simple/rapid seismic evaluation methods ......2018/10/02 · seismic risk evaluation in 3 steps...
Post on 24-Jun-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
SIMPLE/RAPID SEISMIC
EVALUATION METHODS
Advanced Earthquake Engineering
CIVIL-706
Instructor:
Lorenzo DIANA, PhD
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
L’Office Fédérale des eaux et de la Géologie (OFEG)
Seismic evaluation through risk factors
Acknowledgment for the contribution to create the slides
2000 Seismic risk evaluation in 3 steps define priority of interventions STEP 1) Main characteristics of the building. Seismic Risk is evaluated in a simplified way using a check-list. STEP 2) analysis of buildings with high seismic risk by structural questionnaires and simplified structural analysis STEP 3) advanced seismic analysis methods based on SIA norm
FIC
HE
1 C
H-O
FEG
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
AZPS: damage factor
WZ: probability of collapse
RZPS = AZPS x WZ
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
FICHE 1 CH-OFEG
Risk factor
RZPS: risk factor
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
AZPS: personal and material damage
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
direct damage indirect damage
AZPS = AD x AIF = (ADS + ADP) x AIF
Indirect consequence
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
AZPS: personal and material damage
direct consequence
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
AZPS: personal and material damage
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
ADS: direct material damage • building value in million CHF (replacement value)
ADP: direct personal damage • mean occupancy
Number of people
Hours in day
Days in week
Weeks in year
ADP =
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
Examples for ADP • School building
- standard occupancy
ADP = 400 8 5 38 7
• Sports hall of the school - special occupancy
ADP = 1000 3 1 38 1.3
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
AIF: indirect damage Related to function class. It estimates consecutive damage due to functionality reduction.
- Production interruption, personal damage (hospital, chemical factory)
No consecutive damage (small offices, residential buildings, etc.)
Function class AIF
FK I 1
FK II 2
FK III 5
Same function as FK III but less important
Important and strategic buildings with high consecutive damage (e.g. hospital)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
AZPS damage factor Example of the school:
400 8 5 38 7
20 54
WZ = WEPB x WBAU
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
L’Office Fédérale des eaux et de la Géologie (OFEG)
WZ: probability of collapse
• seismic zone and design year • soil class • structure
structure site
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WEPB = WEP x WB WEP: seismic zone and construction year • seismic zone
-defined in the code of Swiss society of engineers and architects (SIA)
• seismic provisions -code 1970: poor until 1989: improved
• project year - design year is important, not the construction time
soil Seismic zone and year
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WEPB = WEP x WB WEP: seismic zone and construction year
Seismic zone 1 2 3a 3b
design year
Before 1970 3 6 15 30
1970 – 1989 2 3 8 15
After 1989 1 1 1 1
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WEPB = WEP x WB
WB: soil class of the site
• Favorable => 1 -Rigid soil classes
•Average => 2 -Neither favorable nor unfavorable
• Unfavorable => 4 - Fine or sensitive soils (clay, silt, incompact sand) - Saturated soils (water level near surface) - Unfavorable topography (slope, edge of valley) - Landslides, artificial soils
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
Example for WB: soil class
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WBAU = 1 + WG + WA + WW + WK + WD + WF
WG: In-plane regularity and bracing
WA: In-elevation regularity and bracing
WW: Type of bracing system
WK: Building in plane shape
WD: Construction mode (ductility)
WF: Foundation
WZ = WEPB x WBAU structure site
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WG: In-plane regularity and bracing
• Favorable => 0
-Center of rigidity close to center of mass
•Unfavorable => 2 -Center of rigidity not close to center of mass
• None => 5 - No effective in-plane bracing elements
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WG: In-plane regularity and bracing
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WG: In-plane regularity and bracing
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WA: Vertical regularity and bracing
• Continuous => 0 -Identical stiffness for all stories / slight differences
•Not continuous => 2 -Stiffness change (suppression of bracing or shear walls)
-Other discontinuities in force path (e.g., floors at different
levels)
• Soft Storey => 5 - storey without or with poor horizontal stiffness
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WA: Vertical regularity and bracing
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WA: examples of soft storey
eart
hq
uak
eret
rofi
t.o
rg
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WW: Type of bracing system
• Cores and walls => 0 High stiffness and stability e.g., elevator cores or stair cores
