Assessing the seismic vulnerability of masonry buildings - Seismic Risk Analysis and Management of Civil Infrastructure Systems - page 332

theory, in recognition of the limited knowledge associated with many of the
parameters. Only one in-plane and one simple out-of-plane mechanism
were initially considered as possible failures. D'Ayala et al. (1997) proposed
a validation of the mechanism approach with extensive in situ observation
and correlation of the seismic collapse load factor with the PGA, proving
the validity of the approach through a case study for the historic centre of
Lisbon. D'Ayala and Speranza (2003) further enhanced this approach by
developing the FaMIVE method, a mechanical approach based on a suite
of 12 possible failure mechanisms directly correlated with in situ observed
damage (D'Ayala and Kansal, 2004) and laboratory experimental valida-
tion (Shi et al. , 2008; D'Ayala and Shi, 2011). The FaMIVE algorithm pro-
duces vulnerability functions for different building typologies and quantifi es
the effect of strengthening and repair intervention on reduction of vulner-
ability. The method has been applied in Nocera Umbra, Italy, following the
1997 earthquake (D'Ayala and Speranza, 2003), in Istanbul, Turkey; in Bhuj,
India, following the 2003 Gujarati earthquake; and in Abruzzo, Italy, fol-
lowing the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake (D'Ayala and Paganoni, 2011). The
FaMIVE procedure has also been applied in conjunction with the VULNUS
approach and the AeDes (Baggio et al. , 2009) and EMS98 (Grünthal, 1998)
vulnerability classes (Bernardini et al. , 2008).
13.2.3 Hybrid methods
Several researchers have used a hybrid method by combining post-earth-
quake damage statistics with analytically derived nonlinear behaviour using
pushover analysis (e.g. Barbat et al. , 1996; Kappos et al. , 1998). Recently,
Kappos et al. (2008) have applied it to estimating direct losses for masonry
buildings in Thessaloniki, Greece. This procedure is very useful when the
damage data collection of an area of interest with a specifi c intensity is only
partially available. However, the use of different data sources derived from
different procedures, for which a direct cross-correlation is not readily avail-
able, might not necessarily result in reduced uncertainty of the output.
An application of this approach to masonry structure within the Risk-UE
project shows the importance of knowledge of the building stock for reli-
able seismic vulnerability assessment, as increased level of uncertainties are
compounded both on capacity and demand curves (Lagomarsino and
Giovinazzi, 2006). Application made using code prescription in terms of
capacity curves provides a good fi rst approximation but needs extensive in
situ calibration, as shown by Erberik (2008).
A summary of the methods reviewed above is presented in Table 13.1.
While this is by no means an exhaustive list of the many applications of
seismic vulnerability assessment for masonry structures available in the
literature, it concentrates on procedures that have been specifi cally