Seismic Risk URM Buildings

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF
NON-LINEAR STATIC PROCEDURES AND INCREMENTAL DYNAMIC ANALYSIS

DECLARATION
Name:
JORGE ARTURO AVILA HARO
Email:
jorge.avila-haro@upc.edu
Title of the
SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY
Msc Dissertation:
MEANS OF NON-LINEAR STATIC PROCEDURES AND INCREMENTAL

DYNAMIC ANALYSIS
Supervisor(s):
Prof. Ing. Ji Mca
Year:
2015
I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance
with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I
have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work.
I hereby declare that the MSc Consortium responsible for the Advanced Masters in Structural Analysis
of Monuments and Historical Constructions is allowed to store and make available electronically the
present MSc Dissertation.
University:
CZECH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY IN PRAGUE
Date:
JULY 29, 2015
Signature:
___________________________
Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL
HISTORICAL CONSTRUCTIONS
ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND
i

This page is left blank on purpose.

iiADVANCED
MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL
ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND

To my family and friends, I love you all.

ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND
iii


ivADVANCED
ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Prof. Ing. Ji Mca for
the support of my study and research. Besides my advisor, I would like to thank the rest of
the masters coordinators: Prof. Pere Roca, Prof. Paulo Loureno, and Prof. Petr Kabele, for
their encouragement and concern.
I wish to thank the professors, technicians and administrators who took part in the masters
programme for their patience and good willing during this academic year.
My sincere thanks also go to the Consortium and Erasmus Mundus programme for the
scholarship granted during the academic year 2014/2015.
I thank my fellow classmates in both institutions for the sleepless nights we were working
together before deadlines, and for all the fun we have had in the last year.
Last but not least, I would like to thank my friends and specially my family: my parents
Beatriz Haro and Jorge Avila, for their support, their hard work, their advice, and their
companionship.

ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND
v


viADVANCED
ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND

Abstract. In recent years, the use of increasingly accurate and complex analysis methods
for the evaluation of the dynamic response of structures has started to escalate due to the
development of the computational power and methods. Nevertheless, despite being
considered the most accurate methods for the seismic assessment of structures nowadays,
the non-linear dynamic analysis (NDA) still require considerable computational efforts and
time consumption, and therefore the aseismic design of new structures and the assessment
of the existing ones require the use of sufficiently clear and simple procedures, whilst their
accuracy is not compromised. The use of non-linear static procedures (NSPs) has become
and attractive alternative for engineers due to their ease and promptness of implementation,
as well as their recognized accuracy. The performance of two non-linear static procedures
(N2, 10 % fit) is evaluated in this work. The case study used in this work is an existing sevenstorey unreinforced masonry building, fully representative of the typology of the residential
buildings located in the district of LEixample in Barcelona, Spain, The structure is
characterized by a load-bearing walls system and unidirectional steel beams-brick vaults
floor system. The accuracy of the NSPs is evaluated by comparison with incremental
dynamic analyses (IDA) whose results are considered as reference values. The comparison
is performed for seven ground motion records and different levels of seismic intensity in
order to take into account the uncertainties of the demand. The selection of the records was
achieved by means of the conditional spectrum (CS) approach. The results obtained from the
studies showed that the N2 method and the 10% fit approach demonstrated a good
performance on the analyzed building.
Keywords: performance-based seismic design, non-linear static procedures, incremental

dynamic analysis, unreinforced masonry, conditional spectrum approach

ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND
vii


viiiADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL
ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND

SEISMICK
POSOUZEN
NEVYZTUENCH
ZDNCH
BUDOV
POUITM
NELINERNCH STATICKCH POSTUP A INKREMENTLN DYNAMICK ANALZY
Shrnut. V poslednch letech se stle vce pouvaj pesn a komplexn analytick metody
pro vyhodnocen dynamick odezvy konstrukc, kter se zaaly stupovat dky vvoji
vpoetnho vkonu a metod. I pesto, e i dnes je stle tato povaovna za nejpesnj
metodu pro seizmick posuzovn staveb, nelinern dynamick analzy (NDA) i nadle
vyaduj znan sil, a to jak z pohledu vpoetnch postup, tak i pohledu asovho.
Z toho vyplv, e navrhovn novch struktur a posouzen tch stvajcch vyaduje pouit
dostaten jasnch a jednoduchch postup, zatmco jejich pesnost nen ohroena. Pouit
nelinernch statickch postup (NSP) se stalo atraktivn alternativou pro inenry vzhledem
k jejich snadn a promptn implementaci, jakoto i jejich pesnosti. V tto studii je ohodnocen
vkon dvou nelinernch statickch postup (metod N2, 10% fit). Jako ppadov studie je
v tto prci pouita existujc sedmipodlan budova z nevyztuen zdivo, kter pln
reprezentuje typologii residennch budov umstnch ve tvrti L'Eixample Barcelony, ve
panlsku. Konstrukce se vyznauje systmem nosnch zd a pouitm jednosmrnch
ocelovch nosnk, kter jsou soust podlahovho systmu. Pesnost NSP je
vyhodnocena srovnnm inkrementln dynamick analza metody (IDA), jej vsledky jsou
povaovny za referenn hodnoty. Pro srovnn se provd zznamy o pohybu sedmi
pozemnch vrstev rznch rovn a seizmick intenzity, kde je brna v vahu nejistota
poptvky. Vbru zznam bylo dosaeno pomoc metodologie CS (conditional spectrum).
Vsledky zskan z tchto studi ukzaly, e metodologie N2 a 10% fit prokzala dobr vkon
na analyzovan budovy.
Klov slova: seismickch designovch, nelinernch statickch postup, inkrementln

dynamick analza, nevyztuen zdivo

ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND
ix


xADVANCED
ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND

EVALUACIN SSMICA DE EDIFICIOS DE MAMPOSTERA NO REFORZADA A TRAVS
DE
PROCEDIMIENTOS
ESTTICOS
NO-LINEALES
ANLISIS
DINMICO
INCREMENTAL
Resumen. En aos recientes, el uso de mtodos de anlisis con mayor precisin y

complejidad ha ido en ascenso debido al incremento en el poder computacional y
metodologas. Sin embargo, y a pesar de ser considerados los mtodos de mayor precisin
para la evaluacin ssmica de estructuras en nuestros das, los anlisis dinmicos nolineales (NDA) an requieren esfuerzos considerables de cmputo y tiempo, y por ende el
diseo antissmico de nuevas estructuras as como la evaluacin de las ya existentes
requiere del uso de procedimientos lo suficientemente claros y simples, sin que su precisin
se vea comprometida. El uso de procedimientos estticos no-lineales (NSPs) se ha
convertido en una alternativa atractiva para los ingenieros debido a su facilidad y rapidez de
implementacin, as como por reconocerse su precisin. El desempeo de dos
procedimientos estticos no-lineales (N2, 10% fit) es evaluado en este trabajo. El caso de
estudio utilizado en este trabajo es un edificio de mampostera no reforzada de siete niveles,
plenamente representativo de la tipologa de edificios residenciales que se localizan en el
distrito de LEixample en Barcelona, Espaa. La estructura se caracteriza por un sistema de
paredes de carga y forjados de viguetas metlicas y bovedillas de ladrillo. La precisin de
los NSPs es evaluada mediante la comparacin con anlisis dinmicos incrementales (IDA),
cuyos resultados se consideran como valores de referencia. La comparacin se lleva a cabo
para siete registros de aceleraciones y diferentes intensidades ssmica con la finalidad de
tomar en cuenta las incertidumbres presentes en la demanda. La seleccin de los registros
se logr por medio del mtodo del espectro condicional (CS). Los resultados obtenidos de
los estudios indican que el mtodo N2 y el mtodo 10% fit demuestran tener un buen
desempeo en el edificio analizado.
Palabras clave: diseo ssmico por desempeo, procedimientos estticos no-lineales,

anlisis dinmico incremental, mampostera no reforzada, mtodo del espectro condicional

ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND
xi


xiiADVANCED
ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
AND


ANALYSIS
OF
MONUMENTS
xiii
AND

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 5
1.1 Foreword ................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Aims of the work ..................................................................................................................................... 6
1.3 Outline of the thesis ............................................................................................................................... 7
2 LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 9
2.1 Performance-Based Seismic Design (PBSD) .................................................................................. 9
2.2 Non-linear Static Procedures (NSPs) .............................................................................................. 10
2.2.1 The Capacity Spectrum Method (CSM) ................................................................................................... 13
2.3 NSPs used in this work ........................................................................................................................ 18
2.3.1 The N2 method / Eurocode-8 ..................................................................................................................... 18
2.3.2 The 10% fit .......................................................................................................................................................... 24
2.4 Incremental Dynamic Analysis ......................................................................................................... 25
3 THE BUILDING ................................................................................................................................ 27
3.1 Historical overview .............................................................................................................................. 27
3.1.1 The Cerd expansion project ....................................................................................................................... 27
3.1.2 The district of LEixample ............................................................................................................................. 28
3.2 General description .............................................................................................................................. 29
3.3 Walls system ........................................................................................................................................... 31
3.4 Floor system ............................................................................................................................................ 34
3.5 Openings .................................................................................................................................................. 35
3.6 Loads and materials ............................................................................................................................. 37
3.6.1 Dead and live loads .......................................................................................................................................... 37
3.6.2 The bricks and the mortars .......................................................................................................................... 37
3.7 Computational model .......................................................................................................................... 38
4 THE DEMAND .................................................................................................................................. 43
4.1 The city of Barcelona ........................................................................................................................... 43
4.1.1 Seismic scenarios .............................................................................................................................................. 43
4.1.2 Site-specific response spectra ..................................................................................................................... 44
4.2 Record selection .................................................................................................................................... 46
5 ANALYSES RESULTS ...................................................................................................................... 49
5.1 Modal analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 49
5.2 Non-linear static analysis (Pushover) ............................................................................................ 51
5.3 Dynamic analysis ................................................................................................................................... 55
6 COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS ................................................................................................ 57
7 FINAL REMARKS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 59

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL
CONSTRUCTIONS
1
SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF NONLINEAR STATIC PROCEDURES AND INCREMENTAL DYNAMIC ANALYSIS
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Capacity (pushover) curve of the MDOF ........................................................................ 10
Figure 2 Lateral load patterns ....................................................................................................... 11
Figure 3 Design response spectra for different soil types ............................................................. 11
Figure 4 Transformation of the MDOF system into an equivalent SDOF system ......................... 12
Figure 5 Bilinear representation of the capacity curve of the SDOF system ................................ 12
Figure 6 Calculation of the SDOF target displacement (performance point) ................................ 13
Figure 7 Invariant lateral load pattern according to the fundamental vibration mode of the
structure ................................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 8 CSM - a) MDOF model of the structure; b) elastic response spectra ............................. 14
Figure 9 CSM - Pushover analysis of the MDOF model with a first mode invariant load pattern . 15
Figure 10 CSM - Capacity (pushover) curve ................................................................................ 15
Figure 11 CSM - Transformation of the MDOF capacity curve into the SDOF capacity spectrum 16
Figure 12 CSM - Conversion of the elastic response spectrum from the traditional format into the
acceleration-displacement format .......................................................................................... 17
Figure 13 CSM - Intersection of the capacity and the demand within the established tolerance
limit ........................................................................................................................................ 18
Figure 14 N2 method - Transformation of the MDOF capacity curve into the SDOF capacity
spectrum ................................................................................................................................ 19
Figure 15 N2 method - Fitting procedure according to EC8 (N2 method) .................................... 20
Figure 16 N2 method - Conversion of the elastic response spectrum from the traditional format
into the acceleration-displacement format ............................................................................. 21
Figure 17 N2 method - Demand spectra for constant ductility in acceleration-displacement units
............................................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 18 N2 method Determination of the target displacement for the equivalent SDOF system
(medium and long period range) ........................................................................................... 23
Figure 19 N2 method Determination of the target displacement for the equivalent SDOF system
(short period range) ............................................................................................................... 24
Figure 20 10% fit approach Bilinear fit of the capacity curve of the SDOF system ................... 25
Figure 21 Typical urban layout of blocks of the district of LEixample .......................................... 28
Figure 22 Elevation of the front faade and plan views of the base floor and upper levels of the
case study building (dimensions in [cm]) ............................................................................... 30
Figure 23 Isometric and plan views of B01 building: a) typical storey (2nd-7th); b) full height; and c)
base floor (1st) ........................................................................................................................ 31
Figure 24 Metallic columns and girders used in the first level of the buildings ............................. 33
Figure 25 Distribution of metallic columns and girders of the first level ........................................ 33
Figure 26 Connection between slabs and walls. a) Metallic beams; b) wooden beams ............... 34
Figure 27 Iron beams and brick vaults unidirectional slabs. a) Components of the floor system: 1.double layer of thin brick, 2.- lime mortar, 3.- I type iron beam, 4.- rubble and plaster infill, 5.pavement; b) separation of the iron beams between 70 to 80 cm; c), d), e) and f) details of
the components and connection of the floor system ............................................................. 35
Figure 28 Discharging elements above openings: a) location of lintels in the 3D model; b) and c)
discharging arches above doors; d) iron lintel above a window; e) iron lintel above faade
openings ................................................................................................................................ 36
Figure 29 Lintels above faade openings ..................................................................................... 37
Figure 30 TreMuri layouts: a) Base floor (1st) plan; b) Typical storey (2nd 7th) plan; c) 3D view of
the building; and d) 3D view of the different levels ................................................................ 40
2 ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL
CONSTRUCTIONS

Figure 31 Main constitutive elements of the 3Muri computational model. Base floor (1st): a)
Foundation layout; b) Columns (cast iron and masonry); c) Lintels (iron and wood); d) Walls
and openings (windows and doors); and e) Slabs ................................................................. 41
Figure 32 Main constitutive elements of the 3Muri computational model. Typical storey (2nd-7th): a)
Columns (cast iron and masonry); b) Lintels (iron and wood); and c) Walls and openings
(windows and doors) d) Slabs ................................................................................................ 42
Figure 33 5% damped response spectra for the deterministic seismic scenario of Barcelona .... 45
Figure 34 5% damped response spectra for the probabilistic seismic scenario of Barcelona ...... 45
Figure 35 Districts of Barcelona with their corresponding soil type and 5% damped elastic
response spectrum ................................................................................................................. 46
Figure 36 Record selection according to the CS approach ........................................................... 47
Figure 37 First and second mode translations of +X direction ...................................................... 50
Figure 38 First and second mode translations of +Y direction ...................................................... 50
Figure 39 Capacity curve of the +X direction ................................................................................ 51
Figure 40 Capacity curve of the +Y direction ................................................................................ 51
Figure 41 Example of the bilinear representation for the two analyzed methodologies for +X
direction .................................................................................................................................. 52
Figure 42 Example of the calculation of the target displacement of the EC8 approach for +X
direction and a pga=0.06 g ..................................................................................................... 52
Figure 43 EC8 approach results for the +X direction .................................................................... 53
Figure 44 10% fit approach results for the +X direction ................................................................ 53
Figure 45 EC8 approach results for the +Y direction .................................................................... 54
Figure 46 10% fit approach results for the +Y direction ................................................................ 54
Figure 47 IDA results for the different records and their average value for +X direction ............... 55
Figure 48 IDA results for the different records and their average value for +Y direction ............... 56
Figure 49 Comparison between mean results of the analyzed NSPs and the IDA for +X direction
............................................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 50 Comparison between mean results of the analyzed NSPs and the IDA for +Y direction
............................................................................................................................................... 58

CONSTRUCTIONS
3
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Geometric properties of the case study analyzed ............................................................ 32
Table 2 Mechanical properties of masonry ................................................................................... 38
Table 3 Parameters for the deterministic and probabilistic scenarios proposed by the ICC for the
city of Barcelona .................................................................................................................... 44
Table 4 Modal analysis results ..................................................................................................... 49

CONSTRUCTIONS

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1
Foreword
In order to evaluate existing constructions, as well as to adequately design new earthquake

resistant structures, the use of transparent and sufficiently simple and accurate procedures is
compulsory. In recent years, different design philosophies and methodologies have been
developed to make this possible.
Early procedures were mainly based on the expert opinion and observations derived from the
damages experienced by buildings hit by earthquakes, which resulted in a classification of the
structural response taking into account different structural and non-structural parameters (Barbat
et al., 1996, Barbat et al., 2010). The main disadvantages of these procedures are their
subjectivity and its dependency on the density of the affected built areas that can be analyzed.
Some other previous methodologies applied in the existing guidelines were mainly based in a
linear elastic structural behavior, being unable to characterize the demand in structural terms
(e.g. stiffness, strength, ductility, etc.).
In recent years, the use of more sophisticated analysis for the evaluation of the dynamic behavior
of structures has started to increase due to the development of the computational power and
methods. These procedures permit the use of different ground motion records as well as a range
of intensities of the seismic action in order to take into account the possible uncertainties of the
demand (Avila-Haro et al., 2013). Among these sophisticated procedures we can mention the
incremental dynamic analysis (IDA), developed by Vamvatsikos and Cornell (2002), which aims
to obtain a measurement of the structural damage related to the dynamic response of the
structure when subjected to successive increments of the intensity of the seismic action. The
CONSTRUCTIONS
5
main drawbacks of this type of procedures are the additional information, computational power
and time consuming they require, leading to not necessarily more reliable results due to the
existing uncertainties of the input data.
In other to overcome the aforementioned drawbacks, a series of simplified methodologies have
been developed. The assessment of the performance of the structure is achieved by facing its
capacity, which is obtained from a non-linear static analysis, with the possible demand that the
structure could experience. These procedures are widely used nowadays due to their ease,
promptness and adequate accuracy when compared to more complex and time-consuming
methodologies (Pujades et al., 2012, Gonzlez-Drigo et al., 2013). These type of methodologies
are commonly known as non-linear static procedures (NSPs) and a large number of them can be
found in the literature.
The work carried out in this thesis assesses the vulnerability of an unreinforced masonry (URM)
building through the IDA approach and two selected NSPs: the N2 method (Fajfar and Gaperi,
1996) adopted by the Eurocode 8 (2004); and the 10% fit approach (De Luca et al., 2013a). In
order to compare the results and therefore determine the accuracy of the simplified NSPs, the
results obtained from the IDA will be used as reference values.
1.2
Aims of the work
The current work aims to compare the results obtained from both, non-linear static and non-linear
dynamic procedures, in the evaluation of an unreinforced masonry (URM) structure.
Despite being considered the most accurate method for the seismic assessment of structures
nowadays, the non-linear dynamic analysis (NDA) is commonly applied only in a few particular
cases due to the considerable computational efforts and time consumption that it requires.
Therefore, the employment of non-linear static procedures (NSPs) in the design or evaluation of
structures has became an attractive alternative for engineers due to their ease and swiftness of
implementation, and their relatively good accuracy.
The results obtained for the different NSPs used in this work are compared with the results
obtained from the NDA, which will be considered as reference values. Both, non-linear static and
non-linear dynamic analyses are performed and compared for a set of ground motion records and
seismic intensities, in order to evaluate the performance and accuracy of the NSPs. Different
structural response parameters can be selected in order to assess this comparison, such as:
base shear, inter-storey drifts, and top displacement, among others.
The case study used in this work is a fully representative residential building located in the district
of LEixample in Barcelona, Spain. The structure is a typical seven-storey unreinforced masonry
building that belongs to the construction period between 1890 and 1940, with load-bearing walls
and a unidirectional metallic beams-brick vaults floor system.
Seven horizontal acceleration records were selected from the PEER earthquake database
(PEER, 2011) using the Conditional Spectrum Approach procedure (Abrahamson and Al Atik,
2010, Jayaram et al., 2011, NIST, 2011) and the site-specific target response spectrum
CONSTRUCTIONS

corresponding to the soil Zone II of the city of Barcelona (Irizarry et al., 2003, Irizarry, 2004,
Irizarry et al., 2011).
1.3
Outline of the thesis
The work is presented in 7 chapters. A brief review of their content is presented as follows.
Chapter 1 provides and introduction and the main goals of the work carried out.
In chapter 2 the state of art is reviewed. This chapter focuses on the performance based seismic
design (PBSD) philosophy, and on the evolution of the existing non-linear static procedures
(NSPs). A description of the non-linear dynamic analysis (NDA) and the bases of the incremental
dynamic analysis (IDA) procedure are presented.
In chapter 3 a brief historical overview of Barcelona and the district of LEixample is provided. The
case study analyzed in this work is presented. A complete description of the structural system, its
main components and materials, and the computer model, are presented in this section.
In chapter 4 the soil characteristics of the building site and the procedure to select the ground
motion records to be used in the non-linear dynamic analysis procedure are explained.
Chapter 5 provides the results obtained from the modal, non-linear static and non-linear dynamic
analyses performed to the structure.
Chapter 6 compares the previously obtained results in chapter 6, in order to evaluate the
accuracy of the Non-linear Static Procedures when faced with the Non-linear Dynamic Analysis
results.
Finally, in chapter 7 final remarks and conclusions of the work are drawn and future work lines
are proposed.

