Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR
HISTORIC REINFORCED CONCRETE
HOUSING BUILDINGS IN EUROPE
Maria Bostenaru
Rui Pinho
IUSS Pavia / RO...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Overview
Problem and ist significance
Approach
Results
Discussion
Conclusi...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Problem and its significance
CA‘REDIVIVUS
Buildings of the Modern Movement...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Problem and its significance
Nr. Objective Interest groups
1 - advancing t...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Nr. Objective Method Instruments
1 Improving understanding of the
impact o...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Approach
Documentation of the distribution and
regional characteristics
In...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Results:
questionaires analysed
registries from the „DOcumentation and
COn...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
DOCOMOMO registries:
entry categories
Summary Localisation Authors Typolog...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
WHE database:
decision tree for retrofit measures
Retrofit goals TG = 100
...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Criterion measurement
spaces for WHE criteria
Measurement space Representa...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
(x-axis) Measurement space Representation space
Function space Ex. Goal re...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Project management
Step Goal Method Instrument Objec-
tive
1 a. Technical ...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Discussion
Step Goal Method Instrument Measure
1 technical reports on impl...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Conclusions
The criteria developed by the experts differ
of those in trans...
EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid
Outlook
The registries / reports will be reviewed
from the point of view o...
Thank you!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

EE21C

582 views

Published on

EE21C conference Ohrid, Macedonia, 2005

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

EE21C

  1. 1. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR HISTORIC REINFORCED CONCRETE HOUSING BUILDINGS IN EUROPE Maria Bostenaru Rui Pinho IUSS Pavia / ROSE
  2. 2. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Overview Problem and ist significance Approach Results Discussion Conclusions Outlook
  3. 3. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Problem and its significance CA‘REDIVIVUS Buildings of the Modern Movement  housing constructions  reinforced concrete structure  raised during a short time span (10-20y) in the interwar time  such research is rare Multitude of disciplinary points of view
  4. 4. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Problem and its significance Nr. Objective Interest groups 1 - advancing the science of earthquake engineering - improving understanding of the impact of earthquakes on the physical, social, economic and cultural environment - developing comprehensive measures for preventing earthquake loss Multidisciplinary 2 development of an algorithm for optimisation of retrofit measures - 3 development of a decentralised decision model, encompassing all actors involved in the implementation strategy of a retrofit measures, from: - geophysics (engineering seismology) - (structural) engineering - economy (investment efficiency) - sociology (consideration of user issues) Interdisciplinary 4 insights into applicability of retrofit methods, where instead of improving capacity demand is reduced, more specifically active devices on frame braces. Interdisciplinary architecture engineering 5 development of a framework for integral planning, meaning that economic and engineering aspects are equally regarded from incipient phases of reconversion projects, namely the building survey. Interdisciplinary architecture engineering economics 6 solving contradictions between the objectives of single actors in the retrofit implementation strategy, not only through the choice, but also through customisation of an adequate decision system. Multidisciplinary 7 highlighting the comprehensibility of the measures analysed, through inclusion into the integral planning scheme near the flow in the physical implementation of the retrofit system also of a flow for the education of the population which has to support the measures. This is especially important in the so-called second phase of strategic implementation, when the application of the measure has to spread from pilot or demonstrative projects to “routine” wide ones. architecture urbanism sociology 8 Investigation of the possibilities to support changes by political and economic environment, namely of existing programmes (results from the events on “Natural Hazards Impact on Urban Areas and Infrastructure”), and their impact. -
