PSI - Issue 78

Somayeh Gholami et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 78 (2026) 1459–1465

1465

( I a , LSLS < 1.0). This highlights the vulnerability of the selected buildings when subjected to design-level earthquake scenarios. Key factors contributing to the low safety indices include: moderate plan irregularity, represented by β x|yi values ranging from 1.01 to 1.25, which quantify the in-plane stiffness imbalance at each level; penalizing end-connection coefficients (μ x|yi ), which account for the non-uniformity in stiffness and strength of masonry piers; and low spandrel effectiveness ( ζ), often equal to 0.80 when the rotation of the pier’s upper section is not restrained . These findings confirm that the EL1 model, despite its simplified assumptions, can identify critical vulnerabilities associated with wall configuration, material strength, and seismic mass. However, it also underscores the sensitivity of the model to input uncertainties and its limitations when detailed structural data are not available. While the EL1 model serves as a useful tool for preliminary screening and prioritization in large-scale risk assessments of historic centers, future developments may benefit from incorporating probabilistic or sensitivity-based methods to account for epistemic uncertainties. Such refinements could improve the reliability and robustness of simplified vulnerability models in heritage contexts. Another important aspect, often overlooked in simplified models, is the out-of-plane behaviour of masonry walls. Including this mechanism in future developments could significantly improve the comprehensiveness of vulnerability assessments in historic centres Acknowledgments The activities described in this paper were carried out within the research project “GENESIS – seismic risk manaGEmeNt for tourist valorization thE hiStorIcal centers of Southern Italy”, funded by the Italian Ministry of University and Research under the PNR 2015-2020 programme (call: D.D. n. 1735, 13/07/2017 – Industrial Research and Experimental Development Projects in the 12 Areas of Specialization identified by the PNR 2015-2020 – Specialization Area: Cul-tural Heritage – Project proposal: ARS01_00883) References De Angelis, A., Maddaloni, G. & Pecce, M. R. 2020. Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of a Monumental Masonry Building. Infrastructures, 5 , 93. Fabbrocino, F., Olivieri, C., Luciano, R., Vaiano, G., Maddaloni, G. & Iannuzzo, A. 2024. Seismic performance of historic masonry buildings: A comparative analysis of equivalent frame and block-based methods. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 109 , 359 – 375. Lagomarsino, S. & Cattari, S. 2014. PERPETUATE guidelines for seismic performance-based assessment of cultural heritage masonry structures. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 13 , 13 – 47. Lourenço, P. B. 2006. Recommendations for restoration of ancient buildings and the survival of a masonry chimney. Construction and Building Materials, 20 , 239 – 251. Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti struzioni per l’applicazione dell’«Aggiornamento delle “Norme tecniche per le costruzioni”» di cui al decreto ministeriale 17 gennaio 2018, Rome,Italy, Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti. Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali 2011. Linee Guida per la valutazione e riduzione del rischio sismico del patrimonio culturale,2011. Ministero per le Infrastrutture e i Trasporti 2018. Aggiornamento delle "Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni"NTC. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana. Puncello, I. & Caprili, S. 2023. Seismic Assessment of Historical Masonry Buildings at Different Scale Levels: A Review. Applied Sciences, 13 , 1941. Spacone, E., Cantagallo, C., Caprili, S., Caroprese, L., D’Amato, M., De Matteis, G., Fossetti, M., Filitti, D., Gigliotti, R ., Mattei, F., Masciotta, M. G., Ponzo, F., Saetta, A., Salvatore, W., Talledo, D. A., Versaci, A. & Zizi, M. 2025. GENESIS Project: Seismic risk management for the touristic valorisation of the historical centers of Southern Italy. In: PAPADRAKAKIS, M. A. F., M (ed.) 10th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2025). Italy. Turnsek V & Cacovic. 24 .-Some Experimental Results on the Strength of Brick Masonry Walls. 1971. Zizi, M., Rouhi, J., Chisari, C., Cacace, D. & De Matteis, G. 2021. Seismic Vulnerability Assessment for Masonry Churches: An Overview on Existing Methodologies. Buildings, 11 , 588.