Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A procedure for the seismic risk assessment of the cultural heritage

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

Abstract

In the last decades, several researchers have proposed procedures for the evaluation of the seismic risk of buildings with different structural typologies. The main aim of these studies is the possibility of giving a tool to engineers and Authorities for assessing the seismic vulnerability of the existing building patrimony and, thus, planning the interventions. In the practical applications, the widespread approach expresses the seismic risk as a function of an economic parameter and a safety index. This procedure, which is regulated by the actual Italian codes, has been calibrated for the application to residential buildings. However, this approach appears to be inadequate to analyze cultural buildings due to their peculiar aspects, which cannot be re-conducted to the residential building ones, and for which a specific and deep analysis is needed. The present paper deals with this topic by proposing a new procedure, specifically calibrated on historic and/or cultural structures, which makes use of additional economic parameters to consider the historic, artistic, architectural, cultural, and socio-economical character of these buildings. The main advantage of the proposed procedure is the simplicity of implementation that may guarantee its diffusion in practical applications, and the possibility of its extension to other kinds of structures which, due to their characteristics, cannot be treated as residential buildings. The procedure and its advantages are here discussed by evaluating the seismic risk class of the Norman tower of Craco (Matera, Italy).

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.

Institutional subscriptions

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 2S.I. ProSAP (2017) PROfessional structural analysis program

  • ATC 33 (1997) NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings: FEMA 273. Washington, DC

  • ATC 58 (2012) Seismic performance assessment of buildings: Volume 1 (Methodology). Redwood City, California

  • Acito M, Bocciarelli M, Chesi C, Milani G (2014) Collapse of the clock tower in finale emilia after the may 2012 emilia romagna earthquake sequence: numerical insight. Eng Struct 72:70–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alcántara-Ayala I, Sassa K, Mikoš M, Han Q, Rhyner J, Takara K, Briceño S (2017) The 4th world landslide forum: landslide research and risk reduction for advancing the culture of living with natural hazards. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 8(4):498–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-017-0139-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartoli G, Betti M, Galano L, Zini G (2019b) Numerical insights on the seismic risk of confined masonry towers. Eng Struct 180:713–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartoli G, Betti M, Giordano S (2013) In situ static and dynamic investigations on the “Torre Grossa" masonry tower. Eng Struct 52:718–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.01.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartoli G, Betti M, Marra AM, Monchetti S (2019a) A Bayesian model updating framework for robust seismic fragility analysis of non-isolated historic masonry towers. Philos Trans Royal Soc A 377(2155):20190024. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2019.0024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blyth A, Di Napoli B, Parisse F et al (2020) Assessment and mitigation of seismic risk at the urban scale: an application to the historic city center of Leiria, Portugal. Bull Earthq Eng 18:2607–2634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00795-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosio M, Bressanelli ME, Belleri A (2018) Simplified models for the evaluation of the economic losses in precast structures due to earthquakes. In: Proceedings of Italian Concrete Days 2018

  • Brandonisio G, Lucibello G, Mele E, De Luca A (2013) Damage and performance evaluation of masonry churches in the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Eng Fail Anal 34:693–714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bru D, Ivorra S, Betti M, Adam JM, Bartoli G (2019) Parametric dynamic interaction assessment between bells and supporting slender masonry tower. Mech Syst Signal Process 129:235–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.04.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

  • Carnimeo L, Foti D, Vacca V (2015) On Damage Monitoring in Historical Buildings via Neural Networks. In: Proceedings of 2015 IEEE Workshop on Environmental, Energy and Structural Monitoring Systems (EESMS 2015), Trento, Italy, July 9th-10th. https://doi.org/10.1109/EESMS.2015.7175870

  • Carreño ML, Cardona OD, Barbat AH (2007) Urban seismic risk evaluation: a holistic approach. Nat Hazards 40(1):137–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-006-0008-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellazzi G, D’Altri AM, de Miranda S, Chiozzi A, Tralli A (2018) Numerical insights on the seismic behavior of a non-isolated historical masonry tower. Bull Earthq Eng 16(2):933–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0231-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Circolare n.7 (2019) Istruzioni per l’applicazione dell’«Aggiornamento delle “Norme tecniche per le costruzioni» di cui al decreto ministeriale 17 gennaio 2018”. https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2019/02/11/19A00855/sg(in Italian)

