|
|
| Line 7: |
Line 7: |
| | == Full document == | | == Full document == |
| | <pdf>Media:Draft_Content_886594553p547.pdf</pdf> | | <pdf>Media:Draft_Content_886594553p547.pdf</pdf> |
| − | == References ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [1] D'Ayala, D. and Benzoni, G. (2012) Historic and traditional structures during the 2010 chile earthquake: Observations, codes, and conservation strategies. Earth Spectr 28 (S1): S425-51.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [2] Cancino, C. (2011) Damage assessment of historic earthen buildings after the August 15, 2007, Pisco, Peru earthquake. Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [3] D’Ayala, D., C. Galasso, V. Putrino, D. Fanciullacci, P. Barucco, V. Fanciullacci, C. Bronzino, et al. (2016) Assessment of the multi-hazard vulnerability of priority cultural heritage structures in the Philippines. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure, Chania, Greece.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [4] Marotta A., Sorrentino L., Liberatore D., Ingham J. (2017) Vulnerability assessment of unreinforced masonry churches following the 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence. J Earthq Eng 21(6):912–934.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [5] Doglioni, F., Moretti, A., Petrini, V. (1994) Le chiese e il terremoto. Trieste, Lint.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [6] DC PCM-DPC MIBAC. 2006. Form of damage for churches. Form A. Available from http://www.beniculturali.it/mibac/multimedia/MiBAC/documents/1338454237471_alleg ato4.pdf (Accessed January 31, 2020).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [7] MiBACT (2011). 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). Attachment C.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [8] Da Porto, F., Silva, B., Costa, C., and Modena, C. (2012) Macro-scale analysis of damage to churches after earthquake in Abruzzo (Italy) on April 6, 2009, J. Earth. Eng., 16,739–758.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [9] Brandonisio, G., Lucibello, G., Mele, E., and De Luca, A. (2013) Damage and performance evaluation of masonry churches in the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, Engineering Failure Analysis, 34, 693–714.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [10] Sorrentino, L., Liberatore,L. Decanini, L. D., Liberatore, D. (2014) The performance of churches in the 2012 Emilia earthquakes, Bull Earthquake Eng 12: 2299–2331
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [11] De Matteis, G., Zizi, M., and Corlito, V. (2017) Analisi preliminare degli effetti del terremoto del Centro Italia del 2016 sulle chiese a una navata. In ANIDIS XVII Convegno L’Ingegneria sismica in Italia, Pistoia, Italy, 17–21 September.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [12] Cescatti, E., Taffarel, S., Leggio, A., da Porto, F., and Modena, C. (2017) Macroscale damage assessment of URM churches after the 2016 earthquake sequence in Centre of Italy In: ANIDIS XVII Convegno L’Ingegneria sismica in Italia, Pistoia, Italy, 17–21 September.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [13] Youance, S. (2009) Évaluation de la vulnérabilité sismique des églises du Québec, ETS, Montreal.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [14] Sferrazza Papa, G. (2020) Seismic vulnerability of churches: a territorial knowledge approach, PhD Thesis, Politecnico di Milano, Milano.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [15] Sferrazza Papa, G., Parisi, M.A., Nollet, M-J. (2019) Seismic vulnerability of churches: the effect of context-related characteristics. In: ANIDIS XVIII L’Ingegneria sismica in Italia, Ascoli Piceno, Italy, 17–21 September.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [16] Lagomarsino, S. and Podestà, S. (2004a) Damage and vulnerability assessment of churches after the 2002 Molise, Iitaly, earthquake. Earth Spect 20 (S1): S271-83.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [17] Lagomarsino, S. and Podestà, S. (2004b) Seismic vulnerability of ancient churches: I. damage assessment and emergency planning. Earth Spect 20 (2): 377-94.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [18] Valente, M. and Milani, G. (2018) Seismic response and damage patterns of masonry churches: Seven case studies in Ferrara, Italy. Eng. Struct. 177 : 809-35.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [19] Casolo, S., S. Neumair, M. A. Parisi, and V. Petrini. 2000. Analysis of seismic damage patterns in old masonry church façades. Earth Spect 16 (4): 757-73.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [20] Adams, J. and Basham, P. (1989) The seismicity and seismotectonics of Canada East of the Cordillera. Geoscience Canada, Vol.16 (1).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [21] Nollet, M.-J., Abo El Ezz, A., and Nastev, M. (2013). Seismic risk assessment of unreinforced masonry buildings in Québec, In: 12th Canadian Masonry Symposium Vancouver, Bristish Columbia, June 2-5, 2013.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [22] Le Patrimoine religieux du Québec. Les églises de la deuxième moitié du XIXe siècle. Available from http://www.gdcr.umontreal.ca/patrimoine/connaissance/catholicisme/dossier4.html (Accessed January 31 2020).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [23] Québec’s National Shrines. Montreal: The city of a hundred bell towers. Available from http://www.sanctuairesquebec.com/en/ (Accessed December, 28 2018).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [24] Parisi M A, Chesi C, Tardini C, Piazza M, (2008). Seismic vulnerability and preservation of timber roof structures. In: Proceedings SAHC08, Bath,UK, pp. 1253-1260.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [25] Chesi C, Parisi MA and Tardini C (2012) Inferring seismic behavior from morphohology in timber roofs, International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 6:100-116.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [26] Parisi MA and Chesi C (2014) Seismic vulnerability of traditional buildings: the effect of roof-masonry walls interaction. In: 10th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Anchorage, Alaska, 21-25 July.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [27] Abaqus (2016) Theory manual, version 2016.
| |
Ottawa’s landmark Union Station was constructed between 1902 and 1912 to house Ottawa’s central railway station. Located in the Ottawa downtown core, it’s situated a short distance from Parliament Hill and across the street from the iconic Fairmont Chateau Laurier Hotel. In the early 1960s, the train tracks and train sheds were removed and replaced with Colonel By Drive parkway. The building sat vacant for quite some time, until it was revived when it underwent renovations in the early 1970s. A south addition was added with a unique geodetic canopy structure. The former Union Station had officially been adapted into the Government Conference Centre, which it remained until this rehabilitation project 2014-2018, which transformed the building into the temporary house of the Senate of Canada. The building was not accessible to the public when it was a Conference Centre, however since 2018 the building is again open to the public for the first time in 55 years.
The client’s objective for this rehabilitation was to increase useable floor space. A seismic upgrade of the existing heritage building was also required, along with the design of a new east addition. Existing floor plates required upgrading based on new user requirements. High heritage areas of the building had to be maintained in their original integrity and worked into the design upgrade.
Creative solutions were demanded to bring this existing heritage masonry building up to current seismic code, without the structure taking any more room within the floor spaces. Maximizing space was absolutely critical. As well as, ensuring the new building materials were compatible with the existing heritage building materials. Innovation was found in the balance between a minimal intervention approach and upgrading for current code requirements.