  5. 5. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Nr. Objective Method Instruments 1 Improving understanding of the impact of earthquakes - public presentation - reaction to feedback on findings and conclusions about the architectural, structural, geophysical, social and economic aspects of retrofitting historic concrete buildings - active participation and co-organisation of conferences - publication in reviewed manner - web dissemination of results to the measures proposed 2 development of an algorithm for retrofit measures optimisation parametrical study FEM 3 development of a decentralised decision model modularisation of a collaborative decision model taking into account non-measurable criteria Use of the pair wise comparison method. Investigation of decision making on different levels (of the actors, of one actor‟s criteria) and of the likelihood of interference with multiobjective systems in the transition from urban to building scale. 4 applicability of retrofit methods - insights documentation training Literature and internet based research Lectures and assisted exercises. 5 development of a framework for integral planning Setting up an example retrofit design model project for the integral planning and defining the steps, from the “functional specifications” over alternative generation to presentation of relevant aspects of all actors. Exercise 6 solving contradictions between the objectives of single actors develop a basis system to administrate modules on different levels of detail included in the urban strategical planning Investigation of the suitability of different computer tools like spread sheets, GIS and multimedia programmed ones. 7 highlighting the comprehensibility of the measures analysed Several steps are foreseen in the „educational flow‟: - determination of research directions - determination of means for accessibilisation of information - investigation of consulting and participation means - education - creation of public ideas - realisation of the connection between education and research. Finally the information circuit gets into a second phase. - database for the presentation to the public, for navigation between urban/building level and for feedback from the programs. 8 support changes by political and economic environment Documentation and conference organisation activity “Natural Hazards Impact on Urban Areas and Infrastructure” session, publication and eventual similar events.
  6. 6. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Approach Documentation of the distribution and regional characteristics Integrated decision systems Databases on residential buildings  DOCOMOMO association  World Housing Encyclopedia project  Risk perception
  7. 7. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Results: questionaires analysed registries from the „DOcumentation and COnservation of the Modern MOvement“ Reports from the (earthquake prone) World Housing Encyclopedia, of the  IAEE  EERI Socio-economic questionaire in the dissertation of Plapp (2004), GK450, Universität Karlsruhe, Germany
  8. 8. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid DOCOMOMO registries: entry categories Summary Localisation Authors Typology Evaluation State Protection building name Type evaluation of originality postal address ZIP code former/ alternate name initial use owner present use social evaluation URL project and transformations Institution owner‟s status Type of protection Grade of protection materials/ techniques engineering technical evaluation evaluation of current state Restoration nature of danger beginning of construction contracting authority end of construction construction year of design stylistic affiliation historical evaluation Awards conception planned use aesthetic evaluation URL of presentation URL of documentation urban center country continent regional context contextual evaluation urban context