CONSTRUCTIONS
7

CONSTRUCTIONS

2 LITERATURE REVIEW
The purpose of this chapter is to briefly describe the evolution of the non-linear static procedures
over time, as well as to describe in detail the non-linear static and dynamic procedures used in
this work.
2.1
Performance-Based Seismic Design (PBSD)
Earthquake engineering has significantly evolved over the last century, leading to not only
concern about the protection of lives, but also to minimize damage and service interruptions. The
later has been possible due to the observation of the effects of major earthquakes and the
availability of seismic monitoring data (National Research Council, 2006).
Contrary to the previous force-based design philosophy, in which the seismic evaluation of the
structures was based on the element stresses caused by the computed equivalent seismic
forces, the performance-based methodologies base the seismic evaluation on the deformations
induced by the earthquake (de Almeida e Fernandes Bhatt, 2011).
The purpose of the performance-based seismic design (PBSD) is to assess, in a realistic manner,
the performance of a structure when subjected to an earthquake ground motion in order to
facilitate and improve the seismic risk decision-making of engineers and stakeholders.
Unlike in other performance based engineering fields, in PBSD the use of full-scale prototypes of
the structure and its extensive testing in order to obtain the required experience to produce
identical outputs, is not economically feasible. Nevertheless, in recent years it has become an
attractive alternative for engineers due to the increase of computational power and capabilities,
the advances in seismic hazard assessment, the improved knowledge about the ground motion
and structural characteristics, and the development of several methodologies (Krawinkler, 1999).
CONSTRUCTIONS
9
PSBD can be used in the design of new structures as well as in the evaluation of existing ones.
Static and dynamic techniques are available for design and evaluation of structures, and
prediction of their performance when subjected to a seismic demand. The aforementioned
techniques can also be subdivided in linear or non-linear.
The performance-based procedures rely in two main elements: the calculation of the capacity of
the structure, and the adequate determination of the demand to be applied to the structure. The
degree to which the capacity is able to handle the imposed demand will determine if the
performance of the structure is compatible with the initial design objectives.
2.2
Non-linear Static Procedures (NSPs)
Within the possible techniques that the PSBD contemplates, the non-linear static procedures are
now widely used in engineering practice due to their accurate prediction of seismic demand
parameters in structures. As the name implies, non-linear mathematical relationships are used to
model the different elements of the structure, and a static analysis is performed through the
application of incremental static loads for the purpose of achieving the ultimate state of the
structure.
Different codes already include these procedures as a tool for the performance assessment of
structures due to their ease, versatility and promptness and several non-linear static procedures
(NSPs) can be found in the literature, within which some of them are recent, and some others
remain valid despite being proposed, adapted and/or modified several years ago. Nevertheless,
the different NSPs share common basis and goals, and have been incorporated in design codes
and guidelines as a powerful tool for performance evaluation. Their key aspects can be
summarized in two parts: one corresponding to the capacity, and another one corresponding to
the demand.
The capacity part is accomplished by means of a non-linear static analysis from which the socalled capacity curve (pushover curve) is obtained (Figure 1). The latter is achieved applying a
monotonically increasing predefined load pattern to the structure with an outcome that
characterizes the relation between the roof displacement (roof) of a selected control node
(usually at the center of masses) and the corresponding base shear (Vb) at each monotonic
increment.
Vb
roof
Figure 1 Capacity (pushover) curve of the MDOF

CONSTRUCTIONS

There are a number of possibilities regarding the load pattern application that can be used,
among which we can differentiate three groups: invariant load vectors; invariant multi-mode
vectors; and adaptive load vectors (Kalkan and Kunnath, 2008). Concerning the shape of the
load patterns, the most common and used ones are: uniform; triangular; and modal (Figure 2).
The procedures belonging to the first group apply monotonically increasing preset load patterns.
These approaches fail to consider the contribution of higher modes to the response and the
inelastic effects in certain structures.
In order to come through these disadvantages, and despite the fact that invariant load vectors are
still used, the procedures of group two consider and combine different loading vectors, which are
derived from mode shapes.
The approaches contained in the third group consider the progressive update of the load vectors
as the system modal properties change during the inelastic stage
Uniform
Triangular
f7
f7
f6
f6
f5
f4
f3
f2
f1
Fundamental mode
of vibration
f7
MDOF system
f6
f5
f5
f4
f4
f3
f3
f2
f2
f1
f1
Figure 2 Lateral load patterns
With regard to the demand part, a proper response spectrum must be selected and used in order
to properly characterize the possible ground motions expected in the building site (Figure 3). The
possible spectra can be obtained from national codes and guidelines, as well as from more
specific micro-zonation studies performed in the area of interest. Depending on the NSPs to be
applied, the response spectra to be used can be either an over damped elastic response
spectrum or an inelastic response spectrum.

CONSTRUCTIONS
11
Se [g]
0.35
5% damped
response spectra
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0.5
1.5
T [s]
2.5
Figure 3 Design response spectra for different soil types
In order to compare both, capacity and demand, their results must be properly treated and
transformed into an equivalent format and units. The procedure accomplishes this through a
series of steps, which include: 1) the transformation of capacity curve of the multi-degree of
freedom (MDOF) system into a capacity curve of an equivalent single-degree of freedom (SDOF)
system (Figure 4); 2) the calculation of the inelastic displacement (target displacement) that
corresponds to the seismic action imposed to the structure in acceleration-displacement units
(Figure 5 and Figure 6); and 3) the transformation of the target displacement of the equivalent
SDOF system back to the MDOF (de Almeida e Fernandes Bhatt, 2011).
MDOF system
Equivalent SDOF system
roof
*
roof
m7
m6
m5
m4
m3
m2
m1
f7=m7a7
k7
f6=m6a6
k6
k3
k2
k1
f4=m4a4
f3=m3a3
Capacity curve
Vb
f5=m5a5
k5
k4
F*
m*
F*
k*
MDOF
SDOF
f2=m2a2
f1=m1a7
Vb=( fi )
Vb*=F*
*roof
roof
Figure 4 Transformation of the MDOF system into an equivalent SDOF

system

CONSTRUCTIONS

F*
Sa
F*
APUSHeq
ABIL
Pushover Curve area of the

equivalent SDOF system
Bilinear Fit area of the

equivalent SDOF system
d*
Capacity curve
Bilinear representation
Sd
d*
Figure 5 Bilinear representation of the capacity curve of the SDOF system

Sa
Capacity spectrum
Respomse spectrum
Bilineal representation
Yielding point
Target displacement
Sd
Figure 6 Calculation of the SDOF target displacement (performance point)
The main differences between the different available NSPs with respect to the capacity are
related to the piecewise fit (in most of the cases of two branches bilinear-) representation of the
capacity curve and its transformation into an acceleration-displacement format for comparison
purposes. On the other hand, the key differences concerning the demand lie mainly on the type
of damped response spectra to be used: elastic or inelastic.
2.2.1
The Capacity Spectrum Method (CSM)
Despite the fact that the capacity spectrum method (CSM) was conceived for the evaluation and
retrofit of concrete structures and, therefore, its implementation is beyond the scope of the
typology analyzed in this work, its pioneering innovativeness and solid bases are shared and
used by the subsequent proposed NSPs approaches and thus, its mention and explanation is
compulsory for this study.
Considered as one of the first approaches to assess the performance of structures, the method
was developed in the early 1970s by Prof. Sigmund Freeman (Freeman et al., 1975), and gained
considerable popularity in the evaluation of concrete structures. The CSM is contained in the
ATC-40 (1996) guidelines and it allows, through a graphical representation, to visually compare
CONSTRUCTIONS
13
and evaluate the capacity and behavior of a certain structure when subjected to the demand of
an earthquake ground motion.
Within the ATC- 40 guidelines, three iterative procedures can be found: A, B, and C. Procedures
A and B are the most clear and convenient for programming, whereas procedure C is a nonprogrammable but purely graphical method.
The CSM approach considers that the predominant response of the structure is the fundamental
mode of vibration (1st mode) and, therefore, an invariant modal lateral load pattern is
monotonically applied to the structure (Figure 7). The seismic demand is represented through a
highly damped elastic response spectrum (Figure 3).
MDOF system
Fundamental mode
of vibration
m7
m6
m5
m4
m3
m2
m1
Z
Y
X
k7
6,1
k6
5,1
k5
4,1
k4
k3
k2
k1
7,1
3,1
2,1
Lateral load distribution based on

the fundamental mode of vibration
f7
m7
f6
m6
f5
m5
f4
m4
f3
m3
f2
m2
f1
1,1
m1
k7
k6
k5
k4
k3
k2
k1
Z
X
Figure 7 Invariant lateral load pattern according to the fundamental vibration

mode of the structure
The main steps of the CSM are summarized hereafter. Note that core of these steps is shared
and followed by most of the subsequent NSPs proposals, with some specific modifications for
each particular approach.
Step 1
A MDOF model of the structure is developed (Figure 8.a). According to the building site, its
corresponding elastic response spectrum is selected (Figure 8.b).

CONSTRUCTIONS

Capacity
Demand
S e [g]
TB TC
a)
b)
T [s]
TD
Figure 8 CSM - a) MDOF model of the structure; b) elastic response spectra
Step 2
A non-linear static (pushover) analysis is performed with a monotonically increasing invariant load
pattern applied to the structure, based on the fundamental mode of vibration (Figure 9).
roof
f7
m7
f6
m6
f5
m5
f4
m4
f3
m3
f2
m2
f1
m1
k7
k6
k5
k4
k3
k2
k1
Vb=( fi )
Figure 9 CSM - Pushover analysis of the MDOF model with a first mode
invariant load pattern
A non-linear force-displacement curve, sometimes referred to as a capacity or pushover curve, is

obtained. The pushover curve relates the displacement of a control node at the roof (usually at
the center of mass) and the base shear at every increase (Figure 10).
CONSTRUCTIONS
15
Vb
roof
Figure 10 CSM - Capacity (pushover) curve
Step 3
The base shear forces and roof displacements of the MDOF system are then converted to
equivalent spectral accelerations and spectral displacements, respectively. The spectral values of
the equivalent SDOF system define the capacity spectrum (Freeman, 1998).
The transformation is achieved through the use of different factors and coefficients related with
the modal and mass properties of the structure (Figure 11). For more details on how these factors
are obtained and calculated, refer to procedure A of chapter 8 in the ATC-40 (1996) guidelines.
MDOF system
roof
m7
m6
m5
m4
m3
m2
m1
f7=m7a7
k7
f6=m6a6
k6
f5=m5a5
k5
k4
k3
k2
k1
f4=m4a4
f3=m3a3
f2=m2a2
f1=m1a7
Vb=( fi )
Vb
Sa
MDOF
Capacity curve
SDOF
Capacity spectrum
Sa = Vb / W / 1
Sd = roof / PF1 / roof,1
Sd
roof
Figure 11 CSM - Transformation of the MDOF capacity curve into the SDOF
capacity spectrum

CONSTRUCTIONS

One of the differences between CSM and other NSPs is the lack of an intermediate step in which
the MDOF capacity curve is transformed into an equivalent SDOF curve also in terms of roof
displacement and base shear, before being converted to the spectral acceleration-displacement
format.
Step 4
The elastic response spectrum that defines the seismic demand should be also transformed into
the spectral acceleration-displacement format as can be seen in Figure 12.
Sae
Sae
T=2
Sd
Sa
Tj
T S
Sa=
2 d
Sae
Tk
= 5%
Ti Tj Tk
Ti
T [s]
= 5%
= 5%
Sde
Sde
Figure 12 CSM - Conversion of the elastic response spectrum from the

traditional format into the acceleration-displacement format
Step 5
The previously obtained capacity and elastic response spectra, both in acceleration-displacement
format, are now intersected in order to calculate the target displacement (performance point).
This calculation involves a series of different sub-steps, which result in an iterative process that is
outlined next (for further details see Chapter 8 of ATC-40 (1996)).
A trial performance point is estimated and a bilinear representation of the capacity curve is
obtained and then transformed into the acceleration-displacement format. The corresponding
damping and reduction factors for this trial point are calculated and applied to the demand elastic
response spectrum.
Both, capacity (bilinearized) and demand spectra are intersected in order to obtain a performance
point. If the obtained target displacement converges within the preset tolerance range then the
process stops (Figure 13). Otherwise, a new trial performance point should be estimated, and the
previous sub-steps should be repeated until the tolerance condition is satisfied.

CONSTRUCTIONS
17
Sa
SDOF capacity spectrum

Elastic response spectrum
SDOF bilinear representation
Yielding point
Target (performance) point
Sd
Figure 13 CSM - Intersection of the capacity and the demand within the
established tolerance limit
Step 6
The obtained performance point of the SDOF should be converted into its corresponding MDOF
value by means of the inverse use of the initial estimated transformation factors.
2.3
NSPs used in this work
Among the different NSPs available in the literature, two methodologies were chosen for this
work. The Eurocode 8 (2004) is a widely employed methodology. The second approach is a
proposal that mainly focuses on the improvement of the piecewise linear fitting of the capacity
curve.
As most of the common methodologies adopted by codes and guidelines do, the two
implemented procedures suggest a two branches piecewise linear fit (bilinear); and the seismic
demand is characterized through an inelastic response spectrum.
2.3.1
The N2 method / Eurocode-8
The N2 method was proposed by Professors Peter Fajfar and Matej Fishinger in the late 1980s
(Fajfar and Fischinger, 1987, Fajfar and Fischinger, 1988), and subsequently matured and
updated in the following decades (Gaperi et al., 1992, Fajfar and Gaperi, 1996, Fajfar,
1999, Fajfar et al., 2004, Kreslin and Fajfar, 2012).
The original N2 method (Fajfar and Gaperi, 1996) was adopted by the Eurocode 8 (2004), and
combines the non-linear static analysis of a MDOF model with the response spectrum analysis of
an equivalent SDOF system. The major difference with respect to the CSM approach is the use
CONSTRUCTIONS

of inelastic demand response spectra, which are indirectly determined from the elastic demand
response spectra by means of reduction factors (Fajfar, 2000).
The basic steps and derivations of the method are described below. It should be noted that, since
the N2 method is in fact a variant of the CSM based on inelastic spectra, some of the steps
previously defined in 2.2.1 are identical, and some others experience slight or specific changes
that characterize the N2 method.
Specifically, Step 1 and Step 2 of the CSM approach (section 2.2.1) remain similar for the N2
method and therefore will not be described again.
Step 3
As in the CSM, the base shear forces (Vb) and roof displacements (roof) of the MDOF system are
transformed into an equivalent SDOF system. However, in contrast with the CSM approach in
which the SDOF is transformed directly into the acceleration-displacement format, the N2 method
firstly transforms the MDOF into a SDOF system with force-deformation units (Figure 14).
MDOF system
Equivalent SDOF system

roof
*
roof
m7
m6
m5
m4
m3
m2
m1
f7=m7a7
k7
f6=m6a6
k6
k3
k2
k1
Vb
f5=m5a5
k5
k4
F*
m*
f4=m4a4
f3=m3a3
F*
k*
Capacity curve
SDOF
Capacity curve
f2=m2a2
F*= Vb /
f1=m1a7
Vb=( fi )
MDOF
D = roof /
D
Vb*=F*
roof
Figure 14 N2 method - Transformation of the MDOF capacity curve into the

SDOF capacity spectrum
The latter is achieved using Eqns. (2.1) and (2.2)
F* =
Vb
(2.1)

CONSTRUCTIONS
19
roof
D* =
(2.2)
where, F* and D* are the force and roof displacement of the equivalent SDOF system, and is
the modal participation factor, which is defined as
m
=
m
i
i
2
i
m*
=
mi i2
(2.3)
where m* is the equivalent mass of the SDOF system
m* =
mii
(2.4)
The procedure implies a non-iterative bilinear fit process that assumes an elastic-perfectly plastic
backbone for the equivalent SDOF system, based on the equilibrium of the areas over and under
the fit (A1 and A2 in Figure 15, respectively). The fitting is performed up to the point where a
plastic mechanism is developed, which can be assumed equal to the maximum force (Dolek,
2008).
F*
A1 = A2
A2
A1
Fy*
Plastic mechanism
Em*
Elastic-perfectly plastic
bilinear fit
SDOF capacity curve
Dy*
Dm *
D*
Figure 15 N2 method - Fitting procedure according to EC8 (N2 method)
The displacement parameter (Dy*) is also determined from the equilibrium of areas and the
deformation energy, Em*, calculated up to the displacement Dm* (Eqn. (2.5)).
* Em*
D = 2 Dm *
Fy
*
y
(2.5)
The elastic period of the bilinearized system T* is determined as

CONSTRUCTIONS

m * Dy*
T = 2
Fy*
*
(2.6)
Finally, the SDOF system is transformed into acceleration-displacement units
F*
Sa = *
m
(2.7)
Sd = D *
(2.8)
Step 4
As was done in the Step 4 of the CSM approach (section 2.2.1), the elastic response spectrum is
transformed into the acceleration-displacement format (Figure 16) using the following relation
Sde =
T
Sae
4 2
(2.9)
where Sae and Sde are the elastic acceleration and displacement spectral values, respectively.
Sae
Sae
= 5%
TB TC
TD
TB TC
= 5%
T [s]
TD
Sde
Figure 16 N2 method - Conversion of the elastic response spectrum from the

traditional format into the acceleration-displacement format

CONSTRUCTIONS
21
For an inelastic SDOF system the acceleration-displacement spectrum (Sa-Sd) can be computed
by means of a reduction factor, R (Eqns. (2.10) to (2.11)).
Sa =
Sae
R
(2.10)
T2
T2
Sd =
Sde =
Sae = 2 Sa
R
R 4 2
4
(2.11)
where is the constant ductility factor defined as the ratio between the maximum displacement
and the displacement of the yielding point.
The reduction factor, R , is directly linked with ductility and the elastic period of the bilinearized
system, T*. It can be computed as
T*
R = ( 1) + 1
TC
R =
for T * < TC
(2.12)
for T * TC
(2.13)
where TC is the transition period between the constant acceleration and the constant velocity
segments of the response spectrum, i.e. between the short-period range and the medium-period
range.
Sa
TB
TC
Ti
=1
>1
Tj
Sd
Figure 17 N2 method - Demand spectra for constant ductility in accelerationdisplacement units

CONSTRUCTIONS

Step 5
The seismic demand for the equivalent SDOF system is obtained by calculating the reduction
factor R as
R =
Sae (T * )
(2.14)
Say
where Sae(T*) represents the intersection between the elastic period of the bilinearized system,
T*, and the elastic demand spectrum.
The displacement demand is then obtained
= R
Sd = Sde (T * )
Sa
*
T TC
(2.15)
TC
T*
Sae
= 1 (elastic)
Say
>1
Dy*=Sdy Sd=Sde
Sd
Figure 18 N2 method Determination of the target displacement for the

equivalent SDOF system (medium and long period range)

CONSTRUCTIONS
23
TC
= R 1 * + 1
T
*
T < TC
Sde
TC
*
Sd = Dy =
1+ R 1 *
R
T
T*
Sa
(2.16)
TC
Sae
= 1 (elastic)
Say
Sdy
Sd
Sde Sd
Figure 19 N2 method Determination of the target displacement for the

equivalent SDOF system (short period range)
Step 6
The target displacement value corresponding to the control node of the MDOF system is given by
roof = D *
2.3.2
(2.17)
The 10% fit
Proposed by De Luca, Vamvatsikos and Iervolino (De Luca et al., 2013a), this bilinear fit
improvement aims to decrease the error introduced in the conventional static pushover analysis
by the piecewise linear fitting of the capacity curve (Figure 20).
The approach stands up for the intersection between the capacity curve and the fitted elastic
segment at 10 % of the maximum base shear in order to better capture the initial stiffness.
Another main difference of this approach is the setting of a subsequent plastic segment at the
maximum strength value (peak base shear value), ignoring the equilibrium of energies, as
happens in other procedures (De Luca et al., 2013b).
CONSTRUCTIONS

As in the abovementioned methodologies, the seismic demand is represented by means of an

inelastic response spectrum, which results from the scaling of the elastic response spectra and
the use of the proper R--T relations.
F*
Fmax*
Fy*
0.10Fmax*
D y*
D*
Figure 20 10% fit approach Bilinear fit of the capacity curve of the SDOF
system
2.4
Incremental Dynamic Analysis
In recent years, the use of increasingly accurate and sophisticated analysis methods for the
evaluation of the dynamic behavior of structures has started to escalate due to the development
of the computational power and methods.
Proposed by Vamvatsikos and Cornell (2002), the incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) has
become a valuable tool of seismic engineering, allowing to estimate the performance of a
structure subjected to seismic loads by means of non-linear dynamic analyses, which are
performed for a single or several different ground motion records in order to take into account the
uncertainties of the demand. This ground motion records are scaled to different intensity values,
thus producing specific results of the dynamic response of the structure for each case that can be
evaluated in function of predefined parameter, e.g. maximum displacement of a control node
located in the roof of the structure.
For the purposes of this work and in order to compare the results and therefore determine the
accuracy of the selected simplified NSPs, the results obtained from the IDA approach will be
used as reference values.