  • Cosenza E, Del Vecchio C, Di Ludovico M, Dolce M et al (2018) The Italian guidelines for seismic risk classification of constructions: technical principles and validation. Bull Earthq Eng 16:5905–5935. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0431-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crespi P, Giordano N, Frascaro G (2019) Seismic Loss Estimation for an Old Masonry Building in Italy. In: Proceeding 13th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, ICASP13

  • De Silva F, Ceroni F, Sica S, Silvestri F (2018) Non-linear analysis of the Carmine bell tower under seismic actions accounting for soil–foundation–structure interaction. Bull Earthq Eng 16(7):2775–2808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0298-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diaferio M, Foti D, Giannoccaro NI (2015) Identification of the modal properties of a squat historic tower for the tuning of a FE model. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Operational Modal Analysis Conference, IOMAC 2015; Gijon; Spain; 12–14 May 2015; Code112375

  • Dogangun A, Acar R, Sezen H, Livaoglu R (2008) Investigation of dynamic response of masonry minaret structures. Bull Earthq Eng 6(3):505–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-008-9066-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dogangun A, Sezen H (2012) Seismic vulnerability and preservation of historical masonry monumental structures. Earthq Struct 3(1):83–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolce M, Manfredi G (2015) Libro Bianco sulla ricostruzione privata fuori dai centri storici nei Comuni colpiti dal sisma dell’Abruzzo del 6 Aprile 2009. Doppiavoce: 210. ISBN (in Italian) 978-88-89972-50-2

  • D’Ayala D (2014) Conservation principles and performance based strengthening of heritage buildings in post-event reconstruction. In:  Perspectives on European earthquake engineering and seismology, Springer, Dordrecht, pp 489–514

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • D’Ayala D, Lagomarsino S (2015) Performance-based assessment of cultural heritage assets: outcomes of the European FP7 PERPETUATE project. Bull Earthq Eng 13:5–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9710-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Ayala D (ed) (2019) The MW 6.2 Amatrice, Italy earthquake of 24th August 2016, a field report by EEFIT. https://www.istructe.org/IStructE/media/Public/Resources/report-eefit-mission-italy-20190501.pdf

  • D’Ayala D, Meslem A, Vamvatsikos D, Porter K, Rossetto T, Silva V (2014) Guidelines for analytical vulnerability assessment of low/mid-rise buildings. Technical Report. GEM Foundation, Pavia, Italy. https://doi.org/10.13117/GEM.VULN-MOD.TR2014.12

  • D’Ayala D, Alexander D, De Luca F et al (2017) Earthquake Engineering Field Investigation Team (UK)—Data and discussion on the 2016 Central Italy Mission. In: Proceedings of 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (16WCEE).

  • Formisano A, Mazzolani FM, Florio G, Landolfo R (2010) A quick methodology for seismic vulnerability assessment of historical masonry aggregates. In: Proceedings of the COST Action C26 Final Conference “Urban Habitat Constructions under Catastrophic Events”

  • Formisano A, Florio G, Landolfo R, Mazzolani FM (2011) Numerical calibration of a simplified procedure for the seismic behavior assessment of masonry building aggregates. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering Computing, 6–9

  • Foti D (2015) A new experimental approach to the pushover analysis of masonry buildings. Comput Struct 147:165–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.09.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glade T (2003) Vulnerability assessment in landslide risk analysis. Erde 134(2):123–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung HC, Wang TW (2011) Determinants and mapping of collective perceptions of technological risk: the case of the second nuclear power plant in Taiwan. Risk Anal Int J 31(4):668–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01539.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang S-H, Lignos DG (2017) Earthquake-induced loss assessment of steel frame buildings with special moment frames designed in highly seismic regions. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 46(13):2141–2162. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICOMOS-ISCARSAH Committee (2005) Recommendations for the analysis, conservation and structural restoration of architectural heritage, http://iscarsah.icomos.org/content/principles/ ISCARSAH_Principles_English.pdf

  • ISO 13822 (2010) Bases for design of structures—assessment of existing structures. International Organization for Standardization—ISO, Switzerland

  • Ivorra S, Foti D, Diafero M, Vacca V, Bru D (2018) Resonances detected on a historical tower under bells’ forced vibrations. Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale 12(46):203–215. https://doi.org/10.3221/IGF-ESIS.46.19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivorra S, Pallares F (2006) Dynamic investigations on a masonry bell tower. Eng Struct 28(5):660–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.09.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kron W(2002) Keynote lecture: Flood risk= hazard× exposure× vulnerability. Flood defence 82–89

