Linear procedures (lateral static force method or modal response spectrum analysis) are the standard approach for the seismic design of new structures. On the contrary, nonlinear procedures, in particular incremental pushover analysis, should be used for the seismic assessment of existing buildings, because it is difficult to estimate the behavior factor of a building in the absence of a standardized capacity design. Moreover, in the case of existing buildings, the use of linear procedures provides results that are excessively conservative, therefore unreliable. Despite this, seismic codes consider linear procedures because of their theoretical simplicity and robustness with respect to model uncertainties and non-linear issues, a priori avoiding convergence problems. The paper deals with the critical issues related to the application of linear static procedures for the seismic assessment of masonry buildings. Methods proposed by the present draft of the Eurocode 8 (Part 3) and the new Italian Seismic code (NTC 2018) have been applied to a case study building, under two configurations (regular, irregular); in particular, the modelling options usually adopted by professionals have been considered. Results are compared with the assessment carried out through the nonlinear pushover analysis, which may be assumed as able to better estimate the actual seismic behavior. Anyhow, the aim of the paper is not a validation of the code procedures but a comparison between alternative allowed methods. Conclusions show that even by considering the recent improvements in the codes, in the regions characterized from medium to high seismic hazard, linear methods result almost inapplicable leading to almost all buildings not verified in contrast with the evidences of most recent earthquakes.

线性程序（横向静力法或模态响应谱分析）是新结构抗震设计的标准方法。相反，应使用非线性程序，尤其是增量推覆分析，对现有建筑物进行地震评估，因为在缺乏标准化容量设计的情况下，很难估算建筑物的行为因素。此外，在现有建筑物的情况下，使用线性程序会导致结果过于保守，因此不可靠。尽管如此，地震代码还是考虑了线性程序，因为它们在模型不确定性和非线性问题方面具有理论上的简单性和鲁棒性，从而避免了收敛问题。本文探讨了与线性静力程序在砌体建筑抗震评估中的应用有关的关键问题。欧洲规范8（第3部分）的当前草案和新的意大利地震规范（NTC 2018）提出的方法已应用于案例研究大楼，采用两种配置（常规，不规则）; 特别是考虑了专业人员通常采用的建模选项。将结果与通过非线性推覆分析进行的评估进行比较，可以认为该评估能够更好地估计实际地震行为。无论如何，本文的目的不是验证代码过程，而是比较允许的替代方法。结论表明，即使考虑到代码最近的改进，