Seismic Assessment of Four Historical Masonry Towers in Southern Italy

Öz

The paper synthesizes the main results of investigations devoted to the evaluation of the seismic performance of four historical masonry towers. On-site diagnostic investigations were carried out using non-destructive or slightly destructive tests, including geometric surveys, laser scanning, endoscopic tests, sonic pulse velocity tests, geognostic surveys, flat-jack tests, environmental vibration tests, dynamic tests on tie-rods. The results of the on-site surveys were employed to calibrate refined 3D finite element models of the towers accounting for the materials' mechanical parameters, restraint of the neighboring constructions, and effect of soil-structure interaction. The FEM model was usefully employed to assess the seismic risk of the towers based on the Italian Guidelines. To this aim, the nonlinear FEM global analysis was developed using the pushover technique for the estimation of the seismic safety of the towers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Masonry towers
• On-site surveys
• Dynamic testing
• Pushover analysis
• Masonry towers
• On-site surveys
• Dynamic testing
• Seismic assessment
• Pushover analysis
• Safety index

Kaynakça

1. Bartoli G, Betti M & Monchetti S (2017). Seismic risk assessment of historic masonry towers: comparison of four case studies. J Perf Constr Fac, 31(5): 04017039.
2. Bayraktar A, Türker T, Sevım B, Altunisik AC & Yildirim F (2009). Modal parameter identification of Hagia Sophia bell-tower via ambient vibration test. J.Nondestruct Eval, 28: 37–47.
3. Bernardeschi K, Padovani C & Pasquinelli G (2004). Numerical modelling of the structural behaviour of Buti’s bell tower. J.Cult Herit, 5: 371–378.
4. ASCE/SEI 31-03 (2003). Seismic evaluation of existing buildings. Standard ASCE/SEI 31-03. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston.
5. ASCE/SEI 41-06 (2007). Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. Standard ASCE/SEI 41-06. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston.
6. ASCE/SEI 41-13 (2014). Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. Standard ASCE/SEI 41-13. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston.
7. Carpinteri A, Invernizzi S & Lacidogna G (2005). In situ damage assessment and nonlinear modelling of a historical masonry tower. Eng Struct, 27: 387–395.
8. Casolo S, Milani G, Uva G & Alessandri C (2013). Comparative seismic vulnerability analysis on ten masonry towers in the coastal Po Valley in Italy. Eng Struct, 49: 465–490.

9. D’Ambrisi A, Mariani V & Mezzi M (2012). Seismic assessment of a historical masonry tower with nonlinear static and dynamic analyses tuned on ambient vibration tests. Eng Struct, 36: 210–219.
10. De Sortis A, Antonacci E & Vestroni F (2005). Dynamic identification of a masonry building using forced vibration tests. Eng Struct, 27, 155–165.
11. DPCM (2011). Valutazione e riduzione del rischio sismico del patrimonio culturale con riferimento alle norme tecniche per le costruzioni di cui al DM 14 gennaio 2008. Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri (Assessment and reduction of seismic risk of cultural heritage in relation to the Building Code included in the Ministerial decree of January 14th 2008). Presidency of the Council of Ministers. Rome.
12. Eurocode 8, CEN EN 1998-1: 2004 (2004). Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 3: assessment and retrofitting of buildings. European Committee for Normalization, Brussels.
13. Fajfar P (1999). Capacity spectrum method based on inelastic demand spectra. Earthq Eng Struct, 28: 979–993.
14. FEMA 356 (2000). Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Report FEMA 356. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington.
15. FEMA 547 (2006). Techniques for the seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. Report FEMA 547. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington.
16. Ferraioli M, Miccoli L, Abruzzese D & Mandara A (2017). Dynamic characterisation and seismic assessment of medieval masonry towers. Nat Haz, 86:489–515.
17. Ferraioli M, Miccoli L & Abruzzese D (2018), Dynamic characterisation of a historic bell-tower using a sensitivity-based technique for model tuning. Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring, 8(2): 253–269.
18. Ferraioli M, Lavino A, Abruzzese D & Avossa AM (2020). Seismic Assessment, Repair and Strengthening of a Medieval Masonry Tower in Southern Italy. International Journal of Civil Engineering, 18(9): 967–994.
19. Fragonara LZ, Boscato G, Ceravolo R, Russo S, Ientile S, Pecorelli ML & Quattrone A (2017). Dynamic investigation on the Mirandola bell tower in post-earthquake scenarios. Bull Earth Eng, 15(1): 313–337.
20. Gentile C, Saisi A & Cabboi A (2015). Structural identification of a masonry tower based on operational modal analysis. Int J Archit Herit, 9: 98–110.
21. Kohnke P (2001). Ansys, Inc., theory manual, SAS IP Inc.
22. Lagomarsino S & Cattari S (2015). PERPETUATE guidelines for seismic performance-based assessment of cultural heritage masonry structures. Bull Earthq Eng 13, 13–47.
23. LUSAS Finite Element System (2012). Lusas theory manual, FEA Ltd. Milani G, Casolo S, Naliato A & Tralli A (2012). Seismic assessment of a medieval masonry tower in Northern Italy by limit, nonlinear static, and full dynamic analyses. Int J Cult Herit, 6(5):489–524.
24. NTC-Guidelines (2018). Technical Standards for Constructions, Official Journal of the Italian Republic. 20.02.2018, Rome, Italy, 2018 (in Italian).
25. NTC-Instructions (2019). Instructions for the application of the new technical norms on constructions, Official Journal of the Italian Republic. Circ. 21.01.2019, n.7, 2019 (in Italian).
26. Peña F, Lourenço PB, Mendes N & Oliveira DV (2010). Numerical models for the seismic assessment of an old masonry tower. Eng Struct, 32: 1466–1478.
27. Preciado A (2015). Seismic vulnerability and failure modes simulation of ancient masonry towers by validated virtual finite element models. Eng Fail Anal, 57, 72–87.
28. Russo G, Bergamo O, Damiani L & Lugato D (2010). Experimental analysis of the “Saint Andrea” masonry bell tower in Venice. A new method for the determination of “tower global Young’s modulus E”. Eng Struct, 32: 353–360.
29. Tomaszewska A & Szymczak C (2012). Identification of the Vistula Mounting tower model using measured modal data. Eng Struct, 42: 342–348.
30. Valente M & Milani G (2016). Non-linear dynamic and static analyses on eight historical masonry towers in the North-East of Italy. Eng Struct, 114: 241–270.