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WW: Type of bracing system
• Moment-resisting frames => 1 stiff systems Condition: no infill Office buildings Sport centres Factories Warehouses
Strut = puntone Tie = tirante
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WW: Type of bracing system
• Braced frames => 2 low energy dissipation potential
concentrically eccentrically
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WW: Type of bracing system
• Frames with infills => 2-4 favourable if the infill and frame are in compression; unfavourable if partially infilled
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WW: Type of bracing system
• Mix systems => 3 inhomogeneous systems: unfavourable (different bracing systems often result from renovations)
plan Structural model behavior
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WK: Building in plane shape
• Compact => 0 - uniform mode of vibration
•With Angles, long => 1 - torsion induced by the unfavorable relative position of mass and stiffness centers
- modes of vibration complex and non-uniform
- stress concentration
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WK: Building in plane shape
• Building in plane shape • Configuration of openings
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WD: Construction mode (ductility)
• Reinforced concrete, steel, composite => 0
- Good strength (shear/compression) -High plastic deformation capacity (energy dissipation)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WD: Construction mode (ductility)
• Reinforced masonry => 2 - Good deformation capacity - Reasonable traction strength
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
• Precast => 3 - Problem with connections
MR
P E
ngi
ne
erin
g
WD: Construction mode (ductility)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WD: Construction mode (ductility)
• Wood => 3
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WD: Construction mode (ductility)
• Masonry, unreinforced concrete
- Almost no ductile behavior - Fragile - Resists only in compression and shear
=> 3 + n or 3 + n/2
3 + n flexible slabs 3 + n/2 stiff slabs
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WF: Foundation
• Continuous foundation => 0 - foundation raft
• Isolated => 1 - foundation elements not bounded (e.g., isolated footing)
- heterogeneous foundations (e.g., piles with different lengths, very heterogeneous soil)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
WF: Foundation
• Continuous foundation • Isolated
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
Collapse probability factor
Material and human damage
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet
Risk factor
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet Example of WZ/AZPS figure
Sou
rce:
Vér
ific
atio
n d
e la
séc
uri
té p
aras
ism
iqu
e d
es
bât
imen
ts e
xist
ants
Co
nce
pt
et
dir
ecti
ves
po
ur
l’éta
pe
1
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
OFEG Evaluation Sheet Risk reduction
• Reduction of AZPS - Change the building utilization (reducing occupancy, changing function, etc.)
• Reduction of WZ - Upgrade seismic behavior (strengthening, improving deformation capacity
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Pettino – L’Aquila (AQ)
Mainly reinforced concrete buildings
Village damaged by 2009 earthquake
Ripabottoni (CB)
Mainly masonry buildings
Village damaged by 2002 earthquake
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main goals:
• Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
WZ value is compared with the damage grade and habitable safety established by AEDES form.
• Improvement of FICHE 1 – OFEG
WZ value is compared with the damage grade and habitable safety established by AEDES form.
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Adjustments on markers:
WEP (seismic zone and construction year)
WB (soil class)
ADS (direct material damage)
ADP (direct personal damage)
AIF (indirect damage)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WEP (seismic zone and construction year)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Construction year
Switzerland Italy
< 1970 < 1974
1970 – 1989 1974 – 1996
> 1989 > 1996
Construction year
< 1974 30
1974 – 1996 15
> 1996 1
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WB (soil class)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Switzerland (SIA 261) Italy (NTC 2008) Soil WB
Soil class A and B Soil Class A and B Favorable 1
Soil class C, D and E Soil class C, D and E Medium 2
Soil class F Soil class C, D and E where it may
occur liquefaction or landsliding Unfavorable 4
WEPB = WEP x WB
WB: soil class of the site
• Favorable => 1 -Rigid soil classes
•Average => 2 -Neither favorable nor unfavorable
• Unfavorable => 4 - Fine or sensitive soils (clay, silt, incompact sand) - Saturated soils (water level near surface) - Unfavorable topography (slope, edge of valley) - Landslides, artificial soils
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
ADS (direct material damage)
For the evaluation of the direct material damage ADS, it has not been possible to refer to the insurance value of the building. The value assumed for ADP refers to the commercial value taken from www.agenziaentrate.it for the first half of 2009 (first the earthquake), converted into million Swiss francs.
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
WEPB = WEP x WB
WB: soil class of the site
• Favorable => 1 -Rigid soil classes
•Average => 2 -Neither favorable nor unfavorable
• Unfavorable => 4 - Fine or sensitive soils (clay, silt, incompact sand) - Saturated soils (water level near surface) - Unfavorable topography (slope, edge of valley) - Landslides, artificial soils
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
ADP (direct personal damage)
For the evaluation of the direct personal damage ADP, it has been calculated the average occupancy of the buildings as assumed by NTC. For housing, the number of inhabitants has been calculated by the number of dwellings and their dimension for and occupancy of 12 hours par day.
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
WEPB = WEP x WB
WB: soil class of the site
• Favorable => 1 -Rigid soil classes
•Average => 2 -Neither favorable nor unfavorable
• Unfavorable => 4 - Fine or sensitive soils (clay, silt, incompact sand) - Saturated soils (water level near surface) - Unfavorable topography (slope, edge of valley) - Landslides, artificial soils
Per la valutazione dell’indice dei danni diretti alle persone ADP, si calcolerà l’occupazione media annua riferendosi alla densità di affollamento dell’edificio secondo quanto riportato in tabella (Tabella 13). Per le abitazioni civili si valuterà il numero di occupanti dal numero di appartamenti presenti e dalla loro dimensione (ad esempio, 4 persone per un appartamento di 80 m2, con due stanze da letto), considerando un tempo di occupazione medio annuo di 12 ore al giorno.
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
AIF (indirect damage)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
WEPB = WEP x WB
WB: soil class of the site
• Favorable => 1 -Rigid soil classes
•Average => 2 -Neither favorable nor unfavorable
• Unfavorable => 4 - Fine or sensitive soils (clay, silt, incompact sand) - Saturated soils (water level near surface) - Unfavorable topography (slope, edge of valley) - Landslides, artificial soils
Switzerland Italy (NTC 2008) AIF
FK I: all the other
buildings
Class I: Building with random presence of people, farm buildings.
Class II: Buildings with standard crowding, not danger for the environment and without public and
social functions. Bridges, barrage and railways not considered in class III and IV.
1
FK II: buildings similar
to FK III but less
important
Class III: Buildings with significant crowding, factories danger for the environment. Roads out-of-
town not considered in class IV. Bridges and railways the interruption may cause important
emergencies. Barrages very important.
2
FK III: Hospitals, civil
protection buildings,
Police, Fireman
Class IV: Buildings with public and key functions connected to the civil protection. Factories
particularly danger for the environment. Road important for the connection between towns. Bridges
and railways very important with a key role. Barrage fundamental for aqueduct and energy
production industry.
5
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Pettino – L’Aquila (AQ)
2009 earthquake
737 reinforced concrete buildings analysed
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
WEPB = WEP x WB
WB: soil class of the site
• Favorable => 1 -Rigid soil classes
•Average => 2 -Neither favorable nor unfavorable
• Unfavorable => 4 - Fine or sensitive soils (clay, silt, incompact sand) - Saturated soils (water level near surface) - Unfavorable topography (slope, edge of valley) - Landslides, artificial soils
Per la valutazione dell’indice dei danni diretti alle persone ADP, si calcolerà l’occupazione media annua riferendosi alla densità di affollamento dell’edificio secondo quanto riportato in tabella (Tabella 13). Per le abitazioni civili si valuterà il numero di occupanti dal numero di appartamenti presenti e dalla loro dimensione (ad esempio, 4 persone per un appartamento di 80 m2, con due stanze da letto), considerando un tempo di occupazione medio annuo di 12 ore al giorno.
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Slight damages to infill mainly due to overturning of brick leafs not connected to the load bearing structures (1).
Slight vertical damages to the infill between slabs (2).
Slight damages in the connection with the structures (3).
Moderate and heavy X-cracks to the infill (4).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Slight damages to infill mainly due to overturning of brick leafs not connected to the load bearing structures (1).
Slight vertical damages to the infill between slabs (2).
Slight damages in the connection with the structures (3).
Moderate and heavy X-cracks to the infill (4).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Slight damages to infill mainly due to overturning of brick leafs not connected to the load bearing structures (1).