CONSTRUCTIONS
25

CONSTRUCTIONS

3 THE BUILDING
3.1
3.1.1
Historical overview
The Cerd expansion project
By the half of the 19th century, the existing population density within the walls that surrounded the
city of Barcelona reached an extreme situation. In contrast, the adjacent territory was completely
deserted due to the military ordinances of the time that prohibited any construction that could be
reached by the cannons of the nearby fortifications.
Therefore, the need to bring down the walls in order to expand the city was compulsory. The
latter was possible due to a political change occurred in 1854, which resulted in a call for an
expansion project issued by the city hall of the city in 1858.
Several engineers and architects presented their proposals for the new configuration of the
expanded city, and finally the project was awarded to the civil engineer Ildefons Cerd. By that
time, Cerd was already working in a topographic survey of the region, which facilitated his
understanding and therefore his conception of the expansion project.
Since the project was directly awarded by the central government based in Madrid, some local
political and social actors opposed to its implementation, and finally the original proposed project
CONSTRUCTIONS
27
suffered important modifications in order to accomplish the requirements imposed by the

government of the city and the displeased stakeholders. Details about the conception,
specifications and main features of the Cerd project can be found in different references, such
as: Grau and Nadal (1997), Ribas (2004), Sobrequs i Callic (2008).
Some of the most relevant architectonical particularities of the Cerd project are mentioned in the
next sections.
3.1.2
The district of LEixample
To date, the district of LEixample has approximately a quarter of a million of inhabitants, 8,658
buildings and a population density of 33,148 inhabitants per km2. A large number of these
buildings are more than 100 years old, the majority of which were built before 1960 and being
1931 the average year of construction. Nowadays, nearly the 73% of the buildings of the district
of LEixample correspond to unreinforced brick masonry buildings (Lantada, 2007).
Due to the construction practices of the time, the buildings were erected with common lateral load
bearing walls, which were shared with the contiguous buildings although they were built
independently. This resulted in an urban layout with large aggregates consisting of 113-meter
side squared blocks (also known as islands), separated by 20-meter wide streets. Therefore, the
design of the buildings is limited by the orthogonal shape of the blocks, leading to the use of
repetitive patterns (Figure 21).
Figure 21 Typical urban layout of blocks of the district of LEixample
According to their location within the block, two different types of buildings can be observed: 1)
those located in the different corners of the block, known as chamfer buildings; and 2) those
located in the central part of one of the sides of the block. On the other hand, depending on the
CONSTRUCTIONS

surrounding buildings, three options can also be distinguished: 1) adjacent buildings on both
sides; 2) adjacent building on one side (partially isolated structure); and 3) non-adjacent buildings
on either side (isolated structure).
The perimeter in plan of the central buildings is rectangular, with a normal ratio between the
longitudinal and transverse dimensions of approximately two to one or higher. The perimeter of
the chamfer buildings is typically pentagonal.
Further details can be found in Ajuntament de Barcelona; Corporaci Metropolitana de Barcelona
(1985), Permanyer (1990), Garcia Espuche (1990), Busquets (2004), Permanyer (2011)
3.2
General description
For the purposes of this work, a real existing 7-storey unreinforced masonry (URM) building,
representative of the district of LEixample in Barcelona, Spain, is analyzed The structure is part
of a block of aggregates located in a main street of the city, with a load-bearing walls system and
shallow foundations running through surface pads under the walls. It was, however, modeled and
analyzed as an independent (isolated) structure.
The structure presents a rectangular base with a diaphanous base level mainly used for
commercial purposes, characterized by high ceilings and the absence of walls as much as
possible due to the use of metallic columns and girders. The upper levels are commonly used as
dwellings, having lower ceilings and the presence of symmetrical bearing and partition walls.

CONSTRUCTIONS
29
20
45
20
300
300
20
500
30
1775
20
300
20
300
20
1270
300
20
280
Front faade
Ground floor
Upper levels
Figure 22 Elevation of the front faade and plan views of the base floor and
upper levels of the case study building (dimensions in [cm])
The floor system is composed of unidirectional slabs oriented in parallel with the shorter direction
of the area to be covered, mainly built with metallic girders and brick vaults, and a compression
layer on top.
The architectural and structural features of the building have been obtained from different
structural plans and drawings, contemporary documents, technical reports, the judgment of
experts, and different field visits (Pujades et al., 2012, Gonzlez-Drigo et al., 2013, Avila-Haro et
al., 2013).

CONSTRUCTIONS

a)
b)
c)
nd
Figure 23 Isometric and plan views of B01 building: a) typical storey (2 th

st
7 ); b) full height; and c) base floor (1 )
3.3
Walls system
Load-bearing walls and masonry or cast iron columns compose the main resisting system of the
lower levels, i.e. ground floor and mezzanine (if any). In the upper levels, load-bearing walls
mainly support the load.
CONSTRUCTIONS
31
Depending on the type and location of the wall, different wall thickness can be found in the
structure. Some of the most common dimensions for each element are: 1) intermediate lateral
walls, with 30 cm thickness at the ground floor and 15 cm thickness at upper levels; 2) faades,
with a 45 to 60 cm thickness at ground level and 30 cm thickness at upper levels; 3) stairwell and
central core, with 30 cm thickness at ground level and 15 to 30 cm thickness at upper levels; 4)
internal load-bearing walls, with 10 to 15 cm thickness; and 5) internal partition walls, with less
than 10 cm thickness. Further details about the architectonic characteristics of the distinctive
masonry buildings of the district of LEixample can be found in Paricio (2001).
Table 1 provides and overview of the different dimensions of the case study building analyzed in
this work.
Table 1 Geometric properties of the case study analyzed
Properties
Height**
Intermediate lateral walls
Front faade
Back faade
Stairwell and central core walls
Internal load-bearing walls
Internal partition walls
1
520
30
45
45
30
-
2
320
15
30
30
15
15
5
Storey
3
4
5
320 320 320
15
15
15
30
30
30
30
30
30
15
15
15
15
15
15
5
5
5
6
7
320 300
15
15
30
30
30
30
15
15
15
15
5
5
Dimensions in [cm]
** Including a 20 cm thickness slab
According to the thickness of the wall, different brickworks can be found in the structure. The
quality of the bricks and the mortar also varies depending the location of the element and the load
to be supported, passing through ordinary bricks and lime mortar for low range loads up to high
resistance bricks with Portland cement for main loads and slender pillars.
The constructive solution adopted for the lower levels in which metallic columns and girders
(Figure 24 and Figure 25) substitute the load-bearing walls, ensures larger diaphanous spaces
for commercial and catering activities in the first floor, and for administrative activities in the
mezzanines (if any).

CONSTRUCTIONS

Figure 24 Metallic columns and girders used in the first level of the buildings
Figure 25 Distribution of metallic columns and girders of the first level
In addition to the faades, inner courtyards and intermediate lateral walls, other load-bearing
walls can be found parallel to the faade, above the previously mentioned girders.
The contribution of the wall system conformed by the partition walls is generally considered as
not significant to the strength of the structure. The system is composed by walls with thickness
lower than 10 cm and therefore, for modeling and analysis purposes, is not considered.
CONSTRUCTIONS
33
The lack of proper connection (sometimes null) between the inner walls and the faades or
intermediate inner walls, precludes their participation as bracing walls. In addition, weak areas
can be located over the lintels and parapets placed above openings (i.e. windows or doors).
Several walls present different openings (doors and windows), whose dimensions tend to
decrease as the level increases. The latter leads to the existence of large openings in the lower
levels, which, despite having greater thickness, can produce weak areas.
3.4
Floor system
From 1890 to 1940, unidirectional slabs, with iron beams and brick vaults, composed most of the
floors systems. According the time of construction, wooden beams can be observed in older
buildings, meanwhile steel or precast reinforced concrete beams can be found in subsequent
periods.
The slabs are simply supported on bearing walls or main beams, depending on the level of the
building, presenting barely sufficient connection to these elements (Figure 26). The support
length directly depends on the thickness of the receiving element. Common support lengths are:
15 cm for intermediate lateral walls; 30 cm for faades in lower levels; and 10-15 cm for faades
in upper levels.
Figure 26 Connection between slabs and walls. a) Metallic beams; b)

wooden beams
In our study case, iron beams and brick vaults, define the floor system of the structure. The
beams are 70 to 80 cm apart, and small thin vaults are placed in-between with an average
thickness ranging between 15 and 20 cm. The vaults are composed of two to three layers of thin
bricks, which are then infilled by a compression layer made of rubble and plaster. This layer is
then leveled and covered with tile pavement. Further details of the various elements that
compose the floor system can be observed in Figure 27.