  9. 9. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid WHE database: decision tree for retrofit measures Retrofit goals TG = 100 Nr.Criterion ZG TG TG TG TG TG TG ZG Criterion Nr. A. Architect 15 50 Engineer C. 1 Description 150 100 A1 Seismic strenthening technologies 100 100 50 100 Seismic strengthening technologies C1 100 250 What has been the performance of retrofitted buildings of this type in subsequent earthquakes? 4 50 100 Seismic strengthening technologies (together with other actors) C2 100 250 Description 5 TG A.100 100 TG C. B.Inhabitant 20 15 Investor D. 62 Who performed the construction: a contractor, or owner/user? 100 50 B1 Seismic strengthening technologies 100 100 50 95 Seismic strengthening technologies D1 35 28 Has this strengthening been perfomed in design practice? To what extent? 3 Was an architect or engineer involved? 100 50 30 24 Was the work done as a mitigation effort on an undamaged building, or as repair following earthquake damage? 7 30 24 Was the construction inspected in the same manner as new construction? 8 50 100 D2 35 26 Description 9 32,5 24 Who performed the construction? 10 Seismic strengthening technologies (together with other actors) 32,5 24 Was an architect/engineer involved? 11 TG B.100 100 TG D.
  10. 10. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Criterion measurement spaces for WHE criteria Measurement space Representation space(x-Axis) Function space increasing decreasing Nr. Name [from] [to] [from] [to] [from] [to] [unit] [ZG] (y-Axis) 0 4 4 0 0 4 1 Description 1 10 0 0 1 10 Text (score: building materials, expected effectivity, construction complexity) 150,0 2 Who performed the construction: a contractor, or owner/user? 1 3 0 0 1 3 Influence degree of the contractor 100,0 3 Was an architect or engineer involved? 1 3 0 0 1 3 Number of participating specialist actors 100,0 4 Performance of retrofitted buildings of this type in subsequent earthquakes? 1 6 0 0 1 6 very poor till very good 250,0 5 Description 1 10 0 0 1 10 Text (as above) 250,0 6 Has this strengthening been perfomred in design practice? To what extent? 1 6 0 0 1 6 Not at all till area-wide 27,6 7 Mitigation effort on an undamaged building, or as post-damage repair? 1 4 0 0 1 4 post-damage repair – retrofit of pre-damaged construction – preventive measure – replacement 23,7 8 Was the construction inspected in the same manner as new construction? 0 0 1 0 0 1 yes/no 23,7 9 Description 1 4 0 0 1 4 Poor to richt based on house price/yearly income 26,3 10 Who performed the construction: a contractor, or owner/user? 1 3 0 0 1 3 Influence degree of the contractor 24,4 11 Was an architect or engineer involved? 1 3 0 0 1 3 Number of participating speacialist actors 24,4
  11. 11. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid (x-axis) Measurement space Representation space Function space Ex. Goal representation (Transformation curve) [Nr.] increasing decreasing Name [from] [to] [from] [to] [IS] [unit] [ZEG]* [ZG]= [GZEG] (y-Axis) 0 4 4 0 Summs 1000 652 ARCHITECT General information 1 Summary 1 10 0 0 6 Text (score) 0,556 18,8 10,4 2 Typical period of practice 0 475 0 0 50 Year 0,105 18,8 2,0 3 Regions where used 0 0 0 100 1 Number of regions 1,000 18,8 18,8 4 Urban/rural construction 1 2 2 4 2 Checklist 18,8 18,8 Architectural features 5 Openings 0 0 0 0,75 33 Opening area/wall area 1,000 13,1 13,1 6 Siting 0 0 0 4 2 Site points (flat/sloped, common wall) 1,000 13,1 13,1 7 Building configuration 0,8 1 0 0 0,8 Shape score 0,000 11,3 0,0 9 Building function 0 0 1 4 4 Checklist (single/multiple family, commerical GF, mixed use) 1,000 9,9 9,9 10 Modification of buildings 0 0 0 5 1 Number (infill balconies, removed interior walls or columns, extensions, new stairs) 1,000 9,2 9,2 11 Means of escape 0 2 0 0 2 Number 1,000 9,2 9,2 INVESTOR Building materials and construction process 12 Description of building materials 3 500 0 0 150 Strength (N/mm²) 0,296 7,5 2,2 13 Eventuality of construction with specualative intentions 0 0 0 1 1 Yes/No 1,000 7,5 7,5 14 Construction process 1 5 0 0 4 Who builds with what machines 0,750 7,5 5,6 15 Design/construction expertise 0 4 0 0 3 Level 0,750 7,5 5,6 16 Codes/standards 0 4 0 0 1 Yes/No; Year 0,250 7,5 1,9 17 Role of engineers and architects 0 7 0 0 7 in how many project phases 1,000 7,5 7,5 18 Building permits/development rules 1 4 0 0 4 requested/not 1,000 7,5 7,5 19 Phasing of construction 0 1 0 0 1 stepwise/not 1,000 7,5 7,5 20 Building maintenance 0 3 0 0 2 who? (investor, owner, tenant, none) 0,667 7,5 5,0 21 Typical problems 1 10 0 0 4 Text (score) 0,333 7,5 2,5 Construction economics and insurance 22 Unit construction cost 2 1500 0 0 800 EUR/m² 0,533 31,3 16,6 23 Labor requirements 1 106 0 0 24 Weeks 0,219 31,3 6,8 24 Insurance 0 0 0 0 62,5 ENGINEER Structural features 25 Lateral load system 1 4 0 0 2 Text (key elements) 0,333 