Seismic performance of a masonry tower under non-linear methods
Masonry towers were usually designed by only considering the gravitational loading and without seismic design criteria. They are generally characterised by a slender geometry, which makes them highly vulnerable to horizontal loading. Hence, assessing their seismic performance is particularly importa...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión aceptada para publicación |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Sevilla (US) |
| Repositorio: | idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dnet:idus________::5d739521f6421ea618013531e7036f73 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/11441/181034 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2025.108458 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Failure and damage analysis Cultural heritage Masonry building Nonlinear analysis Finite element method |
| Sumario: | Masonry towers were usually designed by only considering the gravitational loading and without seismic design criteria. They are generally characterised by a slender geometry, which makes them highly vulnerable to horizontal loading. Hence, assessing their seismic performance is particularly important in earthquake-prone regions, such as the Iberian Peninsula, to properly preserve them. Given that, this paper aims to analyse the failure and the damage expected under different seismic loadings of the Giralda tower. The building is a UNESCO World Heritage Site located in southern Spain in a region of a moderate seismic hazard. A detailed 3D finite element model of the tower has been developed based on the macro-mechanical approach. As a novelty, the numerical model calibration has been completed by means of a sensitivity analysis performed on the constitutive laws of masonry walls and their strength criteria at panel scale. Real ground motions have been used and scaled considering the code response spectrum and different return periods. The seismic safety of the tower has been carried out considering the performance-based method and the drifts limits. The results showed significant differences in the location of the damage depending on the type of analysis conducted. Static analyses show that the damage will be concentrated at the shaft of the tower whereas dynamic ones have shown that the upper body of the tower will present greater damage. Particularly, for a return period of 975 years, the upper bodies of the tower could collapse. |
|---|