Risk Assessment of Ancient Columns and Colonnades

Pdf
Published: Apr 30, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/ta.36874
Keywords:
ancient monuments, rocking structures, fragility, colonnades.
Spyridon Diamantopoulos
National Technical University of Athens
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5104-4850
Michalis Fragiadakis
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0698-822X
Abstract

The paper presents a novel methodology for the fragility assessment of ancient freestanding colonnades. The seismic response and the stability of these colonnades is compared with those of freestanding columns. The modelling of the structures is based on a simplified approach that can be implemented in a general-purpose seismic design software. Thus, time-consuming and/or complicated simulations are avoided. For the fragility assessment, the performance criteria and the methodology adopted are discussed in detail. The examples studied show the capacity of the proposed modelling to simulate ancient structures and to quickly provide accurately the fragility curves. The Engineering Demand Parameter is always the rotation of the column over its slenderness while different Intensity Measures are examined.

Article Details
  • Section
  • Cultural Heritage
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Diamantopoulos S, Fragiadakis M. Modeling of rocking frames under seismic loading. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2022; 51 (1): 108–128.
Housner G. The behavior of inverted pendulum structures during earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1963; 53(2): 404–417.
DeJong M, Dimitrakopoulos E. Dynamically equivalent rocking structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2014; 43(10): 1543–1563.
Dimitrakopoulos E, Giouvanidis A. Seismic response analysis of the planar rocking frame. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 2015, 141(7):04015003.
Cheng C. Shaking table tests of a self-centering designed bridge substructure. Eng Struct 2008; 30(12): 3426–3433.
Palermo A, Pampanin S, Marriott D, Design, modeling, and experimental response of seismic resistant bridge piers with posttensioned dissipating connections. J Struct Eng 2007; 133(11): 1648–1661.
Priestley M, Tao J. Seismic response of precast prestressed concrete frames with partially debonded tendons. PCI J 1993; 38(1):58–69.
Psycharis IN, Fragiadakis M, Stefanou I (2013). Seismic reliability assessment of classical columns subjected to near-fault ground motions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2013; 42:2061-2079.
Diamantopoulos S, Fragiadakis M. Seismic response assessment of rocking systems using single degree of freedom oscillators. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2019; 48(7), 689–708.
Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn.2002; 31(3):491–514.
Vamvatsikos D, Fragiadakis M. Incremental Dynamic Analysis for seismic performance uncertainty estimation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2009; 39(2): 119-235.
Diamantopoulos S, Fragiadakis M, Modeling, fragility and risk assessment of ancient freestanding columns and colonnades, Engineering Structures 2023, Volume 275, Part B, 115273.
Fragiadakis M, Diamantopoulos S. Fragility and risk assessment of freestanding building contents. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2020; 49 (10): 1028-1048.
Baker JW. Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthquake Spectra 2015; 31(1):579–599.