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

1821

6

that more than 50% of buildings suffered significant damage to vertical structures (31% with damage level D2-D3 and 25% with damage level D4-D5)

100%

900

90%

800

80%

700

70%

600

60%

500

50%

400

40%

% buidlings

300 N. of buildings

30%

200

20%

100

10%

0%

0

D0

D1

D2-D3

D4-D5

Damage level

(a)

Fig. 6. Distribution and cumulative percentage of masonry buildings as function of damage level detected on VS (a).

The damage level has been influenced by the buildings’ characteristics (i.e., masonry type and quality, presence of tie roads and beams, and horizontal structural type). As the damage level increases the percentage of masonry with irregular layout and poor-quality increases (Fig. 7a). As expected, buildings without tie rods and tie beams resulted more vulnerable than buildings with tie rods and tie beams (Fig. 7b). The damage distribution has been influenced also by horizontal structural type (Fig. 7c). The deformability of horizontal structure affected the buildings’ global behavior: the percentage of buildings with vaults and flexible slabs increases in case of severe damage (i.e. D2-D3 and D4-D5) .

165

235

277

229

66

56

183

544

165

235

277

229

100%

100%

100%

90%

90%

90%

80%

80%

80%

70%

70%

70%

60%

60%

60%

50%

50%

50%

% buildings

% buildings

% buildings

40%

40%

40%

30%

30%

30%

20%

20%

20%

10%

10%

10%

0%

0%

0%

D0

D1

D2-D3

D4-D5

D0

D1

D2-D3

D4-D5

D0

D1

D2-D3

D4-D5

Damage level

Damage level

Damage level

without tie rods or beams

with tie rods or beams

Vaults

Flexible slabs

Semi-rigid slabs

Rigid slabs

Irregular layout or bad quality

Regular layout or good quality

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 7. Percentage of buildings with maximum damage to vertical structural as a function of damage level for (a) layout type and quality of masonry, (b) tie rods or beams and (c) floor type.

In order to evaluate the cross-correlations between the building damage and the buildings’ characteristics, the building damage state, DS , per building has been defined and dataset has been grouped in different classes with similar vulnerabilities. In litterature there are different conversion matrices to convert empircal damge on structural and not structural component to DS [Di Pasquale and Goretti, (2001), Dolce et al (2001), Dolce and Goretti, (2015), Rosti et al., (2018), Del Gaudio et al., (2019)] and to grouped buildings into vulnerability classses [Zuccaro and Cacace, (2015), Dolce and Goretti, (2015)] To define the building damage state, the damage data detected on the vertical structures by means of AeDES form was converted into 6 DS ( DS0, DS1, DS2, DS3, DS4, DS5 ) by employing the conversion matrices reported in Dolce et al., (2019). In terms of vulnerability, the masonry buildings have been grouped into low, significant and high vulnerability according to the criteria reported in Dolce and Goretti, (2015) and based on data collected on vertical