PSI - Issue 29

Mario De Stefano et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 29 (2020) 71–78 De Stefano and Cristofaro/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

75

5

Table 1. Results (average values) of the compression tests on specimens in a natural and artificial stone. Specimen code σ max [MPa] k [kN/mm] E T [MPa] E * [MPa] Specimen code σ max [MPa] k [kN/mm] E T [MPa] E * [MPa]

P1/P P2/M P2/P P3/M

121.91 349.02

481.42

14524.26 P19/M

6.84

35.87

646.32

1938.95

22.52

83.44

1883.57 5650.71

P19/P

91.67

215.11

4664.16 13992.49 3814.50 11443.50 1327.08 3981.25 1246.97 3740.91 4652.80 13958.39 4676.06 14028.17 1495.60 4486.81 1717.62 5152.86

101.77 215.59

3876.31 11628.94 P28/P

104.75 284.82

11.80 28.42 92.19 19.48 19.46 92.23 17.94

26.78 70.23

741.21

2223.64

P31/M P32/M

10.84 12.21 77.43 89.29 10.28 17.55

63.50 58.30

P11’/M P11’/P P12/M P16/M P16/P P18/M

2247.96 6743.88

247.12

5506.12 16518.36 P33/P

300.30 421.95

77.61 61.10

2250.96 6752.88 1669.47 5008.40

P41/P P43/M

72.64 62.37

288.49

4324.81 12974.43 P45/M

54.35

1258.55 3775.65

3. Evaluation levels LV1, LV2 andLV3 of the seismic response of theMuseumComplex The safety checks were carried out according to the GL requirements. These constitute the basic methodology for carrying out assessments on architectura l artefacts belonging to the cultura l heritage. They provide three levels of seismic risk assessment: i) on a territorial sca le (LV1); ii) on macroelements (LV2); iii) globa l (LV3). 3.1. LV1: Qualitativeanalysis andevaluationwith simplifiedmechanicalmodels Through the first level of seismic vulnerability assessment (LV1) it was possible to obta in an estimate of the Safety Index, IS , relating to the Limit State of Safeguarding Life (SLV). The complex was divided into structura l units and each of them was ana lyzed according to the model with which it can be assimila ted. In particular, two models were used: i) Pa laces, Villas and other structures with herringbone wa lls and intermedia te horizons; ii) Churches, places of worship and other structures with large classrooms, without intermediate horizons. The Pa laces modelwas conductedby adopting the information systemof theMIBACT "Sivars".

Palaces model

Churches model

Legend

Legend

Models: A; B; E; F; G; H; L; M; N Models: C Models: D+F Area analyzed with Palaces model

Models: I Models: D+F Models: D+F+E Area analyzed with Curches model

Ground floor

Ground floor

(a)

(b)

Fig. 4. Ground floor plan with identification of blocks. (a) Palaces model; (b) Churches model.

The checks carried out with the Pa laces model provided IS va lues between 0.1 and 0.3 for blocks A, G, L, N and D + F. These blocks are characterized by a conformation that develops ma inly on one of the two ma in directions and with wa lls having significant heights and the tota l absence of spine wa lls. For blocks B, D and H the IS it ranges between 0.35 and 0.4. While blocks C, E, F and M have a better IS than the previous ones, but in any case, it does not reach 0.6. IS va lues between 0.3 and 0.78 were obta ined for the blocks ana lysed with the Churches model (AA.VV. 2002), as reported in Table 2.