PSI - Issue 78

Giuseppe Brandonisio et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 78 (2026) 2162–2168

2167

For Body A (blue bars of the histograms), the displacement capacity varies from d Rd, Pushover 1 =69mm to d Rd, Pushover 8 =184mm. The displacement demand varies from d Ed, Pushover 1 =57mm to d Ed, Pushover 7 =127mm. The seismic vulnerability index (ξ E,SLV ) always exceeds 1. Therefore, Body A is adequate for the seismic actions expected for the SLV, managing to resist maximum accelerations on the ground between a max S Pushover 1 =0.348g and a max S Pushover 6 =0.424g, therefore always greater than the acceleration of ground demand at SLV (a g S=0.288g). For Body B (orange bars of the histograms), the displacement capacity varies from d Rd, Pushover 3 =44mm to d Rd, Pushover 6 =112m. The displacement demand goes from d Ed, Pushover 4 =65mm to d Ed, Pushover 5 =109mm. The lowest seismic vulnerability index value is ξ E,SLV Pushover 3 =0.67. Therefore, Body B falls into the seismic risk class B, managing to resist a maximum acceleration on the ground equal to a max S Pushover 3 =0.193g, therefore less than the ground demand acceleration at SLV (a g S=0.288g). For Body C (grey bars of the histograms), the displacement capacity varies from d Rd, Pushover 1 =30mm to d Rd, Pushover 7=78m. The displacement demand goes from d Ed, Pushover 1 =22mm to d Ed, Pushover 8 =122mm. The lowest seismic vulnerability index values is ξ E,SLV Pushover 2 =0.74. Therefore, Body C falls into seismic risk class B, managing to resist a maximum acceleration on the ground equal to a max S Pushover 2 =0.213g, thus less than the ground demand acceleration at SLV (a g S=0.288g). For Block 1 (yellow bars of the histograms), the displacement capacity varies from d Rd, Pushover 4 =48mm to d Rd, Pushover 6 =100m. The displacement demand varies from d Ed, Pushover 1 =54mm to d Ed, Pushover 7 =68mm. The lowest of the values of the seismic vulnerability index is ξ E,SLV Pushover 4 =0.84. Therefore, Block 1 falls into the seismic risk class A, managing to resist a maximum acceleration on the ground equal to a max S Pushover 4 =0.238g, therefore less than the ground demand acceleration at SLV (a g S=0.288g).

Fig. 5 Comparison of the Seismic Vulnerability Indexes

For Block 2 (light blue bars of the histograms), the displacement capacity varies from d Rd, Pushover 1 =58mm to d Rd, Pushover 6 =100m. The displacement demand goes from d Ed, Pushover 2 =58mm to d Ed, Pushover 4 =79mm. The lowest of the seismic vulnerability index values is ξ E,SLV Pushover 4 =0.86. Therefore, Block 2 falls into seismic risk class A, managing to resist a maximum acceleration on the ground equal to a max S Pushover 3 =0.246g, thus less than the ground demand acceleration at SLV (a g S=0.288g). For Block 3 (green bars of the histograms), the displacement capacity varies from d Rd, Pushover 4 =48mm to d Rd, Pushover 7 =109m. The displacement demand goes from d Ed, Pushover 3 =61mm to d Ed, Pushover 5 =69mm. The lowest of the seismic vulnerability index values is ξ E,SLV Pushover 4 =0.84. Therefore, Block 3 falls into seismic risk class A, managing to resist a maximum acceleration on the ground equal to a max S Pushover 4 =0.243g, thus less than the ground demand acceleration at SLV (a g S=0.288g). For the As-Is Global Model (blue bars of the histograms), the displacement capacity varies from d Rd, Pushover 4 =48mm to d Rd, Pushover 6 =100m. The displacement demand varies from d Ed, Pushover 1 =75mm to d Ed, Pushover 7 =96mm. The lowest of the seismic vulnerability index values is ξ E,SLV Pushover 1 =0.62. The A+B+C+1+2+3 model falls into the seismic risk class B, managing to resist a maximum acceleration on the ground equal to a max S Pushover 1 = 0.179g, therefore less than the acceleration of ground demand at