Typological Classification and Observed Damage Patterns of Masonry Churches After the 2016 Central Italy Earthquake

Abstract

The seismic protection of cultural heritage is an important topic that has been faced by several researchers in the last decades. Seismic events of the past have highlighted the need of achieving a proper knowledge of the vulnerability of cultural heritage, in particular of churches, in order to put in the field proper mitigation measures at the large scale. According to this premise, this paper deals with the damage scenario observed on eighty seven churches hit by the 2016 Central Italy earthquake. In a first stage, the most important structural features of the studied churches are discussed and threated by the statistical standpoint. The reported information have been collected through the A-DC form, adopted by the Civil Protection Department and by the Ministry of Heritage and Cultural Activity and Tourism (MiBACT), which was used in the framing of the damage reconnaissance activity carried out by the ReLUIS Italian consortium in the aftermath of the earthquake. Also, the form has been used in order assess the damage of each macro-element and, then, to assign a damage index to each church. The presented work is framed in a wider research activity that aims at providing a predictive methodology for the vulnerability assessment of churches at the regional scale. This methodology was already calibrated on the basis of the 2009 L’Aquila seismic event. The outcomes presented in this paper will serve to further prove the reliability of the proposed model.

Full document

References

[1] Gruppo di Lavoro INGV sul terremoto in centro Italia, 2016. Rapporto di sintesi sul Terremoto in centro Italia Mw 6.5 del 30 ottobre 2016,

[2] Gruppo di lavoro INGV 2017. “Relazione sullo stato delle conoscenze sulla sequenza sismica in centro italia 2016-2017 (Aggiornamento Al 2 Febbraio 2017).” 2017.

[3] Gruppo di lavoro INGV. 2016. “Second Summary Report of the Ml 6.0 Amatrice Earthquake of August 24, 2016 (Central Italy).” 2016.

[4] Tashkov, L., Krstevska, L., Naumovski, N., De Matteis, G., Brando, G. 2010. Ambient vibration tests on three religious buildings in Goriano Sicoli damaged during the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake COST ACTION C26: Urban Habitat Constructions under Catastrophic Events - Proceedings of the Final Conference, pp. 433-438.

[5] Linee Guida per la valutazione e riduzione del rischio sismico del patrimonio culturale allineate alle nuove Norme tecniche per le costruzioni (d.m. 14 gennaio 2008). Normativa Italiana per la protezione dei beni culturali. Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, 2010. Circolare n.26.

[6] Criber, E., Brando, G., De Matteis, G., 2015. The effects of L’Aquila earthquake on the St. Gemma church in Goriano Sicoli: part I—damage survey and kinematic analysis. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 13 (12), pp. 3713-3732.

[7] De Matteis, G., Criber, E., Brando, G. 2016. Damage Probability Matrices for Three-Nave Masonry Churches in Abruzzi After the 2009 L’Aquila Earthquake. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 10 (2-3), pp. 120-145

[8] Lagomarsino, S., Podestà, S., 2004. Seismic Vulnerability of Ancient Churches: II. Statistical Analysis of Surveyed Data and Methods for Risk Analysis. Earthquake Spectra, Volume 20, No. 2, pages 395–412, May 2004.

[9] Grunthal, G., 1998. European Macroseismic Scale. Centre Européen de Géodynamique et de Séismologie, Luxembourg; Vol. 15.

[10] De Matteis, G., Brando, G., Corlito, V., 2019. Predictive model for seismic vulnerability assessment of churches based on the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering. In press

[11] Brando, G., Criber, E., De Matteis, G. 2015.The effects of L’aquila earthquake on the St. Gemma church in Goriano Sicoli: part II—fem analysis. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 13 (12), pp. 3733-3748.

[12] De Matteis, G., Criber, E., Brando, G. Damage Probability Matrices for Three-Nave Masonry Churches in Abruzzi after the 2009 LAquila Earthquake (2016) International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 10 (2-3), pp. 120-145.