Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
July 2004
prodotto da:
Multimedia Cardano
Via Cardano, 14 - 27100 Pavia, Italy
Tel.: (+39) 0382.539776 - fax: (+39) 0382.306406 - e-mail: multimediacardano@multimediacardano.191.it
distribuito da:
IUSS Press
IUSS, Collegio Giasone del Maino, Via Luino, 4 - 27100 Pavia, Italy
Tel.: (+39) 0382.375841 - fax: (+39) 0382.375899 - email: info@iusspress.it - web: www.iusspress.it
PREFACE
The contents of the current report consist, to a large extent, of a collection of the
technical material prepared by all LESSLOSS participants during the proposal drafting
stage, and assembled by the coordinators of the project (hereby acting as editors of these
volume), with the assistance of the project managers and the leaders of the three research
areas and the eleven sub-projects, all of whom are identified in the body of the document.
In addition, the contribution of each and every single participant to the project, whom
supplied the material to the aforementioned sub-project and area leaders, must also be
acknowledged by the Editors.
G.M. CALVI
R.PINHO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 . Project Overview......................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Project summary ..............................................................................................................................1
1.2 Project objectives.............................................................................................................................1
1.3 Participant list...................................................................................................................................4
1.4 Relevance to the objectives of the Global Change and Ecosystems Sub-Priority..................5
1.5 Potential Impact.............................................................................................................................11
1.5.1 Contributions to Standards ................................................................................................14
1.5.2 Contributions to policy developments .............................................................................15
2 . Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project ...................................................17
2.1 Research, technological development and innovation activities .............................................19
Sub-Project 1.1 Landslide monitoring and warning systems..............................................21
Sub-Project 1.2 Landslide zonation, hazard and vulnerability assessment.......................23
Sub-Project 1.3 Innovative approaches for landslide assessment......................................26
Sub-Project 1.4 Landslide disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling....................30
Sub-Project 2.1 In-situ assessment, monitoring and typification of buildings and
infrastructures .............................................................................................33
Sub-Project 2.2a Development and manufacturing of energy dissipation devices and
seismic isolators ..........................................................................................47
Sub-Project 2.2b Techniques and methods for vulnerability reduction ...........................56
Sub-Project 2.3a Displacement-based design methodologies ............................................83
Sub-Project 2.3b Probabilistic risk assessment: methods and applications......................93
Sub-Project 2.4a Earthquake disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling for urban
areas..............................................................................................................95
Sub-Project 2.4b Earthquake disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling for
infrastructures .............................................................................................99
2.2 Demonstration activities............................................................................................................ 104
2.3 Training activities........................................................................................................................ 106
2.4 Management activities................................................................................................................ 107
2.4.1 General............................................................................................................................... 107
2.4.2 Key tasks............................................................................................................................ 108
2.5 Plan for using and disseminating knowledge.......................................................................... 109
2.5.1 The LESSLOSS Information Portal.............................................................................. 110
2.5.2 Collection of metadata of research results .................................................................... 111
2.5.3 The Data Repository of the project ............................................................................... 112
2.5.4 The EU-MEDIN Collaboration Framework ............................................................... 112
2.5.5 Dissemination material and means ................................................................................ 112
2.5.6 Dissemination activity...................................................................................................... 114
2.5.7 Exploitation....................................................................................................................... 115
2.5.8 Gender Action Plan ......................................................................................................... 117
vi LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
The LESSLOSS project addresses natural disasters, risk and impact assessment, natural
hazard monitoring, mapping and management strategies, improved disaster preparedness
and mitigation, development of advanced methods for risk assessment, methods of
appraising environmental quality and relevant pre-normative research.
Within this general framework, specific objectives will be pursued, such as the
development of innovative methods and approaches to design and assessment of
structures and earth slopes for both short- and long-term implementation, the
development of advanced monitoring techniques and devices, and the development,
manufacturing and testing of innovative isolating and dissipating seismic devices.
2- Development and application of in-situ assessment and monitoring techniques for structures
This is achieved through the employment of state-of-the-art instrumentation techniques
for (i) pre-earthquake structural monitoring and assessment of structures and (ii) post-
earthquake structural inspection and assessment. These improved methodologies can
then be employed in the elaboration of open access databases and in the improvement of
vulnerability estimates of monitored structural or infrastructure systems.
used to validate existing and proposed deterministic procedures for seismic safety
assessment of structures.
9- Improvement of disaster scenario prediction and loss modelling due to landslides and earthquakes
This is achieved through the development of state-of-the-art methodologies for
prediction of disaster scenarios and estimation of losses stemming from the occurrence
of landslides (non-seismically and seismically triggered) and earthquakes. These models
are to be calibrated through application on representative European sites and cities with
moderate-to-high landslide and seismic hazard exposure.
In Section 2, where the implementation plan for the project is described, the correlation
between the ten S&T objectives listed above and the operational research activities that
are to be carried out in LESSLOSS, is given, thus allowing the identification of the means
in and with which these objectives will be met.
Further, in Section 4, the quantitative criteria for verification of the progress in the pursue
of the aforementioned S&T objectives is effectively set, since the schedule of activities
4 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
and timed list of deliverables, directly connected to each of the operational research
activities that leads to attainment of the project objectives, is given.