Slight vertical damages to the infill between slabs (2).
Slight damages in the connection with the structures (3).
Moderate and heavy X-cracks to the infill (4).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Slight damages to infill mainly due to overturning of brick leafs not connected to the load bearing structures (1).
Slight vertical damages to the infill between slabs (2).
Slight damages in the connection with the structures (3).
Moderate and heavy X-cracks to the infill (4).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Moderate and heavy damage in the columns/beams joints (5).
Very heavy damages to roofs elements (6).
Very heavy damages connected to the overturning of infill (7).
Collapse of the building for soft storey (8).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Moderate and heavy damage in the columns/beams joints (5).
Very heavy damages to roofs elements (6).
Very heavy damages connected to the overturning of infill (7).
Collapse of the building for soft storey (8).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Moderate and heavy damage in the columns/beams joints (5).
Very heavy damages to roofs elements (6).
Very heavy damages connected to the overturning of infill (7).
Collapse of the building for soft storey (8).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Moderate and heavy damage in the columns/beams joints (5).
Very heavy damages to roofs elements (6).
Very heavy damages connected to the overturning of infill (7).
Collapse of the building for soft storey (8).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Damage grades are identified by the application of AEDES form. Related to the analysis of damages to structural and non structural elements, a judgment about the safety of the building is expressed.
For this work: Buildings A, B, C, D, F are considered SAFE
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
A Building SAFE for occupancy
B Building TEMPORARILY NOT SAFE for occupancy that could
become SAFE with slight emergency actions
C Building PARTIALLY NOT SAFE for occupancy
D Building TEMPORARILY NOT SAFE for occupancy that needs
important actions
E Building NOT SAFE for occupancy
F Building not safe for falling external hazard
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Main damages identified
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WEP (seismic zone and construction year)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Year of construction
< 1919
‘19 – ‘45
’46 – ‘60
’61 – ’71
< 1974
’72 – ‘81
’82 – ’91 1974 – 1996
’92 – ‘01
> 2001 > 1996
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WB (soil class)
Soil class is evaluated in relation with the microzone of Pettino. A local amplification factor of 2 (FA = 2) is given for all the village meaning “stable zone susceptible to local amplifications”. Though the soil of Pettino has been classed as an average soil.
WB = 2
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WG (In-plane regularity and bracing)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
In-plane irregularities In-plane bracing WG
None 5
Not regular mass distribution
Not regular stiffness distribution
Presence of in-plane irregularities
Unfavourable 2
Slight in-plane regularity
In-plane regularity Favourable 0
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WA (Vertical regularity and bracing)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Vertical bracing WA
Vertical regularity
Vertical regularity
Medium vertical regularity Continuous 0
Not vertical regularity Not continuous 2
Soft storey
Pilotis
Absence of infill
Cantilever infill
Soft storey 5
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WW (Type of bracing system)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Bracing system WW
R.C. frame with stiff infill (without big openings) 2
R.C. frame with dropped beams with not stiff infill (with widespread big openings) 4
R.C. flat plate moment frame with not stiff infill 4
R.C. frame with dropped beams on the boundary with not stiff infill and flat plate moment
frame inside 4
R.C. frame with dropped beams and R.C. core 0
R.C. Shear walls 0
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WK (In-plane regularity)
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
In-plane regularity WK
Compact and regular plan
Medium compact and regular plan 0
Not compact or irregular plan 1
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
< 100 100 - 200 200 - 400 > 400
% buildings 22% 32% 37% 9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
WZ
WZ distribution of R.C. buildings
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
< 100 100 - 200 200 - 400 > 400
% NOT SAFE 29% 32% 46% 58%
% SAFE 71% 68% 54% 42%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
Relation safety / WZ values
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
• Reliability in the definition of damage scenario
• Not reliability in the definition of priorities
If WZlim = 400 - only 9% buildings for further studies or retrofitting - 87% of not safe buildings would be excluded If WZlim = 100 - 78% buildings for further studies or retrofitting - only 17% would be excluded
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Pettino, L’Aquila (AQ)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Ripabottoni (CB)
2002 earthquake
608 buildings analysed, mainly masonry buildings
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
WEPB = WEP x WB
WB: soil class of the site
• Favorable => 1 -Rigid soil classes
•Average => 2 -Neither favorable nor unfavorable
• Unfavorable => 4 - Fine or sensitive soils (clay, silt, incompact sand) - Saturated soils (water level near surface) - Unfavorable topography (slope, edge of valley) - Landslides, artificial soils
Per la valutazione dell’indice dei danni diretti alle persone ADP, si calcolerà l’occupazione media annua riferendosi alla densità di affollamento dell’edificio secondo quanto riportato in tabella (Tabella 13). Per le abitazioni civili si valuterà il numero di occupanti dal numero di appartamenti presenti e dalla loro dimensione (ad esempio, 4 persone per un appartamento di 80 m2, con due stanze da letto), considerando un tempo di occupazione medio annuo di 12 ore al giorno.
