PSI - Issue 44

Giuseppina De Martino et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 44 (2023) 1816–1823 Giuseppina De Martino et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2022) 000–000

1820

5

good quality (411 with tie rods or tie beams and 266 without tie rods or tie beams); the remaining 231 buildings are characterized by vertical structures with bad quality (66 with tie rods or tie beams and 165 without tie rods or tie beams). The horizontal structures mostly involve beams with semi-rigid and rigid slabs (around 80% of the dataset).

100%

100%

900

900

90%

90%

800

800

80%

80%

700

700

70%

70%

600

600

60%

60%

500

500

50%

50%

400

400

40%

40%

N. buildings

N. buildings

% buildings

300

300

30%

30%

200

200

20%

20%

100

100

10%

10%

0%

0

0%

0

Bad quality

Good quality

N.A.

Masonry quality

Horizontal structure type

without tie rods or beams

with tie rods or beams

(a)

(b)

Fig. 4. Distribution and cumulative percentage for masonry buildings as a function of (a) masonry quality and (b) horizontal structural type.

Fig. 5 shows, for each range of construction age, the correlation with number of stories, horizontal structure types and masonry quality; the graphs show a progressive reduction of building with more than one storey in recent years as well as the progressive increase of semi-rigid or rigid slabs and good quality of masonry vertical structures from 1919 to 1971 .

230 98 138 185 148 84

27

7

206 87 130 178 132 77

25

7

227 95 135 182 145 82 26

7

100%

100%

100%

90%

90%

90%

80%

80%

80%

70%

70%

70%

60%

60%

60%

50%

50%

50%

40% % buildings

40% % buildings

40% % buildings

30%

30%

30%

20%

20%

20%

10%

10%

10%

0%

0%

0%

Period of costruction 1 2 3

Period of costruction

Period of costruction

>3

Vaults

Flexible slabs

Semi-rigid slabs

Rigid slabs

Bad quality

Good quality

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 5. Distribution and cumulative percentage for (a) RC buildings, (b) masonry buildings and (c) mixed buildings as function of number of storeys.

4.1. Buildings damage vs vulnerability classes Sect. 4 of the AeDES form identifies four damage levels (D0-null damage, D1, slight damage; D2-D3 medium severe damage; D4-D5 very heavy damage or collapse) and related extent (lower than 1/3, between 1/3 and 2/3, and greater than 2/3 of the storey components) for structural and non-structural components: Vertical Structures (VS), Floors (F), Stairs (S), Roofs (R) and Infills-Partitions (IP). VS resulted the most damaged components according to empirical data collected in the post-earthquake in-situ inspections. The distribution of buildings according to the four damage levels is shown in Fig. 6. The Fig. 6 shows