Seismic assessment and FRCM strengthening of post-war masonry residential buildings: A case study on building typologies

IF 4.2 1区 地球科学 Q1 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Simon Petrovčič, Petra Prašnikar, Vojko Kilar
{"title":"Seismic assessment and FRCM strengthening of post-war masonry residential buildings: A case study on building typologies","authors":"Simon Petrovčič,&nbsp;Petra Prašnikar,&nbsp;Vojko Kilar","doi":"10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study presents a comprehensive seismic vulnerability assessment of early post-war multi-residential unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings in Slovenia, focusing on structures built between 1945 and 1963. Using an approach that links architectural configuration with structural behavior, over 400 buildings in Ljubljana were categorized into 24 distinct typologies based on shape, height, and structural characteristics. Four representative building types underwent detailed seismic performance evaluation using nonlinear static analysis. The analysis revealed that none of the examined buildings met current Eurocode 8 seismic requirements. Two retrofitting scenarios for enhancing the seismic resilience using Fiber Reinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) were investigated: a selective approach focusing on critical structural elements, and a comprehensive strategy applied to all load-bearing walls. While both scenarios improved seismic performance, they generally fell short of achieving full Eurocode 8 compliance. Interestingly, the selective retrofitting approach demonstrated higher efficiency in some cases. A novel efficiency metric revealed that FRCM retrofitting was generally more effective in directions with lower initial wall percentages. The study highlights the challenges in upgrading existing URM buildings to modern seismic standards and suggests the need for typology-specific approaches to assessment and retrofitting. The findings underscore the importance of tailored strengthening strategies and indicate that achieving full compliance may require more comprehensive or alternative techniques for this vulnerable building stock.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13915,"journal":{"name":"International journal of disaster risk reduction","volume":"119 ","pages":"Article 105341"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of disaster risk reduction","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420925001657","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study presents a comprehensive seismic vulnerability assessment of early post-war multi-residential unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings in Slovenia, focusing on structures built between 1945 and 1963. Using an approach that links architectural configuration with structural behavior, over 400 buildings in Ljubljana were categorized into 24 distinct typologies based on shape, height, and structural characteristics. Four representative building types underwent detailed seismic performance evaluation using nonlinear static analysis. The analysis revealed that none of the examined buildings met current Eurocode 8 seismic requirements. Two retrofitting scenarios for enhancing the seismic resilience using Fiber Reinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) were investigated: a selective approach focusing on critical structural elements, and a comprehensive strategy applied to all load-bearing walls. While both scenarios improved seismic performance, they generally fell short of achieving full Eurocode 8 compliance. Interestingly, the selective retrofitting approach demonstrated higher efficiency in some cases. A novel efficiency metric revealed that FRCM retrofitting was generally more effective in directions with lower initial wall percentages. The study highlights the challenges in upgrading existing URM buildings to modern seismic standards and suggests the need for typology-specific approaches to assessment and retrofitting. The findings underscore the importance of tailored strengthening strategies and indicate that achieving full compliance may require more comprehensive or alternative techniques for this vulnerable building stock.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International journal of disaster risk reduction
International journal of disaster risk reduction GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARYMETEOROLOGY-METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
18.00%
发文量
688
审稿时长
79 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction (IJDRR) is the journal for researchers, policymakers and practitioners across diverse disciplines: earth sciences and their implications; environmental sciences; engineering; urban studies; geography; and the social sciences. IJDRR publishes fundamental and applied research, critical reviews, policy papers and case studies with a particular focus on multi-disciplinary research that aims to reduce the impact of natural, technological, social and intentional disasters. IJDRR stimulates exchange of ideas and knowledge transfer on disaster research, mitigation, adaptation, prevention and risk reduction at all geographical scales: local, national and international. Key topics:- -multifaceted disaster and cascading disasters -the development of disaster risk reduction strategies and techniques -discussion and development of effective warning and educational systems for risk management at all levels -disasters associated with climate change -vulnerability analysis and vulnerability trends -emerging risks -resilience against disasters. The journal particularly encourages papers that approach risk from a multi-disciplinary perspective.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信