  • Lerna M, Sabbà MF, Diaferio M, Carnimeo L, Ivorra S, Foti D (2020) Seismic Risk assessment of a medieval tower: the case study of Craco. In: Proceedings of EURODYN 2020, 11th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, Streamed from Athens, Greece, 23–26 November 2020. vol II. ISBN 978-618-85072-1-0, pp 4911–4921

  • MIT (2008) D.M. 14 Gennaio 2008. Technical code for constructions. G.U. n. 29 del 4/2/2008. Rome, Italy (in Italian)

  • MIT (2018) D.M. 17th January 2018. Aggiornamento delle «Norme tecniche per le costruzioni» . Supplemento ordinario n. 8 alla Gazzetta ufficiale del 20–2–2018. Rome, Italy. https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2018/2/20/18A00716/sg (in Italian)

  • Ministry Decree n.58 28/02/2017 Allegato A: linee guida per la classificazione del rischio sismico delle costruzioni. Italian Ministry of Infrastructures and Trasport, Italy. Updated with Ministry Decree n. 65 del 07/03/ 2017. http://www.mit.gov.it/normativa/decreto-ministeriale-numero-58-del-28022017(in Italian)

  • Modena C, Valluzzi MR, Folli RT, Binda L (2002) Design choices and intervention techniques for repairing and strengthening of the Monza cathedral bell-tower. Constr Build Mater 16(7):385–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01539.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NZSEE (2006) Assessment and improvement of the structural performance of buildings in earthquakes. Corrigenda 3, 2014. New Zealand

  • O.P.C.M. n. 3274 (2003) Primi elementi in materia di criteri generali per la classificazione sismica del territorio nazionale e di normative tecniche per le costruzioni in zona sismica. Supplemento G.U del 8/5/2003. Rome, Italy. https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2003/05/08/03A04408/sg(in Italian)

  • OMI (2019) Agenzia delle Entrate per il segmento direzionale/terziario nella Microzona D1 del Comune di Craco (in Italian). https://www.agenziaentrate.gov.it/portale/web/guest/aree-tematiche/osservatorio-del-mercato-immobiliare-omi

  • Online website (2019) https://www.cracomuseum.eu/parco-museale-scenografico-di-craco/

  • O’Reilly GJ, Sullivan TJ (2018) Probabilistic seismic assessment and retrofit considerations for Italian RC frame buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 16(3):1447–1485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0257-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regional price list of the Basilicata Region (2018) http://prezzariooperepubbliche.regione.basilicata.it/prezzarioop/prezzario/prezzari.xhtml

  • Romero DZ, Akbas B, Budiman J et al (2020) Consideration of economic vulnerability in seismic performance evaluation of structures. Bull Earthq Eng 18: 3351–3381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00822-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajani F, Morano P (2014) Concession and lease or sale? A model for the enhancement of public properties in disuse or underutilized. WSEAS Trans Bus Econ 11:787–800

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolo S, Patelli E, Beer M (2017) Risk assessment of spent nuclear fuel facilities considering climate change. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst Part A Civil Eng 3(2):G4016003

    Google Scholar 

  • Torelli G, D’Ayala D, Betti M, Bartoli G (2020) Analytical and numerical seismic assessment of heritage masonry towers. Bull Earthq Eng 18(3):969–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00732-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyagunov S, Stempniewski L, Grünthal G, Wahlström R, Zschau J (2004) Vulnerability and risk assessment for earthquake prone cities. In: Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (13th WCEE), Vancouver.

  • UNDRO (1980) Natural disasters and vulnerability analysis. Report of Experts Group Meeting, UNDRO, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Italian project PRIN 2015—“Mitigating the impacts of natural hazards on cultural heritage sites, structures and artefacts (MICHe)” is acknowledged for the support given to the present research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Polytechnic University of Bari, via E. Orabona 4, 70125, Bari, Italy

    Mariella Diaferio, Dora Foti, Maria F. Sabbà & Michela Lerna

Authors
  1. Mariella Diaferio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dora Foti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria F. Sabbà
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michela Lerna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dora Foti.

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

Diaferio, M., Foti, D., Sabbà, M.F. et al. A procedure for the seismic risk assessment of the cultural heritage. Bull Earthquake Eng 19, 1027–1050 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-01022-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-01022-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation