PSI - Issue 44

R. Siano et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 44 (2023) 1038–1044 R. Siano, A. Fatnassi, F. V. De Maio, P. Basso, M. Cademartori / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2022) 000–000

1042

5

5.2. Cost benefit analysis and EAL The evaluation and comparison of the retrofit scenarios’ efficiency were performed by applying a simplified cost benefit analysis that allowed to account for both structural and economic efficiency of each scenario with the aim to achieve a good balance between the possible improvement of the buildings’ structural performance and the associated costs. For each scenarios a complete estimation of the costs associated to both structural and non-structural intervention was initially performed by applying the local prices. The overall costs were further checked with national and international references regarding decisional tools for seismic retrofit of existing structures. Then the definition of loss curves, referred to both the existing and the investigated retrofit configurations, allowed the comparison of each scenario in terms of structural and economic efficiency. The definition of loss curves followed the criteria provided by the Italian Decree for the Seismic Classification (2020).

a

b

Fig. 2. Comparison of Loss Curves for Existing and Retrofitted configurations: (a) Group 1; (b) Group 2

a

b

Fig. 3. Comparison of Loss Curves for Existing and Retrofitted configurations: (a) Group 3; (b) Group 4

The comparison of the loss curves, defined for existing and retrofitted configurations, allowed to estimate the reduction of the economic losses associated to the building damage repair and the initial retrofit costs. More specifically, the loss curves allowed the estimation of the Expected Annual Losses (EAL) defined as the area under the loss curve. The latter represents the relationship between the mean annual frequency of exceedance of a specific