Role* Nr. Name Short name Country Date enter Date exit
project project
CO 1 Universit degli Studi di Pavia UPAV Italy Month 1 Month 36
CR 2 ENEL.NewHydro Srl ISMES Italy Month 1 Month 36
CR 3 Applicazione Lavorazione Giunti ALGA Italy Month 1 Month 36
Appoggi SpA
CR 4 Algosystems SA ALGO Greece Month 1 Month 36
CR 5 Arsenal GmbH ARS Austria Month 1 Month 36
CR 6 Aristotle University of Thessaloniki AUTH Greece Month 1 Month 36
CR 7 Bureau de Recherches Geologiques BRGM France Month 1 Month 36
et Minieres
CR 8 Commissariat l'Energie Atomique CEA France Month 1 Month 36
CR 9 Centre Internacional de Mtodes CIMNE Spain Month 1 Month 36
Numrics en Enginyeria
CR 10 DENCO Development & DENCO Greece Month 1 Month 36
Engineering Consultants Ltd
CR 11 Dipartimento della Protezione Civile DPC Italy Month 1 Month 36
12
CR 13 Ente Nuove Tecnologie, lEnergia e ENEA Italy Month 1 Month 36
lAmbiente
CR 14 Faculdade de Engenharia da FEUP Portugal Month 1 Month 36
Universidade do Porto
CR 15 Geodynamique et Structure, France GDS France Month 1 Month 36
CR 16 Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e INGV Italy Month 1 Month 36
Vulcanologia
CR 17 Institut National Polytechnique de INPG France Month 1 Month 36
Grenoble
CR 18 INSA-LYON, France INSAL France Month 1 Month 36
CR 19 Instituto Superior Tcnico IST Portugal Month 1 Month 36
CR 20 Istanbul Technical University ITU Turkey Month 1 Month 36
CR 21 Joint Research Centre JRC EU Month 1 Month 36
CR 22 Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake KOERI Turkey Month 1 Month 36
Research Institute
CR 23 Laboratrio Nacional de Engenharia LNEC Portugal Month 1 Month 36
Civil
CR 24 Maurer Soehne GmbH & Co. KG MAURER Germany Month 1 Month 36
CR 25 Middle East Technical University METU Turkey Month 1 Month 36
CR 26 Munich Reinsurance Company MUNICHRE Germany Month 1 Month 36
CR 27 Necso Entrecanales Cubiertas SA NECSO Spain Month 1 Month 36
CR 28 Norwegian Geotechnical Institute NGI Norway Month 1 Month 36
CR 29 National Technical University of NTUA Greece Month 1 Month 36
Athens
Project overview 5
Role* Nr. Name Short name Country Date enter Date exit
project project
CR 30 Rheinisch-Westflische Technische RWTH Germany Month 1 Month 36
Hochschule Aachen
CR 31 Stamatopoulos and Associates Co. SAA Greece Month 1 Month 36
Ltd
CR 32 Studio Geotecnico Italiano Srl SGI-MI Italy Month 1 Month 36
CR 33 Swedish Geotechnical Institute SGI-SW Sweden Month 1 Month 36
CR 34 STAP SA STAP Portugal Month 1 Month 36
CR 35 University of Bristol UBRIS UK Month 1 Month 36
CR 36 University of Cambridge UCAM UK Month 1 Month 36
CR 37 Universite de Liege ULIEGE Belgium Month 1 Month 36
CR 38 University of Ljubljana ULJ Slovenia Month 1 Month 36
CR 39 University of Naples Federico II UNAP Italy Month 1 Month 36
CR 40 University of Newcastle upon Tyne UNEW UK Month 1 Month 36
CR 41 Universit degli Studi di Milano UNIMIB Italy Month 1 Month 36
Bicocca
CR 42 University of Patras UPAT Greece Month 1 Month 36
CR 43 Universidad Politcnica de Madrid UPM Spain Month 1 Month 36
CR 44 Universit di Roma "La Sapienza UROMA Italy Month 1 Month 36
CR 45 University of Surrey USUR UK Month 1 Month 36
CR 46 VCE Holding GmbH VCE Austria Month 1 Month 36
CR 47 VINCI Construction Grands Projets VCGP France Month 1 Month 36
*CO = Coordinator
CR = Contractor
Point (i) of the call is fully addressed by the proposals S&T objectives 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8,
which feature the development of innovative earthquake-resistant design and assessment
6 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
methods for structures and landslide-prone slopes, together with the development of
methods and techniques for reduction of vulnerability of buildings, infrastructures and
geotechnical structures.
Point (ii) of the call is integrally tackled by the proposals S&T objectives 6, 8 and 10,
where both technical as well as economical aspects of a realm of conventional and state-
of-the-art vulnerability reduction techniques are thoroughly scrutinised and evaluated, and
integrated within pre-disaster planning and mitigation policies at both local and regional
level.
Point (iii) of the call is explicitly included in the proposals S&T objectives 1, 4 and 6,
where innovative approaches for prediction of landslide triggering mechanisms and
resulting movements are considered, together with the development of techniques to
eliminate or at least minimise the occurrence of such slides.
Point (iv) of the call is covered by the proposals S&T objectives 1 and 2, which involve
the assemblage and employment in a harmonised and concerted manner of landslide- and
earthquake-related data and knowledge (e.g. building stock characteristics, landslide
threshold values, variability parameters, hazard and vulnerability distribution, etc.).
Point (v) of the call is wholly comprised in the proposals S&T objectives 9 and 10 that
explicitly deal with disaster scenario prediction and loss modelling due to landslides and
earthquakes and with the development of pre-disaster planning and mitigation policies for
dissemination to user communities and responsible entities, through the means described
in Section 2 below, where envisaged disseminations activities are described.
