The need for seismic retrofitting on a historical masonry heritage structure raises questions that go beyond the improvement of its seismic behaviour after the intervention. Indeed, principles as minimum intervention or reversibility must be considered before a consensus decision can be reached, especially when this process is just a part of a broader and deeper intervention on this kind of building. Moreover, the complexity to perform in-situ experimental tests results in the uncertainty on the masonry mechanical properties, which are typically assumed as a homogeneous and isotropic material. All these uncertainties, among others, result in the difficulty to predict the different possible failure mechanisms of the complete structure and its structural behaviour. Through the analysis of different possible seismic strengthening solutions for a 19th century historical masonry heritage building these issues are tackled. The selected case study is the fort of Santa Catalina, an adobe masonry load-bearing wall building located in Lima, Peru, on which it has been decided to carry out its seismic retrofitting among the complete rehabilitation of the building. The Peruvian coast is classified as a high seismic activity zone, where an 8.0 Mw is expected to occur according to recent studies performed by the Geophysical Institute of Peru. In this context, this work presents the results of a preliminary characterization of the selected adobe masonry building and the subsequent evaluation of its seismic vulnerability in order to define the fitting solution. Thus, the ongoing research allows to define an effective seismic retrofit solution and respectful to the building's historic significance.

Full document

The PDF file did not load properly or your web browser does not support viewing PDF files. Download directly to your device: Download PDF document


[1] Bhattacharya, S., Nayak, S. and Chandra, S. A critical review of retrofitting methods for unreinforced masonry structures, Int. J. Disast. Risk Reduct., 7 (2014), pp. 51-67.

[2] Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática (INEI) – PERÚ, Características de las viviendas particulares y los hogares. Censos Nacionales de Población y Vivienda (2017).

[3] Tarque, N., Salsavilca, J., Yacila, J. and Camata, G. Multi-criteria analysis of five reinforcement options for Peruvian confined masonry walls. Earthquake Struct 17(2) (2019), pp. 205–219.

[4] Tavera, H. Escenario de Sismo y Tsunami en el borde occidental de la región central del Perú, Dirección de Sismología, Instituto Geofísico del Perú, Lima- Perú. 30 pp. (2014).

[5] Tavera, H. Actualización del escenario por sismo, tsunami y exposición en la región central del Perú, Dirección de Sismología, Instituto Geofísico del Perú, Lima- Perú. 24 pp. (2017).

[6] Tolles, L., Kimbro, E., Webster, F. and Ginell, W. Seismic Stabilization of Historic Adobe Structures, Final Report of the Getty Seismic Adobe Project, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles (2000).

[7] Blondet, M., Torrealva, D., Vargas, J., Velasquez, J. and Tarque, N. Seismic reinforcement of adobe houses using external polymer mesh. First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland (2006).

[8] Rouhi, J., and Hejazirad, F. A Review on the Large-Scale Modeling for Seismic Strengthening of Adobe-Mud Brick Structures, International Conference on Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Management in Iran, Tehran University (2018).

[9] Yacila, J., Salsavilca, J., Tarque, N. and Camata, G. Experimental assessment of confined masonry walls retrofitted with SRG under lateral cyclic loads, Engineering Structures, 199 (2019) 109555.

[10]Tavares A., D’Ayala D., Costa A. and Varum H. Construction Systems. In: Costa A., Guedes J., Varum H. (eds) Structural Rehabilitation of Old Buildings. Building Pathology and Rehabilitation, vol 2. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2014).

[11]Santa María, A.E. and Torrealva, D.E. Comportamiento dinámico de una estructura mixta de dos pisos compuesta por adobe y quincha, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú: Facultad de ciencias e ingeniería. Lima, Perú (2018).

[12]MVCS. Norma Técnica E.030 Diseño Sismorresistente. Ministerio de Vivienda, Construcción y Saneamiento. Perú (2018).

[13]MVCS. Norma E.080 Diseño y Construcción con Tierra Reforzada. Ministerio de Vivienda, Construcción y Saneamiento. Perú (2017).

[14]Tavera, H., Bernal, I. and Gómez, J.C. Zonificación sísmico-geotécnica para el centro histórico de Lima, Sistema de Información para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastre, Centro Nacional de Estimación, Prevención y Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres (2010).

[15]Blondet, M., Villa Garcia, G., Brzev S. and Rubiños, A. Earthquake-resistant construction of adobe buildings: A tutorial. Oakland: 2010 Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (2011).

[16]Elgawady, M., Lestuzzi, P., and Badoux, M. A Review of Conventional Seismic Retrofitting Techniques for URM. 13th international brick and block masonry conference. Amsterdam, Netherlands (2004).

[17]Peña, F. and Lourenço, P. Criterios para el refuerzo antisísmico de estructuras históricas. Revista de Ingeniería Sísmica. 87 (2012) pp. 47-66 Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniería Sísmica Distrito Federal, México (2012).

[18]Blondet, M., Vargas, J., Tarque, N. and Iwaki, C. Seismic resistant earthen Construction: the contemporary experience at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Informes de la Construcción Vol. 63, 523, 41-50. Julio-septiembre 2011.

[19]Cancino, C., Lardinois, S., D’Ayala, D., Fonseca, C., Torrealva, D., Vicente, E. and Villacorta, L. Proyecto de Estabilización Sismorresistente: Estudio de edificaciones tipológicas, Vol. 1. The Getty Conservation Institute. Los Angeles (2012).

Back to Top

Document information

Published on 30/11/21
Submitted on 30/11/21

Volume Seismic analysis and retrofit, 2021
DOI: 10.23967/sahc.2021.232
Licence: CC BY-NC-SA license

Document Score


Views 5
Recommendations 0

Share this document

claim authorship

Are you one of the authors of this document?