A comparative study on a complex URM building: part I—sensitivity of the seismic response to different modelling options in the equivalent frame models

The paper presents the comparison of the results of nonlinear static analyses carried out using six software packages (SWs) available at professional level and operating in the field of the equivalent frame (EF) approach on a model representative of a complex masonry building. The structure is inspi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Bulletin of earthquake engineering 2022-03, Vol.20 (4), p.2115-2158
Hauptverfasser: Ottonelli, Daria, Manzini, Carlo Filippo, Marano, Corrado, Cordasco, Emilia Angela, Cattari, Serena
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The paper presents the comparison of the results of nonlinear static analyses carried out using six software packages (SWs) available at professional level and operating in the field of the equivalent frame (EF) approach on a model representative of a complex masonry building. The structure is inspired by the school “P. Capuzi” in Visso (MC, Italy), proposed as one of the benchmark structures in the “ URM nonlinear modelling— Benchmark project” funded by the Italian Department of Civil Protection within the context of the ReLUIS projects. The 2-stories building is characterized by an irregular T-shaped plan and load-bearing walls consisting of two-leaf stone masonry with a rather regular bond scheme. The school was severely damaged by the seismic sequence that hit Central Italy in 2016/2017 and essentially exhibited a global in-plane box-type response, with a clear evidence of cracks concentrated in piers and spandrels. The availability of an accurate survey of the crack extension represents a precious and rare reference to firstly address in the paper the rules to be adopted in the EF models for the definition of the structural elements geometry. Then, the comparison of results is made with a twofold aim: firstly, by setting the models adopting shared and consistent modelling assumptions across the SWs; secondly, by investigating the sensitivity of the seismic response to some common epistemic and modelling uncertainties (namely: the adoption of various EF idealization rules for walls, the out-of-plane contribution of piers, the flange effect). In both cases, results are post-processed to define reference values of the achievable dispersion. The comparison is carried out in relation to a wide set of parameters, namely: global parameters (e.g. dynamic properties, pushover curves and equivalent bilinear curves); synthetic parameters of the structural safety (i.e. the maximum acceleration compatible with the ultimate limit state); the damage pattern simulated by SWs.
ISSN:1570-761X
1573-1456
DOI:10.1007/s10518-021-01128-7