CONSTRUCTIONS

Figure 27 Iron beams and brick vaults unidirectional slabs. a) Components of

the floor system: 1.- double layer of thin brick, 2.- lime mortar, 3.- I type iron
beam, 4.- rubble and plaster infill, 5.- pavement; b) separation of the iron
beams between 70 to 80 cm; c), d), e) and f) details of the components and
connection of the floor system
3.5
Openings

CONSTRUCTIONS
35
Discharging arches or wooden and iron lintels are common solutions that can be observed in the
URM buildings of the district of LEixample (Figure 29 and Figure 28). These can be found above
doorways and windows of the different walls of the structure, according to the wall thickness. In
the case of thin partition walls and small spans, wooden lintels are mainly used. Lintels
composed by two or more I section beams can be found for large openings on walls with
considerable thickness. The support length varies according to the dimension of the element to
be supported.
As it was mentioned in section 3.3, dimensions of the openings tend to decrease as the level
increases, and they can be found mainly in the faades and inner nuclei of the building.
Figure 28 Discharging elements above openings: a) location of lintels in the

3D model; b) and c) discharging arches above doors; d) iron lintel above a
window; e) iron lintel above faade openings

CONSTRUCTIONS

Figure 29 Lintels above faade openings
3.6
3.6.1
Loads and materials

Dead and live loads
The load values used in this work are in accordance with the contemporary city council regulation
documents, prior to the first codes and guidelines that started to appear in the 1960s (Ministerio
de la Vivienda, 1963, Ministerio de la Vivienda, 1988). A permanent load of 350 kg/m2 is assigned
to all levels, consisting of 200 kg/m2 corresponding to the floor weight; 100 kg/m2 corresponding
to the load from the partition walls; and 50 kg/m2 corresponding to weight of tiled floor pavement.
On the other hand, a variable load of 200 kg/m2 is assigned to the intermediate floors, and a 100
kg/m2 load for the last floor (terrace) (Gonzlez-Drigo et al., 2013).
3.6.2
The bricks and the mortars
As it was mentioned before, the studied building corresponds to the construction period between
1890 and 1940. Therefore, the bricks and their manufacture were prior to the mechanized era,
leading to the existence of different qualities of bricks, which tend to increase as the firing grade
augmented (Schindler and Bassegoda, 1955). The color of the pieces serves as an indicator of
their strength and quality, varying from reddish tones for the lower strength bricks (around 7 MPa)
up to pale ochre tones for the higher strength one (around 15 MPa).
The mortars used in the brickwork of these structures was also conditioned to the element to be
constructed, having lime and bastard mortars, natural (roman) mortars, and Portland cement.
CONSTRUCTIONS
37
The constructive purpose of the bricks was also directly linked with their dimensions, having
ordinary bricks of 29x14x5.5 cm for the construction of load-bearing walls; bricks of 29x14x4.5 cm
used in partition walls; medium and thin bricks of 29x14x3 cm and 29x14x2 cm, respectively, for
the construction of vaults.
The building studied in this work is made of solid clay ceramic bricks, with good adherence and
texture. Despite the lack of additional technical reports and specific mechanical tests that could
shed light on the properties of the studied building, the mechanical properties used in this work
(Table 2) were obtained and extrapolated from contemporary documents and existing tests
results, taking into account the expertise and sound opinion of architects and civil engineers.
Table 2 Mechanical properties of masonry
Mechanical parameter
Inferior limit
-Specific weight,
Compressive strength, fm
215
Elastic modulus, E
107500
Shear modulus, G
35833
6.45
Shear strength,
3.7
Average value
18
300
150000
50000
9.00
Superior limit
-385
192500
64167
11.55
Units
kN/m3
N/cm2
N/cm2
N/cm2
N/cm2
Computational model
The 3D non-linear model of the building under study in this work was developed and analyzed
using the computer program TreMuri (Galasco et al., 2002), which is widely used and recognized
in the analysis and simulation of the non-linear behavior of masonry structures The analysis is
performed by means of constitutive laws derived from experimental tests and a macroelement
approach (Lagomarsino et al., 2002), which reduces the computational load.
The program adopts the a macro-element approach (Gambarotta and Lagomarsino, 1997), which
permits to represent the two main in-plane masonry failure mechanisms, i.e. bending-rocking and
shear-sliding, by means of a macroscopic representation of a continuous model through a limited
number of degrees of freedom (eight).
The analyzed building was modeled on the basis of original floor plans, architectural drawings,
and diverse technical documents that provided relevant data. The latter was seconded with the
use of guidelines and manuals contemporary to the construction time of the structure, as well as
the expert judgment of architects and civil engineers, and several field visits.
The modeling process consists in a series of ordered steps, which start with the definition of the
geometry of the different levels and elements as a line layout (Figure 30a and Figure 30b). Then,
the type of element and properties that correspond to each line of the layout should be defined.
The program enables the definition of different types of elements such as columns, beams, and
walls, among others. In a simultaneous step, the knowledge level and material properties can be
defined (this can be modified or updated later) in order to properly assign them to the different
elements of the structure.
In the event of the existence of doors or windows, this should be defined according to their
geometric properties. Similarly, in the case of the presence of lintels above the openings, their
CONSTRUCTIONS

longitude and position should be defined. Auxiliary nodes can be drawn in order to facilitate the
definition of these elements.
The next step involves the definition of the different slabs. The geometric and material properties
of the adopted floor system must be defined, as well as their directionality. Live and dead loads
are also defined at this point.
The previous steps are followed for each level until the full structure is properly defined (Figure
30c and Figure 30d). Security checks can be run during the process in order to avoid any error or
oblivion.
For the study case building of this work, the main constitutive elements for each type of level are
shown in Figure 31 and Figure 32. It can be observed that in the ground floor there is a higher
concentration of columns (Figure 31b) and beams (Figure 31c). As pointed out before, this is in
order to assure a more diaphanous space in which the different commercial and catering
activities can take place. On the contrary, for upper levels, the presence of load-bearing walls at
these locations can be observed. The existence of different lintels above the location of windows
and doors can also be noticed.
Once the definition of the model has been accomplished, the different modal, static and dynamic
analyses can be performed either in the commercial version of the software or in the research
one. In order to automatize, and therefore perform several incremental analyses, the research
version of the program was used for this work and the results are shown in chapter 5.

CONSTRUCTIONS
39
a)
b)
c)
d)
st
nd
Figure 30 TreMuri layouts: a) Base floor (1 ) plan; b) Typical storey (2

th
7 ) plan; c) 3D view of the building; and d) 3D view of the different levels

CONSTRUCTIONS

a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Figure 31 Main constitutive elements of the 3Muri computational model.
st
Base floor (1 ): a) Foundation layout; b) Columns (cast iron and masonry);
c) Lintels (iron and wood); d) Walls and openings (windows and doors); and
e) Slabs

CONSTRUCTIONS
41
a)
b)
c)
d)
Figure 32 Main constitutive elements of the 3Muri computational model.
nd th
Typical storey (2 -7 ): a) Columns (cast iron and masonry); b) Lintels (iron
and wood); and c) Walls and openings (windows and doors) d) Slabs

CONSTRUCTIONS

4 THE DEMAND
4.1
The city of Barcelona
The Mediterranean basin concentrates a vast number of cities in which the socioeconomic
activities and population density is substantial. At the same time, the vulnerability of a large
number of buildings of more than 100 hundred years old without any consideration of the seismic
actions in their construction, increases the seismic risk of these urban areas.
The city of Barcelona is located in a low-to-moderate seismic hazard region in the northeast of
the Iberian Peninsula, with a VI to VII macroseismic intensity in accordance with the European
macroseismic scale, EMS98, and is divided in 10 districts (Figure 35).
4.1.1
Seismic scenarios
In the framework of the Risk UE project (Milutinovic and Trendafiloski, 2003), several studies
were performed in order to better characterize the different types zones and soils of the city
(Irizarry, 2004). Two specific seismic scenarios resulted as an outcome of this work. Similarly,
different microzoning studies (Cid, 1998, Secanell et al., 2004) were carried out in order to obtain
specific site response spectra for these two scenarios (Pujades et al., 2012).
The first scenario, which is called deterministic scenario, assumes that the historical seismicity
contains sufficient information to assess the seismic hazard of a certain region. This scenario was
therefore defined by the historical event occurred in 1448 in Cardedeu, with a 7km depth, and an
CONSTRUCTIONS
43
epicentral distance and intensity of 25 km and VIII (EMS98), respectively (Susagna and Goula,
1999, Secanell et al., 2004).
The second scenario, which is called probabilistic scenario, was obtained based on the
attenuation law of Ambrasseys et al. (1996) and on the regional parameters obtained by Secanell
et al. (2004), matching the ground motion with a 10% probability of occurrence in 50 years, i.e.
475 return period ground motions.
4.1.2
Site-specific response spectra
Both scenarios were defined in terms of 5% damped elastic response spectra, and four soil types
(seismic zones) were identified in the city (Figure 35). The elastic response spectra parameters
for the deterministic and probabilistic scenarios of the four soil zones of Barcelona are presented
in Table 3.
Table 3 Parameters for the deterministic and probabilistic scenarios
proposed by the ICC for the city of Barcelona
Parameters
Soil
Zone
I
II
III
R
pga (g)
TB
TC
BC
TD
BD
0.188
0.136
0.194
0.141
0.169
0.122
0.100
0.072
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.39
0.40
0.22
0.23
0.22
0.19
0.23
0.25
1.91
2.00
2.45
2.50
2.29
2.57
2.26
2.29
1.70
1.34
1.43
1.28
1.40
1.12
1.12
0.98
2.30
2.85
2.20
2.21
2.00
1.77
1.75
1.75
0.09
0.14
0.09
0.14
0.10
0.20
0.23
0.34
Deterministic scenario
Probabilistic scenario
The expressions (Eqn. (2.18)) needed to obtain 5% damped elastic response spectra for both
scenarios (Figure 33 and Figure 34) are described as follows.
TB
1+ ( BC 1)
TC
BC
Sa (T )
d
TC
pga BC
T

TD 2
BD
T
0 T TB
TB T TC
TC T TD
(2.18)
TD T

CONSTRUCTIONS

where Sa(T) is the ordinate of the elastic response spectrum; T is the vibration period of a linear
single-degree-of-freedom system; pga is the peak ground acceleration; BC is the factor defined as
Samax/pga; TB and TC are the limits of the constant spectral acceleration range; d is a variable
exponent; TC is a corner period at the beginning of constant velocity region; TD is the beginning of
the constant displacement response range; and BD is the factor defined as Sa(TD)/pga.