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Damages distributions
Data obtained by: • AEDES form survey (SAFE / NOT SAFE) • Direct survey (DAMAGE GRADE).
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Riapbottoni (CB)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
67%
33%
Ripabottoni (SAFE / NOT SAFE buildings)
% SAFE
% NOT SAFE
33%
25%
14%
17%
10%
1%
Ripabottoni (damage grade)
Damage 0
Damage 1
Damage 2
Damage 3
Damage 4
Damage 5
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Damages distributions
• Not safe buildings increase with the increase of the damage grade • 14% buildings considered NOT SAFE are classed as damage 0
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Damage 0 Damage 1 Damage 2 Damage 3 Damage 4 Damage 5
% NOT SAFE 14% 25% 34% 56% 74% 100%
% SAFE 86% 75% 66% 44% 26% 0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Relation safety and damage
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Damages distributions
• Not a clear relation between safety and height of buildings contrary to Pettino
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
1 storey 2 storey 3 storey > 4 storey
% NOT SAFE 32% 31% 33% 31%
% SAFE 68% 69% 67% 69%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Relation safety and number of storeys
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Damages distributions
• >=4 damage grade buildings decrease with the number of stories
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1 storey 2 storey 3 storey > 4 storey
Relation damage grade and number of storeys
Damage 5
Damage 4
Damage 3
Damage 2
Damage 1
Damage 0
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Damages distributions
• Damage distribution is strictly connected to the location of the buildings (ZONE 5)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
zone 1 zone 2 zone 3 zone 4 zone 5
Relation damage grade and zone
Damage 5
Damage 4
Damage 3
Damage 2
Damage 1
Damage 0
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Damages distributions
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WB (soil class)
On site surveys showed a B soil class, class as a WB = 1. The marker does not take into account the morphology of the site that as shown by the previous tables are important for the damages distribution. E1 = zone with landslide process active E4 = zone with bad soil E5 = zone on a slope E8 = zone under a slope
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Year of construction
< 1919
‘19 – ‘45
’46 – ‘60
’61 – ’71
< 1974
’72 – ‘81
’82 – ’91 1974 – 1996
’92 – ‘01
> 2001 > 1996
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WG (in-plane regularity and bracing)
Mainly masonry building with no bracing system
WG = 5
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Year of construction
< 1919
‘19 – ‘45
’46 – ‘60
’61 – ’71
< 1974
’72 – ‘81
’82 – ’91 1974 – 1996
’92 – ‘01
> 2001 > 1996
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WA (vertical regularity and bracing)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Vertical bracing WA
Regular
- In-plane and vertical regularity
- Only vertical Continuous 0
- Only in-plane
- Not in-plane, not vertical Not continuous 2
Structural
irregularities
- Intermediate storey with bad performance bricks
- Masonry walls of upper stories with hollow bricks
- Heavy roofs
- Storey in R.C. in a masonry building
- Vertical additions in R.C.
