation in existing buildings requires an engineering assessment of the current condition and expected seismic performance and an identification of possible deficiencies that should be addressed. For heritage and historical buildings in particular, there is significant benefit in using the most detailed analysis methods available to avoid the conservatism inherent in simpler methods and thereby minimise unnecessary interventions and more precisely pinpoint where strengthening is required. On recent heritage projects, Arup has used the analysis software LS-DYNA and a new material model, calibrated against experimental tests on unreinforced masonry components and buildings to carry out (or supplement) seismic assessments. The analysis method (non-linear response history analysis) is not new, but its application on detailed finite-element models of complex historic structures has previously been computationally prohibitive and requires significant analyst experience to deliver reliable results. This paper summarises three of these recent Arup projects: Woltersum Church (Netherlands), Procuratie Vecchie (Venice) and a building cluster in the historical centre of Appingedam (Netherlands). The case studies show that these analyses allow complex features of seismic performance to be considered, such as damage or modifications to the building over time, pounding (separate buildings colliding into one another due to seismic movements) and load sharing between adjacent structures.
引用
收藏
页码:95 / 106
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Seismic assessment of buildings using pushover analysis
    Moghadam, AS
    Tso, WK
    ADVANCES IN STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, VOLS I & II, 2000, 10 : 947 - 954
  • [2] Seismic vulnerability assessment of historical masonry buildings
    Calderoni, B.
    Cordasco, E. A.
    Lenza, P.
    Pacella, G.
    PROTECTION OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS - PROHITECH 09, VOL 1 AND 2, 2009, : 1443 - 1448
  • [3] Uncertainties in the Seismic Assessment of Historical Masonry Buildings
    Tomic, Igor
    Vanin, Francesco
    Beyer, Katrin
    APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL, 2021, 11 (05): : 1 - 36
  • [4] Seismic Risk Assessment of Historical Eastern Turkish Buildings by Finite Element Analysis
    Carhoglu, A. I.
    Usta, P.
    Korkmaz, K. A.
    ACTA PHYSICA POLONICA A, 2015, 127 (04) : 1083 - 1085
  • [5] Practical seismic assessment of unreinforced masonry historical buildings
    Pardalopoulos, Stylianos I.
    Pantazopoulou, Stavroula J.
    Ignatakis, Christos E.
    EARTHQUAKES AND STRUCTURES, 2016, 11 (02) : 195 - 215
  • [6] Editorial: Seismic Analysis and Retrofitting of Historical Buildings
    Formisano, Antonio
    D'Amato, Michele
    FRONTIERS IN BUILT ENVIRONMENT, 2020, 6
  • [7] Seismic Isolation for Protecting Historical Buildings: A Case Study
    D'Amato, Michele
    Gigliotti, Rosario
    Laguardia, Raffaele
    FRONTIERS IN BUILT ENVIRONMENT, 2019, 5
  • [8] Seismic vulnerability assessment of corner buildings in the historical centre of Timisoara
    Valotto, C.
    Taffarel, S.
    Marson, C.
    Munari, M.
    da Porto, F.
    Modena, C.
    BRICK AND BLOCK MASONRY: TRENDS, INNOVATIONS AND CHALLENGES, 2016, : 2499 - 2506
  • [9] Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Historical Group of Buildings in Timisoara City
    Onescu, E.
    Onescu, I
    Mosoarca, M.
    Ion, A.
    MODERN TECHNOLOGIES FOR THE 3RD MILLENNIUM, 2019, : 259 - 264
  • [10] SURVEY METHODS FOR SEISMIC VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT OF HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDINGS
    Ballarin, M.
    Balletti, C.
    Faccio, P.
    Guerra, F.
    Saetta, A.
    Vernier, P.
    GEOMATICS & RESTORATION - CONSERVATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE DIGITAL ERA, 2017, 42-5 (W1): : 55 - 59