Advanced Seismic Analyses of “Apennine Churches” Stroked by the Central Italy Earthquakes of 2016 by the Non-Smooth Contact Dynamics Method

Abstract:

The dynamic behaviour and the seismic vulnerability of different masonry “Apennine Churches”, dramatically damaged by the last shocks sequence of 2016 that occurred in Central Italy, have been studied in this paper by means of advanced 3D numerical analyses with the Discrete Element Method (DEM). Thus, a discontinuous approach has been used to assess the dynamic properties and the vulnerability of the masonry structure, through large deformations regulated by the Signorini’s law, concerning the impenetrability between the rigid bodies, and by the Coulomb’s law, regarding the dry-friction model. The major purpose of this study is to highlight that relevant data on the real structural behaviour of historical masonry can be provided through advanced numerical analyses. The comparison between the results of the numerical simulation and the survey of the existing crack pattern of the churches permitted to validate the used approach. Finally, from the results and conclusions of these cases study, it is possible to affirm that the used methodology can be applied to a wide variety of historical masonry structure in Europe.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 817)
• Pages: 309-316
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.817.309
• Online since: August 2019
• Authors: Angela Ferrante*, Elisa Ribilotta, Ersilia Giordano, Francesco Clementi, Stefano Lenci
• Keywords: Damage Assessment, Discrete Element Method, Masonry Churches, Non-Smooth Contact Dynamics Method

References

[1] S. Lagomarsino and S. Podesta`, Damage and Vulnerability Assessment of Churches after the 2002 Molise, Italy, Earthquake,, Earthq. Spectra, vol. 20, no. S1, pp. S271–S283, Jul. (2004).

DOI: 10.1193/1.1767161

[2] L. Krstevska, L. Tashkov, N. Naumovski, G. Florio, A. Formisano, A. Fornaro, and R. Landolfo, In-situ experimental testing of four historical buildings damaged during the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake,, COST ACTION C26 Urban Habitat Constr. under Catastrophic Events - Proc. Final Conf., p.652880, (2010).

DOI: 10.1201/b10559-22

[3] G. Milani, Lesson learned after the Emilia-Romagna, Italy, 20–29 May 2012 earthquakes: A limit analysis insight on three masonry churches,, Eng. Fail. Anal., vol. 34, p.761–778, Dec. (2013).

DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.01.001

[4] G. Brandonisio, G. Lucibello, E. Mele, and A. De Luca, Damage and performance evaluation of masonry churches in the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake,, Eng. Fail. Anal., vol. 34, p.693–714, Dec. (2013).

DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.01.021

[5] E. Giordano, F. Clementi, A. Nespeca, and S. Lenci, Damage Assessment by Numerical Modeling of Sant'Agostino's Sanctuary in Offida During the Central Italy 2016–2017 Seismic Sequence,, Front. Built Environ., vol. 4, Jan. (2019).

DOI: 10.3389/fbuil.2018.00087

[6] M. Valente and G. Milani, Damage assessment and collapse investigation of three historical masonry palaces under seismic actions,, Eng. Fail. Anal., vol. 98, p.10–37, Apr. (2019).

DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.01.066

[7] A. Formisano, G. Vaiano, F. Fabbrocino, and G. Milani, Seismic vulnerability of Italian masonry churches: The case of the Nativity of Blessed Virgin Mary in Stellata of Bondeno,, J. Build. Eng., vol. 20, p.179–200, Nov. (2018).

DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2018.07.017

[8] G. Milani and M. Valente, Failure analysis of seven masonry churches severely damaged during the 2012 Emilia-Romagna (Italy) earthquake: Non-linear dynamic analyses vs conventional static approaches,, Eng. Fail. Anal., vol. 54, p.13–56, Aug. (2015).

DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2015.03.016

[9] F. Clementi, E. Quagliarini, F. Monni, E. Giordano, and S. Lenci, Cultural Heritage and Earthquake: The Case Study of in Ascoli Piceno,, Open Civ. Eng. J., vol. 11, no. Suppl-5, M5, p.1079–1105, Dec. (2017).

DOI: 10.2174/1874149501711011079

[10] E. Quagliarini, G. Maracchini, and F. Clementi, Uses and limits of the Equivalent Frame Model on existing unreinforced masonry buildings for assessing their seismic risk: A review,, J. Build. Eng., vol. 10, p.166–182, Mar. (2017).

DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2017.03.004

[11] F. Clementi, V. Gazzani, M. Poiani, P. A. Mezzapelle, and S. Lenci, Seismic Assessment of a Monumental Building through Nonlinear Analyses of a 3D Solid Model,, J. Earthq. Eng., vol. 22, no. sup1, p.35–61, Sep. (2018).

DOI: 10.1080/13632469.2017.1297268

[12] V. Sarhosis, G. Milani, A. Formisano, and F. Fabbrocino, Evaluation of different approaches for the estimation of the seismic vulnerability of masonry towers,, Bull. Earthq. Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p.1511–1545, Mar. (2018).

DOI: 10.1007/s10518-017-0258-8

[13] A. Formisano and A. Massimilla, A Novel Procedure for Simplified Nonlinear Numerical Modeling of Structural Units in Masonry Aggregates,, Int. J. Archit. Herit., vol. 12, no. 7–8, p.1162–1170, Nov. (2018).

DOI: 10.1080/15583058.2018.1503365

[14] F. Clementi, A. Pierdicca, A. Formisano, F. Catinari, and S. Lenci, Numerical model upgrading of a historical masonry building damaged during the 2016 Italian earthquakes: the case study of the Podestà palace in Montelupone (Italy),, J. Civ. Struct. Heal. Monit., vol. 7, no. 5, p.703–717, Nov. (2017).

DOI: 10.1007/s13349-017-0253-4

[15] A. Pierdicca, F. Clementi, D. Isidori, E. Concettoni, C. Cristalli, and S. Lenci, Numerical model upgrading of a historical masonry palace monitored with a wireless sensor network,, Int. J. Mason. Res. Innov., vol. 1, no. 1, p.74, (2016).

DOI: 10.1504/ijmri.2016.074748

[16] R. Maio, R. Vicente, A. Formisano, and H. Varum, Seismic vulnerability of building aggregates through hybrid and indirect assessment techniques,, Bull. Earthq. Eng., vol. 13, no. 10, p.2995–3014, Oct. (2015).

DOI: 10.1007/s10518-015-9747-9

[17] P. G. Asteris, V. Sarhosis, A. Mohebkhah, V. Plevris, L. Papaloizou, P. Komodromos, and J. V. Lemos, Numerical Modeling of Historic Masonry Structures,, in Handbook of Research on Seismic Assessment and Rehabilitation of Historic Structures, P. Asteris and V. Plevris, Eds. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2015, p.213–256.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-8286-3.ch007

[18] B. Pantò, F. Cannizzaro, S. Caddemi, and I. Caliò, 3D macro-element modelling approach for seismic assessment of historical masonry churches,, Adv. Eng. Softw., vol. 97, p.40–59, Jul. (2016).

DOI: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2016.02.009

[19] J. J. Moreau, Unilateral Contact and Dry Friction in Finite Freedom Dynamics,, in Nonsmooth Mechanics and Applications, Vienna: Springer Vienna, 1988, p.1–82.

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-7091-2624-0_1

[20] B. Chetouane, F. Dubois, M. Vinches, and C. Bohatier, NSCD discrete element method for modelling masonry structures,, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., vol. 64, no. 1, p.65–94, Sep. (2005).

DOI: 10.1002/nme.1358

[21] A. Ferrante, F. Clementi, and G. Milani, Dynamic Behavior of an Inclined Existing Masonry Tower in Italy,, Front. Built Environ., vol. 5, Mar. (2019).

DOI: 10.3389/fbuil.2019.00033

[22] F. Clementi, A. Ferrante, E. Giordano, F. Dubois, and S. Lenci, Damage assessment of ancient masonry churches stroked by the Central Italy earthquakes of 2016 by the non-smooth contact dynamics method,, Bull. Earthq. Eng., Apr. (2019).

DOI: 10.1007/s10518-019-00613-4

[23] J. V. Lemos, Discrete Element Modeling of Masonry Structures,, Int. J. Archit. Herit., vol. 1, no. 2, p.190–213, May (2007).

[24] Soprintendenza Archeologia, Belle Arti e Paesaggio delle Marche, http://sabapmarche.beniculturali.it/.

[25] F. Dubois, V. Acary, and M. Jean, The Contact Dynamics method: A nonsmooth story,, Comptes Rendus Mécanique, vol. 346, no. 3, p.247–262, Mar. (2018).

DOI: 10.1016/j.crme.2017.12.009