PSI - Issue 55

Isabel Turbay et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 55 (2024) 168–176 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

174

7

Table 3. Summary table of monuments according to the vulnerability index (VI, VIp, VIe1, VIe2). Degree of vulnerability Very low Low On alert High Very High

Number of monuments

0

2

13

5

1

SPA, STC

CAR, MER, CCC, SPC, SRC, TRC SDC, ERM, ENC, CAR, AGU, SFP, JOS

CAL, ESC, LUP, BEL, SDP

SFA

according to the least favourable condition of each among the 4 indexes

In very low vulnerability, no buildings were found (dark green) (Table 3), therefore the same recommendations are taken for buildings with low vulnerability.

Biplot (F1 and F2 axes)

6

Traffic

land use Inadequate occupation of public space

Simplicity of the constructive solution seismic vulnerability

SFP

4

AGU

cataloging

covers VI e1%

Inadequate interventions

JOS

SPC

2

MER

urban landscape

CCC

CAG

CAR

SFA

SDC

0

ENC TRC

CAL

SDP

F2

SPA

Maintenance

STC

Physicochemical characteristics

ESC

VI p %

-2

Facilities

Structure Coatings

SPC

Fire resistance

ERM

Texture

VI %

foundation

BEL

-4

level of use

LUP

-6

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

F1

Active Variables

Active Observations

Supplementary Variables

Fig. 3. Biplot graph observations on the F1 and F2 axes. The colours represent the level of mild vulnerability (green), alert (yellow), serious (orange) and very serious (red).

In the case of the churches with low vulnerability grouped in green (Fig. 3), they are simple in their construction with gable roofs, but with little fire resistance due mainly to their wooden ceilings, roofs and ornaments. Low vulnerability corresponds to churches with little complexity in their roofs with respect to rainwater evacuation, therefore, their seismic vulnerability is relatively low. Because of that, the preventive conservation for this category is summarized in structural and functional monitoring and preventive maintenance, with special attention to the maintenance of facilities that protect against fire, and the conservation of wooden structures. The churches in alert (yellow) in Fig. 3 have been the most complex to group, since they are distributed in the four quadrants, so they do not share all the incidence factors. Some churches are affected by conditions related to urban pressure (traffic, occupation of public space and land use) in addition to being relatively seismically vulnerable and