If the general aims of the Integrated Project FP6 instrument are considered, the following
non-thematic objectives can be identified:
radical innovation in long term
new applicable knowledge
integration of different subject/activity areas
clear and quantified deliverables
from basic research to dissemination and training
involvement of governments, contractors, industry, universities, research institutions
Again, the LESSLOSS IP endeavour fully addresses all such objectives since, as described
in Section 1 above, it features (i) an integrated multi-disciplinary approach to earthquake
and landslide risk mitigation, (ii) the development of innovative methods and approaches
to design and assessment of structures and earth slopes for both short-term application
(e.g. employment of loss assessment results in urban planning policies) and long-term
implementation (e.g. introduction of displacement-based approaches in design
regulations), (iii) a comprehensive set of deliverables (e.g. technical reports, open
databases, etc.) listed in Section 4, (iv) thorough dissemination and implementation
Project overview 7
activities plan (described below) and (v) direct involvement as participants in the
LESSLOSS project of governmental organisations, contractors, industry partners (in the
form of both large corporation and small medium enterprises), higher education and
research institutions, as described in Section 5, where it is noted that a third of the
participants in the project are in fact industry partners, the majority of which in the form
of SMEs.
Finally, reference should also be made to the EU workshop Mitigation of Seismic Risk
Support to Recently Affected Countries (http://elsa.jrc.it/workshop2000) held in
Belgirate (Italy) on 27-28 November 2000, in the aftermath of the earthquakes that struck
Turkey and Greece in 1999. This event was jointly organized by the Joint Research
Centre, DG-Environment and Civil Protection Unit with collaboration from DG
Research, DG Enterprise, the European Consortium of Earthquake Engineering
Research Infrastructures and several European Associations, institutions and experts.
Following interventions by MEPs, Commissioners, National Authorities representatives
and academic, research and industry experts, the following five-point priority list for
European seismic risk mitigation was drawn:
1. To involve all the relevant European institutions and organisations;
2. Protecting citizens of the expanded and densely populated Europe from earthquake
risk;
3. Address identified areas of research and development in a multi-disciplinary
environment integrating science, engineering management and social-economic
aspects;
4. To coordinate national earthquake risk management bodies and to advise on the
balance between research, education, regulation and civil protection;
5. To increase the international cooperation with USA and Japan.
Clearly, the LESSLOSS Integrated Project responds to all the above requirements, as
follows:
It acts as a facilitator and a nucleus for the involvement of all relevant European
institutions and organisations, since it includes universities, research laboratories,
consulting/construction firms, governmental organisations and is in contact with a
number of regulatory authorities and civil protection agencies. It thus fulfils
substantially requirement 1 above;
Provides holistic solutions and comparison of cost-benefit for various seismic risk
mitigation measures, hence it contributes significantly to the protection of the
expanded and densely populated Europe. This responds to the second requirement in
a major manner;
Deals with the most immediate research needs identified in the EU workshop report,
in a multi-disciplinary environment that includes scientists, engineers, urban planners,
information technologists, management consultants and economists. Requirement 3
above is therefore addressed;
8 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
As part of its dissemination plans, the LESSLOSS set-up aims at advising national
seismic risk management organisations and to draw guidelines for the optimum
balance between research, education, regulation and civil protection. As such, the
network makes a contribution towards the fourth requirement stated above;
The project includes formal links with leading US and Japanese institutions (e.g. Mid-
America Earthquake Centre, Tokyo Institute of Technology) and is therefore uniquely
suited to progress the fifth objective defined by the EU workshop.
Indeed, and considering first the case of landslides, the last decades have witnessed an
extensive number of independent research programmes that have focused on prediction
of the probability, occurrence, location and size of ground instabilities. However, and
independently of the degree of success of such efforts, present experience clearly shows
that a strategy combining the identification of the predisposition and natural or human
triggering factors, suitable conceptual models with sound theoretical background and the
identification of relevant physical input properties and calibration requirements is
determinant for a better comprehension and for actual risk management.
This can be achieved only by adopting a fully integrated scientific approach, combining
field monitoring theoretical research, data collection and organization in database from
field observations, geophysical and geotechnical investigations, laboratory
experimentation, physical model testing, etc., as well as processing techniques and
numerical simulations and use of advanced GIS techniques for mapping and analysing the
data. The LESSLOSS project, therefore, sets the ideal framework for significant
advancement to be achieved in the field of landslide disaster management, due to its
inherent and underlying integrated multi-disciplinary approach to problem solving.
Considering instead the case of seismic safety assessment of urban areas and
infrastructures, it is equally clear that this constitutes also a multi-faceted problem whose
main aspects start from that of the availability of an inventory of the built environment
and of the industrial apparatus with its facilities and its complex system of interactions. It
then follows the task of assessing the performance of individual components (buildings,
bridges, dams, industrial and power plants, etc.) when subjected to seismic actions and,
based on this, to evaluate the state of physical and functional damage of the whole
system.
Project overview 9
For as essential as the fragility functions for individual structures are, they nevertheless
constitute only the building blocks for a higher level analysis, i.e. one that examines the
consequence of a seismic event on the whole environment. Even setting apart the long-
term socio-economic aspects, the analysis of the interaction between the individual
components in an infrastructure and, hence, its loss of functionality due to the various
levels of damage of its components, is a subject still in need of sustained qualified
research efforts.
The conclusive aspect of the assessment problem consists in the identification of the
elements whose influence is critical in the functioning of the considered system and in the
quantification of the enhancement of their performance necessary to achieve a target level
of protection. Established formal methodologies to solve the problem of optimal
allocation of resources among critical elements are still missing, and further research is
also needed to develop effective and economic upgrading techniques and strategies.