- In-plane setbacks
- Ground floors with a lot of openings
- Masonry walls with a lot of / big openings
- Masonry walls with empty space for gas and electrical systems
- Irregularities in strengthening / strengthening only in the upper stories /not regular strengthening
Not continuous 2
Soft storey
- Ground floor with a lot of openings
- Intermediate storey with a lot of openings
- Intermediate storey with big openings
- Important out-of-plane setbacks
- Absence of spine walls
- Bad wall performances
Soft Storey 5
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WW (bracing systems)
Not a clear bracing system is detectable
WW = 3
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WK (in-plane regularity)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Regularity In-plane WK
- In-plane and vertical regularity
- Only in-plane Compact 0
- Only vertical regularity
- Not vertical nor in-plane regularity Re-entrant corners / long plan 1
Regolarità Forma WK
1. Planimetrica e altimetrica
3. Solo planimetrica Compatta 0
2. Solo altimetrica
4. Né planimetrica né altimetrica
Angolosa o
allungata 1
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WF (foundation)
Supposed to be continuous
WF = 0
WD (ductility)
Unreinforced masonry with flexible floors
WD = 3 + n
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 450 450-550 > 550
% buildings 39% 33% 28%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
WZ
WZ distribution
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
zone 1 zone 2 zone 3 zone 4 zone 5
WZ distribution classed by zones
> 550
450-550
<= 450
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
• Selection of WZ thresholds is based on the division of the population of buildings into three numerically comparable sets.
• There is not a clear relationship between the WZ distribution by zones and damages detected after the surveys.
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
zone 1 zone 2 zone 3 zone 4 zone 5
WZ distribution classed by zones
> 550
450-550
<= 450
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
zone 1zone 2zone 3zone 4zone 5
Relation damage grade and zone
Damage 5
Damage 4
Damage 3
Damage 2
Damage 1
Damage 0
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
<= 450 450-550 > 550
% NOT SAFE 19% 44% 26%
% SAFE 81% 56% 74%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
Relation safety / WZ values
46
193 110
126
88 45
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
<= 450 450-550 > 550
Relation damage / WZ
Damage 5
Damage 4
Damage 3
Damage 2
Damage 1
Damage 0
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
26%
49%
25%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Not safe for occupancy buildings in WZ intervals
WZ > 550
WZ = 450-550
WZ <= 450
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ Results
• The WZ distribution is not consistent with AEDES (SAFE / NOT SAFE) survey. The FICHE 1 form is reliable in detecting the buildings with few damages but it is not reliable for the two other sets.
• The damage distribution in the three WZ sets is scattered.
• Not safe building percentage with WZ <= 450 is comparable to that with WZ > 550
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Verification of FICHE 1 reliability – Ripabottoni (CB)
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
NEW: AF (crowding)
• The number of stories is not considered as an important marker in FICHE 1.
• In Pettino: buildings with more stories tends to be considered as not safe for occupancy.
• In Ripabottoni: low rise buildings show important damages related to the taller ones.
• High rise buildings with low damages (grade 2 or 3) have been considered not safe for occupancy.
• Low rise buildings have been considered not safe for occupancy with higher damage grade (4 and 5).
• Tendency to assess buildings with less damages but more stories as not safe for occupancy rather than those with more damages but lass stories
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
NEW: AF (crowding)
AZPS = AD x AIF = (ADS + ADP x AF) x AIF
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
Crowding WA
Possible 1.5
Not possible 1
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Changing: WEP (seismic zone and construction year)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
Anno di
progetto
Zona sismica
1 2 3a 3b
< 1970 3 6 15 30
1970 - 1989 2 4 8 15
1990 - 2003 1.4 2 3 5
> 2003 1 1 1 1
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Changing: WEP (seismic zone and construction year)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
WEP
ag (m/s2)
< 1970
1970 - 1989
1990 - 2003
> 2003
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Changing: WB (soil class)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
Soil class Parametrs from SIA 261/2003
WB S [-] TS [sec] TC [sec] TD [sec]
A 1 0.15 0.4 2 1.0
B 1.2 0.15 0.5 2 2.5
C 1.15 0.20 0.6 2 2.1
D 1.35 0.20 0.8 2 3.6
E 1.4 0.15 0.5 2 4.0
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
NEW: WT (topography)
WEPB = WEP x WB x WT
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
Categoria Topografica WT
Level ground (slope d < 15 ° ) 1.0
Slope ( d > 15 ° ) 1.2
Ridge ( 15 ° < d < 30 ° ) 1.2
Ridge ( d > 30 ° ) 1.4
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Changing: WG (In-plane bracing)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