Figure 33 5% damped response spectra for the deterministic seismic
scenario of Barcelona

Figure 34 5% damped response spectra for the probabilistic seismic
scenario of Barcelona

CONSTRUCTIONS
45
Figure 35 Districts of Barcelona with their corresponding soil type and 5%

damped elastic response spectrum
4.2
Record selection
The conditional spectrum approach (CS) procedure (Abrahamson and Al Atik, 2010, Jayaram et
al., 2011, NIST, 2011) was applied in order to select seven compatible horizontal acceleration
components from the PEER earthquake database (PEER, 2011), that matched the deterministic
scenario target response spectrum corresponding to the soil Zone II of the city of Barcelona in
which the district of LEixample is located.
By means of a Monte-Carlo simulation from a target distribution, the method generates a
probabilistic response spectrum, from which a set of ground motions with matching response
spectra (in log scale) is selected (Jayaram et al., 2011, NIST, 2011). The target values are
closely matched, as the number of simulated spectra is higher. The similarity of the target with
the selected ground motion spectra is measured using the sum of the squared errors. In contrast
with other methodologies, the CS not only matches the target mean, but also the target variance
(Figure 36).

CONSTRUCTIONS

10
+2 response spectra
Sa [g]
Matching records
-2 response spectra
1
10
Response spectra of simulated

ground motions
2
10
10
10
T [s]
Median response spectrum
10
Figure 36 Record selection according to the CS approach
The seven selected records were properly scaled to different intensity values, i.e. pga, in order to
evaluate the dynamic response of the structure for different possible states. The considered pga
values for the scaling process yield between 0.2 and 0.22 g, at every 0.01 g. The upper limit was
selected taking into account that the expected pga in Barcelona for the deterministic scenario of
soil Zone II is 0.141 g (see section 4.1.2).

CONSTRUCTIONS
47

CONSTRUCTIONS

5 ANALYSES RESULTS
The results of the different analysis performed for this work are shown in this chapter. The
analyses were performed with the research version of the software TreMuri for the case study
building in the transversal (+X) and longitudinal (+Y) directions. In order to determine the
procedures followed to obtain these results, refer to Chapters 2 and 4.
5.1
Modal analysis
The results from the performed modal analysis are summarized in Table 4 and Figure 37 and
Figure 38.
Table 4 Modal analysis results
Mode
1
2
1
2
T [s]
0.80
0.27
0.61
0.58
Mx [%]
87.64
9.77
0.60
0.14
My [%]
0.30
0.01
72.39
5.79
Direction
X
Y
It can be observed that the first and second modes of vibration are translational for both
directions of the structure, and the third one is rotational.

CONSTRUCTIONS
49
+Y
+X
2nd Mode
1st Mode
+X direction
Figure 37 First and second mode translations of +X direction
+Y
+X
1st Mode
+Y direction
2nd Mode
Figure 38 First and second mode translations of +Y direction

CONSTRUCTIONS

5.2
Non-linear static analysis (Pushover)
The results of the non-linear static analyses are presented as a table with the values of the target
displacement for the MDOF800system, as well as in xxx
700
Vbase, [kN]
600
500
400
300
Pushover Curve
droof=2.8104 [cm]
Vbasemax=748.4186 [kN]
droof80=2.9427 [cm]
Vbase80=598.7349 [kN]
200
100
1400
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
droof, [cm]
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
Figure 39 Capacity curve of the +X direction
1200
Pushover Curve
droof=4.7897 [cm]
Vbasemax=1224.1624 [kN]
droof70=4.8274 [cm]
Vbase70=979.3299 [kN]
800
600
base
, [kN]
1000
400
200
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
droof, [cm]
Figure 40 Capacity curve of the +Y direction

CONSTRUCTIONS
51
0.15
10% fit
EC8
Sa, [g]
0.1
0.05
0.5
1
Sd, [cm]
1.5
2.5
Figure 41 Example of the bilinear representation for the two analyzed

methodologies for +X direction
0.2
Sa, [g]
0.15
0.1
0.05
0.5
1.5
2.5
Sd, [cm]
Figure 42 Example of the calculation of the target displacement of the EC8

approach for +X direction and a pga=0.06 g

CONSTRUCTIONS

PGA vs D
roof
12
10
d roof, [cm]
IB Dir X. EC8
1
IDA
Rec 01
Rec 02
Rec 03
Rec 04
Rec 05
Rec 06
Rec 07
Mean Values
6
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
0. 1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19
pga, [g ]
0. 2 0.21 0.22
Figure 43 EC8 approach results for the +X direction

PGA vs Droof
9
8
7
d roof, [cm]
6
5
IB1 Dir X. 10fit
IDA
Rec 01
Rec 02
Rec 03
Rec 04
Rec 05
Rec 06
Rec 07
Mean Values
4
3
2
1
0
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
0. 1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19
pga, [g ]
0. 2 0.21 0.22
Figure 44 10% fit approach results for the +X direction

CONSTRUCTIONS
53
PGA vs D
roof
10
9
8
7
d roof, [cm]
IB Dir Y. EC8
1
IDA
Rec 01
Rec 02
Rec 03
Rec 04
Rec 05
Rec 06
Rec 07
Mean Values
5
4
3
2
1
0
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
0. 1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19
pga, [g ]
0. 2 0.21 0.22
Figure 45 EC8 approach results for the +Y direction

PGA vs Droof
d roof, [cm]
IB1 Dir Y. 10fit
IDA
Rec 01
Rec 02
Rec 03
Rec 04
Rec 05
Rec 06
Rec 07
Mean Values
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
0. 1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19
pga, [g ]
0. 2 0.21 0.22
Figure 46 10% fit approach results for the +Y direction

CONSTRUCTIONS

5.3
Dynamic analysis
The incremental results of the non-linear dynamic analysis are presented hereafter. The mean
values are also calculated and included in the graphics in order to ease the comparison of an
average response.
14
12
d roof, [cm]
10
Rec 01
Rec 02
Rec 03
Rec 04
Rec 05
Rec 06
Rec 07
Mean Values
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
0. 1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19
pga, [g ]
0. 2 0.21 0.22
Figure 47 IDA results for the different records and their average value for +X
direction

CONSTRUCTIONS
55
16
14
12
Mean Values
roof
, [cm]
10
Rec 01
Rec 02
Rec 03
Rec 04
Rec 05
Rec 06
Rec 07
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.2 0.21 0.22
pga, [g ]
Figure 48 IDA results for the different records and their average value for +Y
direction

CONSTRUCTIONS

6 COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS

Finally, the comparison between the different NSPs analyzed in this work and the IDA results are
compared for the different pgas and ground motion records used. The roof displacement was
selected as the parameter to evaluate the performance and accuracy of the simplified methods.
It can be observed that the NSPs approaches tend to provide higher values than those obtained
through the IDA for almost all the intensity measures considered in the analysis. The latter is in
accordance with what is reported in the literature and with what would be expected from more
conservative methodologies that incorporate simplifying assumptions that lead to the use of
higher safety factors in order to surpass the different uncertainties.
The 10% fit shows closer results to those reported by the IDA since it captures in a better way the
elastic branch of the capacity, which results to be a very sensitive parameter in the performance
of these methodologies.

CONSTRUCTIONS
57
d roof, [cm]
IDA
EC8
10fit
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
0. 1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19
pga, [g ]
0. 2 0.21 0.22
Figure 49 Comparison between mean results of the analyzed NSPs and the
IDA for +X direction
8
d roof, [cm]
IDA
EC8
10fit
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
0. 1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19
pga, [g ]
0. 2 0.21 0.22
Figure 50 Comparison between mean results of the analyzed NSPs and the
IDA for +Y direction

CONSTRUCTIONS

7 FINAL REMARKS AND CONCLUSIONS

The validity and applicability of the static pushover analysis have been extensively studied in
literature, becoming an attractive alternative and useful tool for the seismic assessment of
structures.
Regarding the NSPs, it is clear that most of them share the same basics and principles, differing
mainly in the idealization of the capacity as a bilinear representation, and in the response spectra
to be used in order to represent the demand.
Special attention is required for the selection and subsequent processing of the ground motion
records that will represent the demand to be imposed to the structure, since the response of the
structure and therefore the obtained results are highly sensitive.
The conditional spectrum (CS) approach can be considered an appropriate and useful approach
in order to select different ground motion records since it takes into account several of the
structure itself.
.
The correct definition and modeling of the structure and its elements is fundamental in order to
reduce the possible uncertainties in the input data of the model. The sufficient knowledge of the
mechanical parameters and particularities of the materials would lead to a better understanding
and therefore results.
The results obtained in this work show that the applied NSPs can successfully characterize the
response of the analyzed building with sufficient accuracy, leading to enormous time saving and
computational efforts, without compromising the results.