Indeed, the concepts for displacement-based seismic design of new structures seem to
have now matured to the point that their implementation in the intermediate term within
codified seismic design seems feasible. Certain gaps need to be filled, though, before such
an implementation. Some of these gaps are common with nonlinear analysis, static or
dynamic, as noted above. More specific to DBD is the need for extension, elaboration
10 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Current seismic design codes for new buildings, including the prEN (2003) version of
Eurocode 8 do not treat the problem of irregularity and torsional response sufficiently.
The relevant clauses are based on elastic considerations of simple models or are totally
empirical. Moreover, some codes, especially in the American ones (IBC, NEHRP 2000,
SEAOC Blue book), confuse the problem of torsional response of irregular structures by
assuming independence between strength and stiffness of structural elements and using
member displacement ductility factors as the underlying criterion for member design. A
DBD approach takes realistically into account the coupling between member strength
and stiffness (by using a yield deformation that depends on dimensions of the member
and not its strength) and places the emphasis on absolute member deformations as the
criterion. So, it is intrinsically better suited than forced-based approaches to tackle the
problem of torsion of irregular structures. The primary question to be resolved, then, is
the calculation of member inelastic displacement demands in 3D in the presence of
torsion, in the framework of DBD (meaning that such calculation will have to take place
before members are dimensioned and detailed, rendering the use of nonlinear models
difficult).
In summary, the LESSLOSS project addresses natural disasters, risk and impact
assessment, natural hazard monitoring, mapping and management strategies, improved
disaster preparedness and mitigation, development of advanced methods for risk
assessment, methods of appraising environmental quality and relevant pre-normative
research, all of which are within the scope of the thematic area 1.1.6.3 - Global Change
and Ecosystems. In addition, the LESSLOSS project (i) integrates European research and
development in all aspects affecting societal response to earthquake and landslide risk and
(ii) enriches this integration by profiting from the experience in earthquake risk
assessment and mitigation from other countries, especially the USA and Japan, thus
leading to an integrated risk management framework that addresses the seismic and
landslide risk to which European society is subjected. Finally, the LESSLOSS endeavour
Project overview 11
provides the ideal framework for the integration, within an integrated seismic risk and
losses mitigation system, of the significant investment, in funding and organisation effort,
made by the EC throughout the lifetime of the 3rd, 4th and 5th Framework Programmes,
to foster the development of regional and pan-European solutions to the seismic loss
assessment and mitigation equation.
It is thus clear that the consequences of these two types of natural disasters, earthquakes
and landslides, affect vulnerable communities, causing severe disruption to the whole
gamut of complex societal systems. Since the effect is comprehensive in nature,
mitigation, response and recovery considerations should also be holistic and integrated.
Hence, the rationale for the LESSLOSS integrated project in earthquake and landslide
risk mitigation was that stepping up to the challenge of reducing earthquake
consequences required an integration of the expertise of social scientists, economists,
12 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
In addition to direct financial losses, business interruption has emerged lately as a major
concern to industry. This is the effect of largely non-structural damage causing business
closure, which in turn leads to financial disruption and hardship. Another angle on this
effect is the loss of market share, which results from interruption to production in
industrial facilities and difficulties in securing the share of the market, which the affected
business previously held. Thus, the occurrence of earthquakes and landslides in Europe
may in some cases lead to the loss of share, to the benefit of non-European competitors,
of a given industry sector that might have been heavily disrupted by the event.
Oppositely, mitigating earthquake and landslide effects, minimises also the likelihood of
such negative effects on industry and commercial activities, thus effectively reinforcing
competitiveness of European industry within the world market.
Furthermore, the project features also a centralised effort, which will be developed and
applied within the framework of the EU-MEDIN initiative of the EC, to disseminate and
exploit to the full the results achieved through the project. Such effort is described in
great detail in Section 2.5, followed by an equally in depth depiction of the plans for
interacting with the public as whole and raising its awareness to the work and results of
the LESSLOSS project (see Section 2.5.9)
Interaction and accounting of other national and international activities is fully predicted
and envisaged within the framework of the LESSLOSS project. As described in Section
2, the assembled consortium includes the vast majority, if not the entirety, of leading
academic and research institutions in the field of landslides and earthquake risk
mitigation. Naturally, such leading institutions have been involved, throughout the years,
in a large number of nationally-funded or EC-supported projects (e.g. PREC8, ICONS,
SAFERR, ECOEST, ECOLEADER, and many others), where they have played roles of
coordinators or core participants, as described in Section 2. The knowledge acquired in all
those projects is to be fully incorporated in the LESSLOSS endeavour, where exchange
of results and information with currently running national EC projects is also envisaged,
as explicitly specified in Section 5.
With regards to the latter point, i.e. the timely character of the scientific objectives of
LESSLOSS, it is perhaps noteworthy that the current research plan of the MAE Center,
one of the worlds leading research institution in the field of earthquake engineering, aims
exactly at streamlining a series of research thrust areas, both generic and specific in
character, that will produce the necessary systems integration, enabling technologies and
advanced knowledge needed to reach its vision of creating innovative solutions for
earthquake hazard mitigation. Clearly, this is in line with the premises for the setting up of
the LESSLOSS initiative, both from a conceptual general viewpoint but also in terms of
areas of activity. As a result, opportunities for cooperation abound.
14 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
In summary, it is believed that the impact of the LESSLOSS project in reshaping the way
earthquake and landslide risk mitigation research is carried out in Europe will be
significant, particularly in what concerns the creation of the bridges between different
fields of knowledge and the coordinated remote use of facilities, resources and data, in
view of the technology transfer to the stakeholders for effective risk reduction. A
European research area able to compete, in particular, with US and Japanese centres in all
fields related to landslide and earthquake risk mitigation will result and may progressively
lead to the creation of permanent, geographically distributed, centres, as successfully
implemented in the US and Japan. Furthermore, the assembled research team, with its
history of fruitful cooperation, multi-disciplinary and highly qualified personnel, is poised
to act as the focal point for the integration and creation of tangible European added value
through the synthesis of a wide range of recent developments.
The partnership of the LESSLOSS IP is ideal for the dissemination of the project results
to the bodies above, as it overlaps with them; the coordinator of the Sub-project
Displacement-based Design of the IP, Prof. Fardis, is Chairman of CEN/TC250/SC8
for the period 1999-2005 and ex-officio member of the Project Team responsible for the
conversion to EN1998-3. The scientific responsible for LNEC in LESSLOSS, Dr.
Carvalho, is the permanent Technical Secretary of CEN/TC250/SC8. Several
LESSLOSS project participants integrate Project Teams or are National representatives in
the CEN Technical Committees (e.g. the scientific responsible for ULJ in this project,
Prof. Fajfar, is the representative of Slovenia in CEN/TC250/SC8).
The Joint Research Centre Research (JRC) established a very close and direct co-
operation with DG ENTERPRISE and is committed to carry out research in support of
standardisation in construction and construction products in the framework of its
institutional Multi Annual Work Programme. Dr. A. Pinto is the JRC representative at the
Eurocodes National Correspondent Group set-up by DG ENTERPRISE to facilitate
approval of the Eurocodes as European Norms (EN). The Commission (DG
ENTERPRISE) puts priority on the approval of the Eurocodes and on the need for a
suitable maintenance/revision scheme, which should allow to incorporate innovation in
the codes and to solve any issues resulting from their practical application.
Due to the unique liaison between the project partners and the process of the conversion
to European Norms (EN) and the strong involvement in most of the standardization
Project overview 15
bodies guaranties full dissemination and integration of the outcome of the project
relevant to the European standards. Furthermore, the IP includes participants from
almost all EU countries and Candidate Countries, who integrate the Eurocode 8 -
National Annexes Committees. The outcome of LESSLOSS relevant to standardization
will be also conveyed to these Committees. In addition to this participation and direct
contact in/with European and National standardisation bodies and Authorities,
LESSLOSS intends to produce adequate technical information relevant for codes and
standards. A typical example of those is part the EU-LESSLOSS Reports, described in
Section B.4.1, which will constitute a sort of pre-normative documents.
As described above, the rationale and mission statements of the LESSLOSS project call
for an integrated, multi-disciplinary, holistic and articulated framework for dealing with
earthquake and landslide risk issues affecting the growing, complex and densely
populated Europe, capable of providing the platform for fulfilling the aims of protecting
European citizens and the community at large from the perils of these natural disasters.
Taking stock of the above, the S&T implementation plan can be readily obtained through
the merging and cross-cutting of each of the three areas of research with the required
four research activity types, leading to the implementation framework schematically
depicted Fig. 1, where the projects research components are identified. The latter
constitute in fact the underlying working structure of the LESSLOSS project.
The correlation between the S&T research components identified in the implementation
plan and the ten S&T objectives of the LESSLOSS project, identified in Section 1.2, is
depicted in Fig. 2 below, where it is observed that the devised S&T implementation plan
does indeed enable the project to achieve its objectives. Recalling that the latter have been
proved to wholly fulfil the prerequisites of the call for proposals, it results thus equally
verified that the implementation plan constitutes an adequate response to the
requirements set by the Commission.
The manner in which each of these research components are interconnected amongst
themselves to form and integrated and coherent project is schematically shown in Fig. 3.
This level of interconnectivity has been devised in such a way so as to keep an
18 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Research activity 4 Research component 1.4 Research component 2.4a Research component 2.4b
Disaster scenarios Landslide disaster Earthquake disaster Earthquake disaster
predictions and loss scenarios predictions scenarios predictions and scenarios predictions and
modelling and loss modelling loss modelling for urban loss modelling for
. areas . infrastructures
appropriate balance between the need to optimise the quality of research output (which
grows in proportion to the degree in which different research activities are connected)
and the requirement to avoid the creation of inter-dependencies so strong that the whole
research program could be at risk in case one given research component would for any
reason fail to meet its envisaged objectives.
The latter effectively constitutes a contingency plan since it ensures that, that in the
extremely unlikely event of failure of a component delivery, the overall research
programme and project objectives are not placed in jeopardy. It is noted, however, that,
as described in Section 12, all participants in LESSLOSS feature unblemished track
records in National and European research projects, for which reason it is not foreseen
that there will be any difficulties in ensuring compliance to the delivery targets.
Furthermore, the management and coordination structure of the project, described in
Section 7, has been devised in such a way that any eventual counterproductive deviations
from the envisaged work plan, will be flagged at an earlier stage, in time for corrective
measures to be adopted, where and if needed.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 19
Sub-Project 2.1
Sub-Project 1.1 In-situ assessment, monitoring and typification
Landslide monitoring and
warning system
Sub-Project 2.2a
Development and manufacturing of energy
dissipation devices and seismic isolators
Sub-Project 1.2
Landslide zonation,
Sub-Project 2.2b
hazard and vulnerability
Techniques and methods for vulnerability reduction
assessment
Sub-Project 2.3a
Sub-Project 1.3
Displacement-based design methodologies
Innovative approaches
for landslide assessment
Sub-Project 2.3b
Probabilistic risk assessment: methods and
applications
In what follows, the contribution of each of the LESSLOSS Sub-Projects (i.e. research
components) to its S&T research programme is described. It is perhaps worth noting that
whilst the intervention/contribution of each project participant are described on a
subproject-by-subproject basis, the exploitation of results and plan for disseminating of
knowledge beyond the consortium are given in the subsequent section (2.5), and thus
apply to the entirety of sub-projects and related research/innovation activities.
Sub-Projects RTD activities are carried out in blocks of work, identified as Tasks and/or
Sub-Tasks, which therefore come fully described in what follows. In addition, the
partner(s) responsible for carrying out each of these tasks/sub-tasks is also identified in
what follows. Taking into account that, as shown above, these Sub-Project activities are
clearly linked to the progress of the project as whole, it results evident that by identifying
the direct involvement and contribution of each participant to such activities, then their
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 21
relevance and contribution to the project as whole becomes also readily available, and
their participation in the project thus justified.
Nevertheless, LIDAR is still quite expensive and its use can be prohibitive for small
administrations. The aim of the project is also to investigate the cost-benefit issues
regarding the use of LIDAR technology for landslide zonation and mapping. The same is
true for other monitoring instrumentation and for GPS stations in particular.
22 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Accessibility of
data integration
Data
ALERT THRESHOLDS
Failure time,
Monitoring Instrumentation:
probability, etc.
Effects of:
type and/or sequence
of perturbations
Climatic changes,
glaciation/deglaciation,
permafrost thawing,
etc.
The objectives of this Sub-Project are thus to (i) apply advanced landslide zonation
methods to focus areas in selected landslide prone regions in Europe and develop and
implement new models of landslide mapping, (ii) evaluate the technical and economic
efficiency of conventional and innovative stabilization methods by numerical modelling
of well-documented slides and (iii) develop tools for pre-disaster planning and mitigation
policies. The Sub-Project is coordinated by NGI and features also the participation of
GDS, SAA, SGI-SW, UNEW and UNIMIB, as described in the Table below:
24 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
A geodatabase containing data for a 4000 km2 highly populated mountainous region
(focus area in Italy) will be produced. Spatial frequency, typology and size of the mapped
landslides will be analysed through statistical techniques to produce landslide hazard
maps. The adopted technique will use half basins as terrain units to be successively
classified in different levels of hazard probability. Different future scenarios could be
simulated by changing areal distribution of parameters such as land use and vegetation
cover.
The comparison of the produced inventory maps will allow evaluating the possible
increase in the level of information and especially the reduction of mapping and
subjective errors. The final inventory map will be embedded in a geodatabase to be
integrated with existing in-situ monitoring data to create a tool to suggest the best
planning and mitigation approaches to local and regional technical and non-technical
administrators.
The deliverable for this work is a quantitative, probability-based landslide hazard zonation
technique. The demarcation line between the 'safe', 'potentially unsafe' and 'unsafe' areas
will be based on the annual probability of being exposed to a landslide. The preceding
probabilistic zonation technique will be tested and validated in two regions in Scandinavia
and re-calibrated if necessary. In addition, at one of the sites, the results will be
compared with those of a deterministic hazard zoniting method. The hazard zonation
procedure will also form the basis for making landslide risk maps by combining the
hazard maps with vulnerability of exposed population/facilities/infrastructure, and the
associated costs.
In addition to state-of-art methods, this work package will investigate the effectiveness of
an innovative stabilisation method consisting of driving stiff inclusions near the toe of
slope. The use of stiff inclusions has recently been implemented to improve the
earthquake behaviour of the foundations of a large bridge. These inclusions will not only
increase the average soil shear resistance due to their high shear and bending capacities,
but will also nail the slope by pushing the potential failure surfaces towards layers of
higher strengths. The method will be applied to actual slopes having suffered severe
damages during past earthquakes. The new methodology will be validated against more
sophisticated calculation tools and the potential effectiveness of the improvement
technique will be assessed.
The work will consist of collecting datasets and climate scenarios for the focus areas in
the central Spanish Pyrenees and the Italian preAlps. The climate scenarios will be refined
and rainfall events of different return periods (allowing for duration and intensity) will be
generated for both current and possible future climatic conditions. The model will be run
to give debris flow incidence and sediment yield for the different events. The relationship
between rainfall return period and the debris flow incidence, spatial distribution and
sediment yield will then be quantified, for example in rainfall duration-intensity
thresholds for different levels of debris flow. The results, as representative descriptions of
the focus basin regions, will be discussed with the end-users as the basis for improved
pre-disaster planning and mitigation policies. The above landslide model can predictively
examine the occurrence of shallow landslides and debris flows on a spatially distributed
basis at the scale of a river basin (up to 500 km2 as opposed to most other landslide
models, which typically are limited to scales of a few square kilometres).
It is thus the objective of this sub-project to make an attempt to quantify the influence of
the parameters that govern the mechanisms of landslides, to assess the consequences in
terms of induced displacements and effects on the built environment. Both aspects
related to the driving forces (pore pressure changes due to rain falls, temperature changes
due to glaciation, rainfall earthquake induced forces taking into account the topographic
amplification, the forward directivity and fling effects) and related to the soil constitutive
behaviour (rigid plastic, viscous-rigid plastic (Bingham model) and elasto-plastic) will be
examined. Various modelling techniques will be adopted: rigid block models, Lagrangian
finite element models, arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian finite element models. Rate effects
on the behaviour of soils are also of paramount importance and will be experimentally
investigated.
Some researchers assume that the liquefied soil behaves as a viscous fluid, others model
the soil behaviour as a rigid plastic material with a residual shear strength and some
others invoke the formation of a water film at the sliding surface to explain the large
observed movements. Each of these assumptions will be reviewed and other new ones
(viscous fluid with a threshold strength - Bingham model) will be investigated. The
objective will be to develop a consensus, if possible, on the most appropriate constitutive
modelling of soil during the progress of a landslide.