18,8 6,3 26 Gravity load bearing structure 1 4 0 0 3 Text (key elements) 0,667 18,8 12,5 27 Type of structural system 1 32 0 0 15 Score (based on the associated vulnerability class) 0,452 18,8 8,5 28 Type of foundation 1 7 8 14 5 Score (depending on their continuity) 0,667 18,8 12,5 29 Type of floor/roof system 1 16 0 0 14 Score (depending on the rigidity and the stability of the beared elements) 0,867 18,8 16,3 30 Plan dimensions 0,5 0,8 0,8 0,5 0,5 m min/m max 0,000 18,8 0,0 31 Number of stories 0 0 1 4 7 Number 1,000 18,8 18,8 32 Story height 0 0 2,7 6 3 M 1,000 18,8 18,8 33 Typical span 0 0 1,8 6 4,5 M 1,000 25,0 25,0 34 Typical wall density 2,5 20 0 0 7,5 % 0,286 25,0 7,1 Earthquake damage patterns 35 Earthquake damage patterns 0 0 0 4 4 Pre-damaging earthquakes 1,000 150,0 150,0 Evaluation of seismic performance and seismic vulnerability 36 Structural and architectural features 0 13 0 0 5 Simplified evaluation of seismic resistance 0,385 52,5 20,2 37 Seismic features 0 4 0 0 1 Problems and Opportunities 0,250 52,5 13,1 38 Seismic vulnerability rating 1 6 0 0 3 A (very low) - F (excellent) 0,400 45,0 18,0 INHABITANT Socio-economic issues 39 Patterns of occupancy 0 0 1 4 1 families/residential unit 1,000 24,4 24,4 40 Nr. of residential units pro building 0 0 1 50 25 units/building 1,000 24,4 24,4 41 Average number of inhabitants 0 0 5 20 40 Simulataneously 1,000 26,3 26,3 42 Economic level of inhabitants 1 4 0 0 4 Poor-rich based on house-price/annual- income 1,000 26,3 26,3 43 Sources of construction financing 1 9 0 0 7 Nominal 0,750 24,4 18,3 44 Ownership 0 0 1 7 3 participation degree, given from the ownership 1,000 24,4 24,4
  12. 12. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Project management Step Goal Method Instrument Objec- tive 1 a. Technical reports on steel braces retrofit systems applicability in RC housing buildings b. Charts of support programmes Documentation Literature and internet based research Investigation 4; 8 2 a data table of use for the decision method in the next step parametrical study FEM 2 3 support the choices at step 4 and 1 (public presentation/feedback) Highlighting comprehensibility Database and urban/building level navigation 7 4 algorithm based on case studies (step 2) for experiments (step 6) modularisation of the decision model pair wise comparison 3 5 report about pros and cons of available systems for this purpose A basis system to administrate modules Comparative employment of computer tools for this problem 6 6 trial of educational feasibility (step 3), more practical examples project example Exercise 5 7 dissemination of results Publication of results Participation to conferences, reviewed publications, web 1
  13. 13. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Discussion Step Goal Method Instrument Measure 1 technical reports on implementation programmes documentation investigation training. 4; 8 2 a data table of use for the decision method in the next step parametrical study FEM 2 3 support the choices at step 4 and step 1 highlighting comprehensibility database 7 4 algorithm based on case studies (step 2) for experiments (step 6) modularisation of the decision model pair wise comparison 3 5 report about available systems for this purpose a basis system to administrate modules computer tools 6 6 trial of educational feasibility (step 3) project example exercise 5 7 dissemination of results presentation publications 1 Nr. Measures package 1 improving understanding of the impact of earthquakes 2 development of an algorithm for optimisation of retrofit measures 3 development of a decentralised decision model 4 insights into applicability of retrofit methods 5 development of a framework for integral planning 6 solving contradictions between the objectives of single actors 7 highlighting the comprehend- sibility of the measures analysed 8 support changes by political and economic environment:
  14. 14. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Conclusions The criteria developed by the experts differ of those in transdisciplinary manner by the the first author Points of view of other actors are included, to an unbalanced amount, also in the survey criteria of the works of professional societies
  15. 15. EE21C 27 August-1 September 2005 Skopje & Ohrid Outlook The registries / reports will be reviewed from the point of view of uncertainities left for the point of view of experts from the other disciplines An own questionaire will be developed:  To assess the applicability for housing of steel bracing systems
  16. 16. Thank you!

×