PSI - Issue 29

Maria Pianigiani et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 29 (2020) 103–110 Pianigiani M., Careccia C., Montone C./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

110

8

approved. This project gives priority to the restora tion of the movable assets of the churches included in the reconstruction plans (in the ordinances), in order to guarantee a complete restitution of the cultural heritage to the community, includingboth thechurches and themovable assets placed therein. 3. Conclusion The high seismic risk and the large number of artworks distributed over theItalian territorymake the preservation of the churches and the goods inside them, a very interesting topic. Investiga ting the seismic behaviours of those complexbuildings, it is possible to establish criteria andmethods to operate bothon thegood “container” and on the artistic assets inside it, as it were an only thing. These considerations all make the approach to the church’s seismic behaviours a complex topic. In fact, container and content mean that church and its artworks are particularly interconnected, a long with their damages, because of their own na ture: the injuries suffered by artworks are not less than those suffered by the container. All because artistic elements are very often integral part of the constructive system of the church whose they suffer the structural behaviors due to the insufficiency of theconstraints that should guarantee the stability of the system whole. Substantially damages on churches aredue to both their own structure andartistic assets that haveoften compromised its stability. Moreover, damageson artworks canbe bothdirect (due to the collapse of thesupport:DC, PC) and indirect (due to the difficultyof their arrangement in adequate deposit). Furthermore, the earthquake experience hashighlighted this strongcorrelation betweencontainer and content and, despite the efforts of the technicians to carry on the procedures of the recovery and reconstruction for both jointly, it seems impracticable becauseof their different timingof achievement. All these considerations lead to declare that it is unthinkable to separate the two goods both as structure and as administrative procedure for the recovery and reconstructionbecause this divisioncauses different timingand funding. Moreover, the funding for the reconstruction of the churches is estimated on the basis of the index of damage that doesn’t consider the artworks bothmovable or immovable (structural decorations). Recovery timingof artworks is different from reconstruction timingof the churches and it involves the problemof where to store the restored assets until their placement in the restored church, so how if funding of the decorative structures is separate, it means that church will not seem completely reconstructed in a ll its components. For these reasons, churches must be considered an unicum including a ll their artworks (movable and immovable) and together both constitutea cultural asset of highest complexity and quality. Acknowledgements Authors would like express their appreciation to Arch. Gisella Capponi for a ll precious suggestions and constant encouragement and Eng. Paolo Iannelli, for a llowingus to a ttend the conference, supportingour effort. References Anagnostopoulos, S. A., Moretti,M. L., 2008. Post-earthquakeemergencyassessment of buildingdamage, safety and usability — Part 2: Organisa tion. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 28(3):233-244. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2006.05.008. CacaceC., 2019. La Carta delRischio per il pa trimonio culturale. In: Fiorani, D., (Ed). Quasar, Roma, pp. 65-74. Farabollin,i F., 2018. The 2016 Earthquake in Central Italy. The Alphabet of Reconstruction. In Farabollini, F., Lugeri F.R. et Mugnano S. (ed.) Earthquake risk perceptioncommunication and mitigation strategies across Europe in Geographies of the Anthropocene OpenAccess andPeer-Reviewed series, Il Sileno Edizioni, 145 – 171. Guccione, M., Nappi, M.R., Recchia, A.P., 1998. Pa trimonio culturale e disastri. L’impa tto del sisma sui beni monumentali. Prospettive di prevenzione, GangemiEditore, Roma, pp. 94-99. Marra , A., 2015. Interdisciplinary approach to the conservation of cultural heritage in seismic areas. PhD disserta tion. University of Naples “Federico II”. Villani, F., et a l., 2018. A da tabase of the coseismic effects following the 30 October 2016Norcia earthquake in Central Italy. Scientific data, 5, -. [180049]. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.49. Website: http://vincoliinrete.beniculturali.it/VincoliInRete/vir/ ; http://www.cartadelrischio.it/