In general, models for analysing slope stability, rockslides and debris flows, run-out
distance, impact forces and tsunamis need to be improved or developed. With the
28 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
this subtask is directly related and follows Sub-project 1.3 and especially Tasks 1.3.2, 1.3.3
and 1.3.4. Moreover, it is in direct relation with Sub-project 1.2 through the geodatabase
and zonation mapping while it is also linked with Task 1.2.3 (mitigation methods). The
existing and improved numerical tools will be implemented in a meshfree numerical
framework with possible coupling with the finite element method. It will be improved to
account for the following aspects:
Various initial, boundary and loading or triggering (static/dynamic) conditions.
Various hydraulic and draining conditions for geomaterials (totally or partially
saturated assumptions, undrained analysis).
Multiphase interactions into soil considered as a continuous porous medium.
Small or finite transformation assumptions, depending on the motion phases to be
modelled (triggering, failure and/or propagation of soil mass).
Non linear constitutive models for geomaterials involved in the sliding process,
including strain hardening/softening behaviour, in order to predict irrecoverable
deformation and in case of earthquake-triggered landslides, to predict shear-strength
loss, liquefaction and lateral spreads, post-liquefaction behaviour.
Water accumulation occurring at the interface between geomaterials with high
permeability contrast.
2D/3D kinematics.
Calibration of modelling tools. The reliability of existing analytical models needs to be verified
and quantified. The best approach to do this is to make predictions with the models, and
to verify these with model tests or prototype measurements. The analytical and
experimental data should, as far as possible, be confirmed with observations in-situ. The
main research efforts will be devoted to:
Prioritise verifications and calibrations that need to be done.
Select case studies that best will validate predicted ground deformation with back-
analyses of events from the databases (link with Sub-project 1.3, Task. 1.3.1)
Design model tests.
Calibrate predicted slope movements with model test results and back-analyses of
events from the landslide database available in different countries. Predictive
simulations of ground deformation for recent large sliding events (gravitational solid
motions) where different predisposition and triggering factors (earthquakes, heavy
rainfalls etc) are involved. Comparison of predicted results with available data
(databases, field observations/monitoring, back-analyses).
Review experience elsewhere, e.g. Hong Kong, Japan, Canada, Latin America; form
international alliances for sharing of data, correlations and experience.
Define priorities for location of monitoring stations, select parameters to be
monitored, develop monitoring programmes and, through related research
32 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Task 1.4.2: Unified global hazard and risk assessment for landslides under static
and seismic conditions
The risk due to landslide can only be evaluated with a good understanding of the geology,
material behaviour, physical mechanisms and the computational models used to make the
predictions. Experience shows that getting sufficiently reliable parameters is one of the
main challenges in risk analysis. Slide hazard and risk mapping will be carried out to
evaluate risk level. Procedures for mapping slide hazard and risk need to be developed,
including selection of criteria for setting priorities. Hence, this important task is fully related
to all previous and it is the final synthesis of all previously described Sub-projects. Major
research tasks include:
Develop global risk analysis approaches integrating deterministic or probabilistic
modelling of ground deformation for static and dynamic (seismic) triggering forces.
Select a set of criteria for slide hazard and risk mapping, considering sliding potential
and consequence of sliding for different triggers and types of slides.
Quantify deformations observed in sliding events for different geological settings and
different triggers.
Establish parameter uncertainty on basis of statistical data and engineering judgement.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 33
Quantify safety and risk level for specific slopes and various slide types.
Compare with other low-, medium- and high-risk situations and draw conclusions on
risk level; compare with international results and requirements.
The final output of this task is the development of a unified global hazard and risk
assessment methodology for landslides.
Task 1.4.4: Early warning systems to calibrate loss models and evaluate losses
Data need to be collected to develop methods to calibrate the developed loss
(consequence) models and predictions of ground deformations and risk evaluations, thus
reducing the risk due to landslides. To reduce risk, systems need to be developed to
provide means to monitor long term slide evolution and to forewarn of an impending
hazard. The reliability of the loss models can be verified and quantified only through
predictions with the models and where possible comparisons with landslides, hopefully
new ones (prototype measurements). The main research tasks include:
Select criteria for parameters to be monitored, optimum location and threshold values
for different ground conditions.
Develop equipment and systems; plan monitoring programmes for high-risk areas.
Develop early warning systems, including computer-aided decision-making tools.
Prioritise verifications and calibrations that need to be done, and design verification
programme.
Calibrate predicted losses (consequences) with model test results and back-analyses of
events from landslide databases.
The following set of objectives, directly related with dynamic in-situ measurements and
instrumentation, will be pursued:
1) Evaluation of all concepts using in-situ measurements, installed instrumentation and
monitoring as tools for risk mitigation
2) Dynamic in-situ testing can be used in order to assess dynamic parameters of existing
structures. Then, FE models can be fitted to the test results. But it must be
emphasized, that models elaborated in the above way, have to be considered as linear
starting points, which reflect the first vibrational phase during an earthquake quite
well. In a further step the expert has to realize the areas where nonlinear behaviour
will occur. This areas have to be considered adequately in the final model and even in
the design of a retrofit resulting from the calculations. The benefit obtainable by the
above strategy has to be discussed from several points of view. Within an Austrian
project, masonry buildings were excited by a reaction mass exciter. The reaction force
was not applied in the classical way but using a rod chain, which was put between
building an reaction mass under 45. The force of excitation was 20 kN, the force
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 35
transducer is integrated into the chain. The sinusoidal excitation force was swept in
the range 0 10 Hz. The response of the building was measured at each storey level in
several points. For each measurement point a transfer-function is obtained, which is
the optimum basis for an experimental modal analysis.
