Outline

Ingegneria Sismica

Ingegneria Sismica

How code-based linear static analysis for the seismic design of masonry buildings may fail to be conservative

, Maria Cristina Porcu. and , Lussoria Chessa. “How code-based linear static analysis for the seismic design of masonry buildings may fail to be conservative.” Ingegneria Sismica Volume 29 Issue 4: -, doi:….

Abstract

Linear static analysis is the easiest method for the seismic design of unreinforced masonry buildings. What makes this method particularly convenient to apply is that the fundamental vibration period of the structure may be obtained conventionally from a formula given by the codes of practice, rather than being calculated rigorously. Usually, the code-based formula overestimates – sometimes significantly – the rigorous value of the fundamental period of vibration of masonry structures. By referring to a series of unreinforced masonry buildings, the paper shows that the conventional period may be even 4-9 times greater than the rigorous one. However, overestimating the fundamental period may lead to a reduction of the design loads to be applied in the static method. This occurs, in particular, when the design response spectrum decreases in the short-period range, where natural periods of masonry buildings typically fall. Some codes do not allow design spectra to be negatively sloped in the short-period range. While others, such as the Italian code of practice, do allow it, and in so doing, they make the linear static method non-conservative (in the given examples the shear at the base of masonry buildings may be underestimated by even as much as 35% when compared to the values obtained from the more precise linear dynamic method). The paper gives some hints towards making the code-based static method for seismic design of masonry buildings safe.

Related Articles

E. Brunesi1, S. Peloso1, R. Pinho1,2, R. Nascimbene3
1EUCENTRE, European Centre for Training and Research in Earthquake Engineering Via Ferrata 1, 27100 Pavia, Italy
2Dept. of Civil Engineering and Architecture (DICAr), University of Pavia, Via Ferrata 3, Pavia 27100, Italy
3Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS Pavia Piazza della Vittoria 15, 27100 Pavia, Italy
R. Arvind1, M. Helen Santhi1, G. Malathi2, Huseyin Bilgin3
1School of Civil Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
2School of Computer Science and Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
3Civil (Structural) Engineering, Epoka University, Tirana / Albania
Ali Ekber Sever1, Yakup Hakan Aydin2, Pinar Usta Evci1
1Department of Civil Engineering, Isparta University of Applied Sciences, 32260 Isparta, Turkey
2Department of Mechanical Engineering, Isparta University of Applied Sciences, 32260 Isparta, Turkey
Hayri Baytan Ozmen1, Esra Ozer2
1Department of Civil Engineering, Usak University, 64200 Usak, Turkey
2Department of Civil Engineering, Tokat Gaziosmanpasa University, 60250 Tokat, Turkey
Hamid Beiraghi1, Abolfazl Riahi Nouri2
1Department of Civil Engineering, Mahdishahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mahdishahr, Iran
2Department of Civil Engineering, West Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran