Fragility curves and seismic demand hazard analysis of rocking walls restrained with elasto‐plastic ties

• Published in: Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics Vol. 50; no. 13; pp. 3602 - 3622
• Main Authors: Solarino, Fabio, Giresini, Linda
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Bognor Regis Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.10.2021
• Subjects: Demand analysis; Diaphragms; Ductility; Ductility tests; Dynamic analysis; Dynamic stability; elasto‐plastic tie‐rods; Fragility; fragility curves; Hazard assessment; Masonry; Mechanical properties; Parameters; Performance assessment; Performance testing; Probability theory; rocking; Rods; Seismic activity; Seismic analysis; seismic demand hazard curves; Seismic hazard; Seismic response; Seismic stability; Seismic surveys; Stability analysis; Stochasticity; Vulnerability; Walls
• ISSN: 0098-8847; 1096-9845
• DOI: 10.1002/eqe.3524

The dynamic stability of out‐of‐plane masonry walls can be assessed through non‐linear dynamic analysis (rocking analysis), accounting for transverse walls, horizontal diaphragms and tie‐rods. Steel tie‐rods are widely spread in historical constructions to prevent dangerous overturning mechanisms and can be simulated by proper elasto‐plastic models. Conventionally, design guidelines suggest intensity‐based assessment methods, where the seismic demand distribution directly depends upon the selected intensity measure level. Fragility analysis could also be employed as a more advanced procedure able to assess the seismic vulnerability in a probabilistic manner. The boundedness of this approach is herein overcome by applying a robust stochastic seismic performance assessment to obtain seismic demand hazard curves. A sensitivity study is carried out to account for the influence of wall geometry, the minimum number of seismic inputs, and the mechanical parameters of tie‐rods. Fragility analysis, prior to seismic demand hazard analysis is applied on over 6000 analyses, revealing that intensity measures are poorly correlated both for 1‐D and 2‐D correlation, hardly leading to the selection of the optimal intensity measure. The tie‐rod ductility, followed by its axial strength and wall size, is the mechanical parameter mostly influencing the results, whereas the wall slenderness does not play a significant role in the probabilistic response.