CONSTRUCTIONS
59
Different research lines can be continued with regard to this topic, e.g. the proposal of modified
factors in order to use other NSPs, which were originally conceived for different typologies, and
therefore their factors and parameters are not adequate.,

CONSTRUCTIONS

REFERENCES
ABRAHAMSON, N. A. & AL ATIK, L. 2010. Scenario Spectra for Design Ground Motions and
Risk Calculation. 9th US National and 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake
Engineering. Toronto, Canada.
AJUNTAMENT DE BARCELONA; CORPORACI METROPOLITANA DE BARCELONA 1985.
Inicis de la Urbanstica Municipal de Barcelona. Mostra dels Fons Municipals de Plans i
Projectes d'Urbanisme 1750-1930, Barcelona, Spain.
AMBRASSEYS, N., SIMPSON, K. & BOMMER, J. 1996. Prediction of horizontal response
spectra in Europe. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 25, 371-400.
ATC-40 1996. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings. California, U.S.A.:
California Seismic Safety Commission.
AVILA-HARO, J., GONZLEZ-DRIGO, R., VARGAS, Y., PUJADES, L. G. & BARBAT, A. 2013.
Deterministic and Probabilistic Earthquake Scenarios for the Seismic Risk Analysis of
URM buildings. Key Engineering Materials, 525-526, 537-540.
BARBAT, A., CARREO, M. L., PUJADES, L., LANTADA, N., CARDONA, O. D. &
MARULANDA, M. C. 2010. Seismic vulnerability and risk evaluartion methods for urban
areas. A review with application to a pilot area. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering,
6, 17-38.
BARBAT, A., YPEZ, F. & CANAS, J. A. 1996. Damage scenarios simulation for risk assessment
in urban zones. Earthquake Spectra, 2, 371-394.
BUSQUETS, J. R. 2004. Barcelona. La construccin urbanstica de una ciudad compacta,
Barcelona.
CID, J. 1998. Zonacin ssmica de la ciudad de Barcelona basada en mtodos de simulacin
numrica de efectos locales. PhD., Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya, UPC.
DE ALMEIDA E FERNANDES BHATT, C. A. 2011. Seismic Assessment of Existing Buildings
Using Nonlinear Static Procedures (NSPs) - A New 3d Pushover Procedure. PhD in Civil
Engineering, Universidade Tcnica de Lisboa. Instituto Superior Tcnico.
DE LUCA, F., VAMVATSIKOS, D. & IERVOLINO, I. 2013a. Improving Static Pushover Analysis
by Optimal Bilinear Fitting of Capacity Curves. In: M. PAPADRAKIS ET AL. (ed.)
Computational Methods in Earthquake Engineering. Springer Netherlands.
DE LUCA, F., VAMVATSIKOS, D. & IERVOLINO, I. 2013b. Near-optimal piecewise linear fits of
static pushover capacity curves for equivalent SDOF analysis. Earthquake Engineering
and Structural Dynamics, 42, 523-543.
DOLEK, M. 2008. PBEE Toolbox - Examples of application. Ljubljana, Slovenia.: University of
Ljubljana, Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering.
EUROCODE-8-1 2004. Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. Part 1: General Rules,
Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings. Comit Europen de Normalisation.
FAJFAR, P. 1999. Capacity Spectrum Method Based on Inelastic Demand Spectra. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 979-993.
FAJFAR, P. 2000. A Nonlinear Analysis Method for Performance Based Seismic Design.
Earthquake Spectra, 16, 573-592.
FAJFAR, P., DOLEK, M., MARUI, D. & PERU, I. Extension of the N2 method - Asymetric
buildings, infilled frames and incremental N2. In: FAJFAR, P. & KRAWINKLER, H., eds.
CONSTRUCTIONS
61
Performance-based seismic design concepts and implementation, 2004 Bled, Slovenia.

Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, PEER.
FAJFAR, P. & FISCHINGER, M. 1987. Non-linear seismic analysis of RC buildings: implications
of a case study. European Earthquake Engineering, 1, 31-43.
FAJFAR, P. & FISCHINGER, M. N2 - A method for non-linear seismic analysis of regular
buildings. Ninth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, August 2-9, 1988 1988
Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan.
FAJFAR, P. & GAPERI, P. 1996. The N2 method for the seismic damage analysis of RC
buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 25, 31-46.
FREEMAN, S. A. The Capacity Spectrum Method as a Tool for Seismic Design. Eleventh
European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 1998 Paris, France.
FREEMAN, S. A., NICOLETTI, J. P. & TYRELL, J. V. Evaluation of Existing Buildings for Seismic
Risk - A Case Study of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. U.S. National Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, 1975 Bremerton, Wasington. EERI, 113-122.
GALASCO, A., LAGOMARSINO, S. & PENNA, A. 2002. TREMURI Program: Seismic Analyser of
3D Masonry Building. University of Genoa.
GAMBAROTTA, L. & LAGOMARSINO, S. 1997. Damage models for the seismic response of
brick masonry shear walls, Part II: the continuum model and its applications. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 26.
GARCIA ESPUCHE, A. 1990. El Quadrat d'Or. Centre de la Barcelona modernista. La formaci
d'un espai urb privilegiat, Barcelona, Spain.
GAPERI, P., FAJFAR, P. & FISCHINGER, M. 1992. An approximate method for seismic
damage analysis of buildings. Tenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Rotterdam, Netherlands.
GONZLEZ-DRIGO, R., AVILA-HARO, J., BARBAT, A., PUJADES, L., VARGAS, Y.,
LAGOMARSINO, S. & CATTARI, S. 2013. Modernist URM buildings of Barcelona.
Seismic Vulnerability and Risk Assessment. International Journal of Architectural
Heritage.
GRAU, R. & NADAL, M. 1997. La Unificacin Municipal del Pla de Barcelona 1874-1897,
Barcelona, Spain
IRIZARRY, J. 2004. An Advanced Approach to Seismic Risk Assessment. Application to the
Cultural Heritage and the Urban System of Barcelona. PhD., Universitat Politcnica de
Catalunya, UPC.
IRIZARRY, J., GOULA, X. & SUSAGNA, T. 2003. Analytical Formulation for the Elastic
Acceleration-Displacement Response Spectra Adapted to Barcelona Soil Conditions.
Barcelona, Spain: Institut Cartogrfic de Catalunya.
IRIZARRY, J., LANTADA, N., PUJADES, L., BARBAT, A., GOULA, X., SUSAGNA, T. & ROCA,
A. 2011. Ground-shaking scenarios and urban risk evaluation of Barcelona using the
Risk-UE capacity spectrum method. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 9, 441-446.
JAYARAM, N., LIN, T. & BAKER, J. W. 2011. A Computationally Efficient Ground Motion
Selection Algorithm for Matching a Target Response Spectrum Mean and Variance.
Earthquake Spectra, 27, 797-815.
KALKAN, E. & KUNNATH, S. K. 2008. Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures for
seismic evaluation of buildings. Engineering Structures, 29, 305-316.
KRAWINKLER, H. 1999. Challenges and progress in Performance-Based Earthquake
Engineering. International Seminar on Seismic Engineering for Tomorrow - In Honor of
Professor Hiroshi Akiyama. Tokyo, Japan.
CONSTRUCTIONS

KRESLIN, M. & FAJFAR, P. 2012. The extended N2 method considering higher mode effects in
both plan and elevation. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 10, 695-715.
LAGOMARSINO, S., GALASCO, A. & PENNA, A. 2002. Pushover and dynamic analysis of URM
buildings by means of a non-linear macro-element model. International Conference on
Earthquake Loss Estimation and Risk Reduction. Bucharest: RISK-UE project.
LANTADA, N. 2007. Aplicacin de Tcnicas GIS a Estimacin de Riesgos Naturales. PhD,
Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya.
MILUTINOVIC, Z. V. & TRENDAFILOSKI, G. S. 2003. WP4: Vulnerability of Current Buildings.
RISK-UE Project Handbook.
MINISTERIO DE LA VIVIENDA 1963. Norma MV 101-1962. Acciones en la Edificacin. Spanish
Official Bulletin. Madrid, Spain: Ministerio de la Vivienda.
MINISTERIO DE LA VIVIENDA 1988. NBE-AE/88 Norma Bsica de la Edificacin. Acciones en
la Edificacin. Spanish Official Bulletin. Madrid, Spain: Ministerio de la Vivienda.
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL 2006. Improved Seismic Monitoring - Improved DecisionMaking: Assessing the Value of Reduced Uncertainty, Washington, DC, The National
Academies Press.
NIST 2011. Selecting and Scaling Earthquake Ground Motions for Performing Response-History
Analyses, NIST GCR 11-917-15. Gaithersburg, Maryland: by NEHRP Consultants Join
Venture for the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
PARICIO, A. 2001. Secrets d'un Sistema Constructiu, Barcelona, Espaa, Edicions UPC.
PEER 2011. New Ground Motion Selection Procedures and Selected Motions for the PEER
Transportation Research Program. California, USA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering
Research Center.
PERMANYER, L. 1990. Historia de L'Eixample., Barcelona.
PERMANYER, L. 2011. L'Eixample. 150 Anys d'Historia, Barcelona, Spain.
PUJADES, L., BARBAT, A., GONZLEZ-DRIGO, R. & AVILA-HARO, J. 2012. Seismic
Performance of a Block of Buildings Representative of the Typical Construction in the
Eixample District in Barcelona (Spain). Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 331-349.
RIBAS, M. 2004. Barcelona i la Catalunya-ciutat.
SCHINDLER, R. & BASSEGODA, B. 1955. Tratado moderno de construccin de edificios.,
Barcelona, Spain.
SECANELL, R., GOULA, X., SUSAGNA, T., FLETA, J. & ROCA, A. 2004. Seismic hazard
zonation of Catalonia, Spain, integrating uncertainties. Journal of Seismology, 8, 2440.
SOBREQUS I CALLIC, J. 2008. Historia de Barcelona., Barcelona.
SUSAGNA, T. & GOULA, X. 1999. Cataleg de Sismicitat. Atlas Sismic de Catalunya. . In:
CATALUNYA, I. C. F. D. (ed.). Barcelona.
VAMVATSIKOS, D. & CORNELL, C. A. 2002. Incremental Dynamic Analysis. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 31, 491-514.

CONSTRUCTIONS
63

Seismic Risk URM Buildings

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seismic Risk URM Buildings

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

NON-LINEAR STATIC PROCEDURES AND INCREMENTAL DYNAMIC ANALYSIS

JORGE ARTURO AVILA HARO

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY

MEANS OF NON-LINEAR STATIC PROCEDURES AND INCREMENTAL

Prof. Ing. Ji Mca

CZECH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY IN PRAGUE

JULY 29, 2015

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

This page is left blank on purpose.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

To my family and friends, I love you all.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

This page is left blank on purpose.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

This page is left blank on purpose.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

Keywords: performance-based seismic design, non-linear static procedures, incremental

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

This page is left blank on purpose.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

NELINERNCH STATICKCH POSTUP A INKREMENTLN DYNAMICK ANALZY

Klov slova: seismickch designovch, nelinernch statickch postup, inkrementln

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

This page is left blank on purpose.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

Resumen. En aos recientes, el uso de mtodos de anlisis con mayor precisin y

Palabras clave: diseo ssmico por desempeo, procedimientos estticos no-lineales,

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

This page is left blank on purpose.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

Erasmus Mundus Programme

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

In order to evaluate existing constructions, as well as to adequately design new earthquake

Aims of the work

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

Outline of the thesis

Erasmus Mundus Programme

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF

Performance-Based Seismic Design (PBSD)

Non-linear Static Procedures (NSPs)

Figure 1 Capacity (pushover) curve of the MDOF

Erasmus Mundus Programme

SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF