Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seismic retrofit solutions using base isolation for existing RC buildings: economic feasibilty and pay-back time

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The existing reinforced concrete buildings typical of the Mediterranean area commonly have poor seismic performance and high vulnerability to the seismic events. As demonstrated by recent post-earthquake reconstruction processes, they commonly exhibited significant damage to structural components and to infills and partitions resulting in very high repair costs. This suggests that effective seismic strengthening interventions should aim at both improving the safety and reducing the expected annual losses. Nowadays, the seismic retrofitting of existing RC buildings by using base isolation is becoming popular because of the high effectiveness as seismic protection strategy. However, the high costs of installation are limiting the widespread in the common design practice. In this context, a unique design parameter capable of combining the increasing seismic safety, the cost of installation and the reduction of the expected losses can be useful to draw simple cost-benefits considerations. This research work proposes a PBEE-based methodology to quantify the Pay-Back Time (PBT) of seismic retrofit solutions for existing RC buildings. The non-linear response of base isolated building is assessed and a comparison with different strengthening solutions is proposed to show the applicability of the PBT as a unique design parameter to select the most effective retrofit solution. A database of 59 RC buildings retrofitted by using base isolation during the L’Aquila reconstruction process, where actual retrofit costs are available, is used for the validation. Finally, these data are used to calibrate a simple formulation of the PBT to be used in the design practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ATC−Applied Technology Council FP-58 (2012a) Next-generation seismic performance assessment for buildings, vol 1, methodology. Fed Emerg Manag Agency, Washington, DC

  • ATC−Applied Technology Council FP-58 (2012b) Next-generation seismic performance assessment for buildings, vol 2—implementation Guide. Fed Emerg Manag Agency, Washington, DC

  • Baggio C, Bernardini A, Colozza R et al (2007) Field Manual for post-earthquake damage and safety assessment and short term countermeasures ( AeDES ). JRC Sci Thechnical Reports, 1–100

  • Bakis CE, Bank LC, Brown VL et al (2002) Fiber-reinforced polymer composites for construction—state-of-the-art review. J Compos Constr 6:73–87. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2002)6:2(73)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D (2016) Fragility curves and loss functions for RC structural components with smooth rebars. Earthq Struct 10:1181–1212. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.5.1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Flora A, De Luca PM, Martoccia A (2019) Estimating direct and indirect losses due to earthquake damage in residential RC buildings. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 126:105801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Gesualdi G, Perrone G (2019) Cost-benefit analysis of alternative retrofit strategies for RC frame buildings. J Earthq Eng 23:208–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1323041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Perrone G (2017) Damage and loss assessment of Pre-70 RC frame buildings with FEMA P-58. J Earthq Eng 21:23–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1149893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Perrone G (2015) Developing fragility curves and loss functions for masonry infill walls. Earthq Struct 9:257–279. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.9.1.257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Perrone G, Piesco V (2019) Developing collapse fragility curves for base-isolated buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 48:78–102. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Rossino M, Gesualdi G (2018) Estimating fragility curves of pre-70 RC frame buildings considering different performance limit states. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 115:868–881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.11.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardone D, Sullivan TJ, Gesualdi G, Perrone G (2017) Simplified estimation of the expected annual loss of reinforcedconcrete buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn, 46

  • CEN (2005) Design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 3: Assessment and reofitting of buildings. EN-1998-3, Eurocode 8. European Committee for Standardization, Brussell

  • Clemente P, Martelli A (2019) Seismically isolated buildings in Italy: state-of-the-art review and applications. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 119:471–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.12.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colangelo F (1999) Qualificazione risposta sismica pseudodinamica e modelli fenomenologici di portali di c.a tamponati con laterizio

  • Computers and Structures (2007) SAP 2000. Linear and nonlinear static and dynamic analysis and design of three dimensional structures. CSi, Berkeley, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosenza E, Del Vecchio C, Di Ludovico M et al (2018) The Italian guidelines for seismic risk classification of constructions: technical principles and validation. Bull Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0431-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cosenza E, Manfredi G (2000) Damage indices and damage measures. Prog Struct Eng Mater 2:50–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1528-2716(200001/03)2:1%3c50::aid-pse7%3e3.3.co;2-j

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Vecchio C, Di Ludovico M, Pampanin S, Prota A (2018) Repair costs of existing rc buildings damaged by the l’aquila earthquake and comparison with FEMA P-58 predictions. Earthq Spectra. https://doi.org/10.1193/122916EQS257M

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Vecchio C, Di Ludovico M, Prota A (2020) Repair costs of reinforced concrete building components: from actual data analysis to calibrated consequence functions. Earthq Spectra, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293019878194

  • Di Ludovico M, Prota A, Manfredi G (2019) Leggi di correlazione dannno costo per la definizione di scenari di perdite da sisma

  • Di Ludovico M, Prota A, Moroni C et al (2017) Reconstruction process of damaged residential buildings outside historical centres after the L’Aquila earthquake: part II—“heavy damage” reconstruction. Springer, Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • DPC-ReLUIS (2011) Linee Guida Per Riparazione E Rafforzamento Di Elementi Strutturali, Tamponature E Partizioni (in Italian), Doppiavoce

  • European Committee (2004) Eurocode 8 Design of structures for earthquake resistance

  • Fajfar P (2000) A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design. Earthq Spectra 16(3):573–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • fib bulletin 90 (2019) Externally applied FRP reinforcement for concrete structures. Fédération internationale du béton (fib), 2019

  • Fico R, Sabino A, Pipponzi G et al (2019) The emergency management and reconstruction process in small towns: the case of Barisciano (AQ). In: Dynamic interaction of oil and structure (DISS_19). L’Aquila

  • Frascadore R, Di Ludovico M, Prota A et al (2015) Local strengthening of RC structures as a strategy for seismic risk mitigation at regional scale. Earthq Spectra 31:1083–1102. https://doi.org/10.1193/122912EQS361M

  • Galanis PH, Moehle JP (2015) Development of collapse indicators for risk assessment of older-type reinforced concrete buildings. Earthq Spectra 31:1991–2006. https://doi.org/10.1193/080613EQS225M

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iervolino I, Galasso C, Cosenza E (2010) REXEL: computer aided record selection for code-based seismic structural analysis. Bull Earthq Eng 8:339–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-009-9146-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly JM (1982) The influence of base isolation on the seismic response of light secondary equipment, Report No. UCB/EERC41/17. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Lignola G, Di Sarno L, Di Ludovico M, Prota A (2016) The protection of artistic assets through the base isolation of historical buildings: a novel uplifting technology. Mater Struct Constr 49:4247–4263. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-015-0785-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mannella A, Di Ludovico M, Sabino A et al (2017) Analysis of the population assistance and returning home in the reconstruction process of the 2009 L’aquila earthquake. Sustain 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081395

  • MIT (2018) Aggiornamento delle «Norme tecniche per le costruzioni» (in Italian). Supplemento ordinario n. 8 alla GAZZETTA UFFICIALE del 20–2–2018. Italy

  • Naeim F, Kelly JM (1999) Design of seismic isolated structures. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly GJ, Calvi GM (2019) Conceptual seismic design in performance-based earthquake engineering. Submitt to Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3141

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2018) Probabilistic seismic assessment and retrofit considerations for Italian RC frame buildings. Springer, Netherlands

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ozkaya C, Akyuz U, Caner A et al (2011) Development of a new rubber seismic isolator: ‘Ball Rubber Bearing (BRB).’ Earthq Eng Struct Dyn, 1337–1352. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1091

  • Panagiotakos TB, Fardis MN (1996) Seismic response of infilled RC frames structures. In: Proceedings of the eleventh world conference on earthquake engineering, Mexico, Paper No. 225

  • Polese M, Di Ludovico M, Gaetani d’Aragona M et al (2020) Regional vulnerability and risk assessment accounting for local building typologies. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101400

  • Porter K (2003) An Overview of PEER’s Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Methodology. In: Ninth international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering

  • Ragni L, Cardone D, Conte N et al (2018) Modelling and seismic response analysis of Italian code-conforming base-isolated buildings. J Earthq Eng 22:198–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1527263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricci P, De Luca F, Verderame GM (2011) 6th April 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, Italy: Reinforced concrete building performance. Bull Earthq Eng 9:285–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-010-9204-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi Y, Kurata M, Nakashima M (2020) Disorder and damage of base-isolated medical facilities when subjected to near-fault and long-period ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn, 1683–1701. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2417

  • Skinner RI, McVerry GH (1975) Base Isolation for increased earthquake resistance of buildings. Bull New Zeal Soc earthqauke Eng 8:93–101

    Google Scholar 

  • STR. LL.PP. (2017) Abruzzo region price list 2017 Edition. Abruzzo, Italy

  • Takeda T, Sozen MA, Nielsen NN (1971) Reinforce Concrete Response to Simulated Earthquakes. In: Technical Research Report

  • Verderame GM, De Luca F, Ricci P, Manfredi G (2010) Preliminary analysis of a soft-storey mechanism after the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40:925–944. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zayas V, Low S, Mahin S (1987) The FPS earthquake protection system: experimental report. Report No. UCB/EERC-87/01. Earthquake engineering research center, University of California, Berkeley, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou FL, Yang Z, Liu WG, Tan P (2004) New Seismic Isolation System for Irregular Structure With the Largest Isolation Building Area in the World. In: 13th World Conf Earthq Eng, pp 1–11

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was performed within the framework of the PE 2019–2021 joint program DPC-ReLUIS, WP5 “Fast and Integrated Retrofit Interventions”, WP4 “Seismic Risk Maps” and WP7 “Post-earthquake analysis: usability, damage, seismic design of repair and strengthening interventions. The support of the Campania Region for funding the PhD grant of Andrea Natale through the project POR CAMPANIA FSE 2014/2020 is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy

    Andrea Natale & Marco Di Ludovico

  2. Department of Engineering, University of Sannio, Benevento, Italy

    Ciro Del Vecchio

Authors
  1. Andrea Natale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ciro Del Vecchio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Di Ludovico
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ciro Del Vecchio.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Natale, A., Del Vecchio, C. & Di Ludovico, M. Seismic retrofit solutions using base isolation for existing RC buildings: economic feasibilty and pay-back time. Bull Earthquake Eng 19, 483–512 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00988-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00988-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation