Seismic assessment of historical masonry buildings with nonlinear static analysis

820 views

Published on

Bucchi F., Arangio S., Bontempi F., “Seismic assessment of historical masonry buildings with nonlinear static analysis”, The Fourteenth International Conference on Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering Computing, 3-6 September 2013, Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
820
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
104
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Seismic assessment of historical masonry buildings with nonlinear static analysis

  1. 1. Seismic assessment of an historical masonry building with nonlinear static analysis Sapienza University of Rome F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Cagliari, September 5th 2013 StroNGER s.r.l.
  2. 2. 2/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Introduction Part I Conclusions Part II Nonlinear static analysis with different commercial codes Outline Seismic assessment of masonry historical buildings Case study: Analysis of Camponenschi Palace (L’Aquila, Italy)
  3. 3. 3/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Introduction Part I Conclusions Part II Nonlinear static analysis with different commercial codes Outline Seismic assessment of masonry historical buildings Case study: Analysis of Camponenschi Palace (L’Aquila, Italy)
  4. 4. 4/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Structural assessment of masonry buildingsIntroduction Simplified Analysis Method (SAM) [Magenes] POR [Tomazevic] Equivalent struts [Calderoni et al.] SISV [D’Asdia et al.] Macroelements with springs [Caliò et al.] Macroelements [Gambarotta et al.] 1D 2D Detailed microelements 3D finite element models 3D
  5. 5. 5/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Introduction Part I Conclusions Part II Nonlinear static analysis with different commercial codes Outline Seismic assessment of masonry historical buildings Case study: Analysis of Camponenschi Palace (L’Aquila, Italy)
  6. 6. 6/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Nonlinear static analysis of a three dimensional buildingPartI SAP2000 Muri
  7. 7. 7/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Nonlinear static analysis with SAP2000 PartI PIER SPANDRELJOINT Plastic hinges “weak” spandrel “strut” spandrel floor with shell elements control node PartI
  8. 8. 8/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Nonlinear static analysis with 3Muri The panels are schematized with macro-elements with 8 DOFs Panel Macro-element Integer Plastic (shear) Failure (shear) Plastic (Bending moment) Failure (Bending moment) Failure (Compression) Failure (Tension) Failure (in elastic phase) PartI
  9. 9. 9/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi “weak” spandrels: comparison of the modeling hypothesis a) b) The nodes are connected with an internal rigid constraint Diaphragm constraints between the adjacent nodes 2. CONNECTIONS “Simple” panel 1. WALLS frames; plastic hinges with low Vu e Mu (“weak” behavior) Weak connection between joists and walls a) wood floor not modeled b) wood floor modeled with shell elements 3. WOOD FLOOR SAP2000Muri PartI
  10. 10. 10/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi “strut” spandrels: comparison of the modeling hypothesis a) b) The nodes are connected with an internal rigid constraint Diaphragm constraints between the adjacent nodes 2. CONNECTIONS Panel with chains 1. WALLS frames; plastic hinges with Vu e Mu defined in accordance with NTC2008 Weak connection between joists and walls a) Rigid floor modeled with a strut b) Rigid floor modeled with shell elements 3. WOOD FLOOR SAP2000Muri PartI
  11. 11. 11/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Plastic hinges - SAP2000PartI a) b) c) “WEAK” SPANDRELS “STRUT” SPANDRELS
  12. 12. 12/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Nonlinear static analysis with 3MuriPartI Integer Plastic (shear) Failure (shear) Plastic (Bending moment) Failure (Bending moment) Failure (Compression) Failure (Tension) Failure (in elastic phase) Almost all the spandrels show plastic bending behavior. The piers work as cantilever beams. “WEAK” SPANDRELS
  13. 13. 13/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Comparison of the resultsPartI
  14. 14. 14/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Introduction Part I Conclusions Part II Nonlinear static analysis with different commercial codes Outline Seismic assessment of masonry historical buildings Case study: Analysis of Camponenschi Palace (L’Aquila, Italy)
  15. 15. 15/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Camponeschi PalacePartII
  16. 16. 16/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Camponeschi Palace – SAP2000 ModelPartII Properties of the masonry KL2 CF= 1.2 w 18 kN/m3 E 1202 N/mm2 G 300 N/Cm2 fM 270 N/mm2 fvm0 6 N/cm2
  17. 17. 17/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Results of the nonlinear static analysisPartII 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0 0,02 0,04 0,06 0,08 0,1 0,12 0,14 Shear[kN] Displacement - control node #31 [m] Distribution of forces proportional to seismic masses Distribution of forces proportional to equivalent static forces
  18. 18. 18/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Plastic hingesPartII Plasticization of the spandrels Plasticization of some piers Plasticization of all the piers of the first level
  19. 19. 19/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi [From Gattulli,2011] Comparison with the results obtained with 3MuriPartII
  20. 20. 20/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Introduction Part I Conclusions Part II Nonlinear static analysis with different commercial codes Outline Seismic assessment of masonry historical buildings Case study: Analysis of Camponenschi Palace (L’Aquila, Italy)
  21. 21. 21/21PartIPartIIConclusionsIntroduction SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF AN HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDING WITH NONLINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS F. Bucchi, S. Arangio, F. Bontempi Conclusions Two commercial codes for nonlinear static analysis of masonry buildings have been compared: • Both codes are able to reproduce the failure mechanisms; • The results are very sensitive to the modelling hypothesis; • The kind of floor strongly influences the response of the structure; Conclusions and future studies Case study: Camponeschi Palace • The codes are in substantial accordance on the failure mechanisms and they are coherent with the observed damages. • In order to obtained more detailed results a complete 3D model is needed. • The current work is focused on the comparison of the results obtained with the entire model developed with 3Muri and Strand7
  22. 22. email: stefania.arangio@uniroma1.it francesca_bucchi@yahoo.it franco.bontempi@uniroma1.it This research was partially supported by StroNGER s.r.l. from the fund “FILAS - POR FESR LAZIO 2007/2013 - Support for the research spin off”.

×