PSI - Issue 44

Valeria Leggieri et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 44 (2023) 2004–2011 Valeria Leggieri et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2022) 000–000

2009

6

v j (P i ), it is possible to rapidly obtain the outputs for a specific model and to easily compare the seismic performance of models by varying one or more parameters.

Table 1. Input parameters (P i ) and relative values (v j ) for each structural-typological class.

Values (v j )

Parameter

Variable (P i )

Source

MUR01

MUR02

Side of the SU [m]

P 1

CTR

[10 12 15]

Base area [m 2 ]

P

CARTIS CARTIS CARTIS CARTIS CARTIS

[70 85 100] [130 150 170]

2

Number of storeys

P 3 P 4 P 5 P 6

[2 3]

[3 4]

Thickness of walls [m]

[0,25 0,30 0,50 0,70 1]

Percentage of openings in upper floors [%] Percentage of openings in the ground floor [%]

[10 15 20] [20 25 30]

Average compressive (f c ) and tensile (f y ) strengths [MPa] [2,04 2,45 2,86 3,27] [0,10 0,13 0,16 0,19] Some examples of preliminary results are reported in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 (more details are available in Leggieri et al., 2021). j (P 3 ) equal to 1; v j (P 4 ) equal to 0.25 m; v j (P 5 ) equal to 10%; v j (P 6 ) equal to 20% and by varying f c . In order from left to right respectively AC 1 , AC 2 , AC 3 and AC 4 . P 7 Italian Building Code Fig. 3. Bilinear curves for the class MUR01 obtained by uniform load pattern, v j (P 1 ) equal to 10 m; v j (P 2 ) equal to 70 m 2 ; v

25

2

2

2

2

f c = 2.04 N/mm f c = 2.45 N/mm

f c = 2.86 N/mm f c = 3.27 N/mm

f c = 2.86 N/mm f c = 3.27 N/mm

f c = 2.04 N/mm f c = 2.45 N/mm

20

2

2

2

2

15

10

C/D Ratio

5

0

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

number of SUs in AC

number of SUs in AC

12000

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

f c = 2.86 N/mm f c = 3.27 N/mm

f c = 2.04 N/mm f c = 2.45 N/mm

f c = 2.86 N/mm f c = 3.27 N/mm

f c = 2.86 N/mm f c = 3.27 N/mm

f c = 2.04 N/mm f c = 2.45 N/mm

f c = 2.04 N/mm f c = 2.45 N/mm

f c = 2.04 N/mm f c = 2.45 N/mm

f c = 2.86 N/mm f c = 3.27 N/mm

10000

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

8000

6000

4000

Force [kN]

2000

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 displacement [cm]

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 displacement [cm]

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 displacement [cm]

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 displacement [cm]

Fig. 4. C/D ratios for the models MUR01 for the IO limit-state, uniform load pattern and 0° direction, obtained by v j (P 1 ) equal to 15 m; v j (P 2 ) equal to 100 m 2 ; v j (P 4 ) equal to 0.25 m; v j (P 5 ) equal to 20%; v j (P 6 ) equal to 30% and by varying f c . In order from left to right respectively the models with 1 and 2 number of storeys. 4. Conclusion and future development The aim of the paper is to present an automated tool, named META-FORMA (MEchanical-Typological Approach FORMasonry Aggregates), for large-scale seismic vulnerability assessment of masonry aggregates, starting from few input parameters about typological-structural building classes and involving low computational effort. The development of such procedure has been possible exploiting the interoperability between the programming software MATLAB and the structural software POR2000. The application to the case study of Foggia municipality have shown the potentials of the proposed automated procedure. Indeed, META-FORMA allows to overcome the difficulty to determine a nearly full knowledge about the structural and typological features of individual structural units, requiring