WG
In-plane bracing Rigid slabs Flexible slabs
Appropriate in both directions 0 1 (0)
Appropriate in only one direction 1 (2) 2
Not appropriate 2 3 (5)
None 5 5
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Changing: WD (ductility)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
Masonry WD
Good quality 2.5+n/2
Bad quality 5+n/2
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
Changing: WF (foundation)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
Foundation WF
Continuous 0
Linear foundations not connected 0.5
Isolated 1
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
NEW: WS (maintenance)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
Conditions WS
Good conditions 0.8
Medium consitions and slight cracks 0.9 - 1
Bad conditions and important cracks 1.2
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
WB modification:
• Soil B = 2.5 for all the buildings
• Movement of the distribution towards WZ values 2.5 times bigger
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 1125 1125 - 1375 > 1375
% NOT SAFE 19% 44% 26%
% SAFE 81% 56% 74%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
Relation (modified WB) safety / WZ values
46
193 110
126
88 45
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
WT introduction:
• WT = 1.4 (zone 4 and 5)
• WT = 1.2 (zone 2)
• WT = 1 (zone 1 and 3)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
Improvement of FICHE 1 reliability
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
zone 1 zone 2 zone 3 zone 4 zone 5
WZ distribution (introduction WT) by zones
> 550
450-550
<= 450
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
WT introduction:
• WT = 1.4 (zone 4 and 5)
• WT = 1.2 (zone 2)
• WT = 1 (zone 1 and 3)
• Better relation between WZ values and safety assessment
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 450 450-550 > 550
% NOT SAFE 8% 22% 37%
% SAFE 92% 78% 63%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
Relation (introduction WT) safety / WZ values
8
98 72 259
20 150
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
5% 11%
84%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Not safe for occupancy buildings (introduction WT) in WZ intervals
WZ > 550
WZ = 450-550
WZ <= 450
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
WG modification:
• Relocation of the distribution towards smaller WZ values
• Better relation between WZ values and safety assessment
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 450 450-550 > 550
% NOT SAFE 29% 29% 47%
% SAFE 71% 71% 53%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
Relation (modification WG) safety / WZ values
8
302 117 10
48
9
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
WD modification:
• Better relation between WZ values and safety assessment
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 450 450-550 > 550
% NOT SAFE 16% 34% 39%
% SAFE 84% 66% 61%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
Relation (modification WD) safety / WZ values
30
160 189 80
98 51
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
WF modification:
• WF = 0.5 for all the buildings
• Movement of the buildings inside the three different classes
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 450 450-550 > 550
% NOT SAFE 22% 32% 29%
% SAFE 78% 68% 71%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
Relation (modification WF) safety / WZ values
20
71 214
144
100 59
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
WS introduction:
• Relocation of the distribution towards smaller WZ values
• Reduction in the total number of buildings belonging to WZ > 550
• Increase of the not safe to occupancy buildings percentage in WZ > 550 set
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 450 450-550 > 550
% NOT SAFE 10% 40% 63%
% SAFE 90% 60% 37%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
Relation (introduction WS) safety / WZ values
27
257 139
33
94
57
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 450 450-550 > 550
% buildings 51% 22% 27%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
WZ
NEW global WZ distribution
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
zone 1 zone 2 zone 3 zone 4 zone 5
NEW global WZ distribution (introduction WT) by zones
> 1375
1125 - 1375
<= 1125
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 1125 1125 - 1375 > 1375
% NOT SAFE 7% 35% 68%
% SAFE 93% 65% 32%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
NEW global relation safety / WZ values
21
289 88
52
47
110
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
41%
28%
9%
29%
26%
22%
14%
13%
17%
12%
21%
28%
4% 12%
21%
3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
<= 1125 1125 - 1375 > 1375
NEW global relation damage / WZ
Damage 5
Damage 4
Damage 3
Damage 2
Damage 1
Damage 0
Advanced Earthquake Engineering CIVIL-706 Rapid Visual Screening
WZ results (modified)
Post-earthquake FICHE 1 application
<= 1500 1500 - 2000 > 2000
% NOT SAFE 17% 73% 80%
% SAFE 83% 27% 20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
NEW global relation safety / WZ values
82
395
80
30
16
4
<= 500 500 - 650 > 650
% NOT SAFE 22% 36% 80%
% SAFE 78% 64% 20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WZ
OLD relation safety / WZ values
66
233
1
109
195
4
top related