3) Let us hope, that in future it becomes state of the art to start the assessment of the
earthquake resistance of important existing structures/ lifeline structures
(Importance class I and certain of class II in prEN 1998-1) by dynamic in-situ testing.
Further, it would be very helpful to put the results (dynamic properties) of some
selected structures into a database. If forced vibration is used, besides of
eigenfrequencies, mode-shapes and damping ratios also dynamic stiffnessess can be
elaborated. The results obtained for selected structures are then benchmarks, which
mean a basis for interpolation for similar structures.
4) In the future there must be a shift from pure ductility concepts to the use of
innovative devices and concepts for energy dissipation. If such concepts are used
for retrofit, there will be frequently the intrinsic need to know the dynamic properties
of the structure before the measure is designed.
5) The dynamic properties of the structure must be also known in the case, that an
installed instrumentation is planned.
6) There is also the question of a quick assessment of the safety and serviceability/
operability of safety relevant structures and lifeline structures immediately after an
earthquake. Continuous monitoring systems (installed systems) providing information
about changed modal parameters as a consequence of damage could be used to trigger
warnings and alarm. The measurement system must be a tailored one, which works
together with an expert system. Warning- and alarm levels have to be elaborated in
advance by sensitivity studies carried out with a structural model fitted to reality
(using test results). Such expert systems have also to consider the influence of
changing environmental conditions, especially temperature. Alternative to an installed
monitoring system, the change of modal parameters could be assessed after the
earthquake via further in-situ tests.
A second set objectives, concerning the use of GIS and other IT technologies to store
and visualize all assessed information (from measurements and many different other
sources (e.g. from National inventories) in order to provide quick and powerful tools for
seismicriskmitigation-decision making has also been identified:
1) The are several good tools available (e.g. software SEISMOCARE; project ENV4-
CT97-0588). But rules and guidelines for the users (e.g. authorities) of these systems
must be prepared. The first question is a clear definition of the foreseen goals (e.g. use
in the phase of seismic upgrading or use for a proper and quick response after an
earthquake). Next, it must be defined under which circumstances such systems have
to be implemented (e.g. seismic hazard, population density, etc. at the site) and further
what degree of sophistication is necessary for the system. In less important
36 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
On the whole, Sub-project 2.1 will try to elaborate rules and guidelines for
implementation and use of in-situ measurements, instrumentation, databases and GIS in
order to support Seismic Risk Mitigation. Further development of the methods will take
place in already planned projects (e.g. priority 3: IP EMOI Sub project V2: Re
Evaluation of Civil Structures for Natural Hazards (RECS)) or in future STREPs.
Task 2.1.1: Rules and guidelines for the implementation and use of in-situ
assessment methods, installed instrumentation, databases and GIS
implementation; development of tools
In-situ assessment methods comprise general methods and methods based on
measurements, especially dynamic in-situ testing. The rules and guidelines will cover:
pre-earthquake assessment
structural inspection after earthquakes
permanent monitoring (installed systems)
Work plan: The focus of this task will be both on the collection and evaluation of results
obtained so far in other projects (literature review, elaboration of a SOA report) but also
on the development of innovative concepts. Feasibility studies and discussions of
benefits, which could be obtained by additional measures, will be carried out. A
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 37
discussion of existing codes like FEMA 310 and the draft of prEN 1998-3 will be also
included into Deliverable 2.1.1a.
The focus will be on dynamic methods. Dynamic in-situ testing can be used in order to
assess dynamic parameters of existing structures. Criteria for the application of the
appropriate excitation (ambient or forced excitation) will be given in order to keep the
expense of the experiments as low as possible. Then, FE models are fitted to the test
results. But it must be emphasized, that these models have to be considered as linear
starting points, which reflect the first vibrational phase during an earthquake quite well.
In a further step the expert has to realize the structural locations where nonlinear
behaviour will occur. These areas have to be considered adequately in the final model
and even in the design of a retrofit resulting from the calculations. The benefit obtainable
by the above strategy has to be discussed from several points of view. For RC- and steel
structural elements the nonlinear behaviour can be predicted with good precision, if the
complete design documentation is available, which is frequently not the case. With load
bearing masonry elements the situation is much more complicated. Hence it will be also
important to look for other non destructive testing - methods which can be used to
assess material parameters (especially the probable ultimate capacity of materials). But
also sound engineering judgement will always play an important role. Some
demonstrative examples will be given in the SOA report.
One part of D2.1.1a will be the summary of the most important findings (manual), which
is the basis for Task 2.1.5 Layout for an European code on the in-situ assessment of earthquake
resistance of existing structures.
Work Plan: The sub-task will start with a specification of assessment - importance
categories for industrial facilities. The importance will depend on the potential impact
on population and environment. Rules will be specified for the consideration of failure
paths affecting the integrity of safety relevant structural components. This will lead to
integration of safety measures into the design philosophy and recommendations of
general design criteria for non-collapse and damage limitation requirements.
Case studies on selected examples of existing industrial structures (mainly steel- and
composite structures; RWTH is a specialist for steel) will be carried out. The structures
will be modeled and the seismic response calculated. The available seismic resistance will
be determined, considering the non-linear behaviour. Potential weak points will be
identified and failure modes estimated. Recommendations for strengthening measures
will be given and the feasibility of the proposed measures will be evaluated.
In addition partner RWTH will work on procedures for the evaluation of seismic
resistance of existing structures and facilities. The seismic resistance will be also estimated
by comparison to the design for wind loads. This question is very interesting for large
parts of Europe, which are zones of moderate seismicity. Further, former material related
requirements will be compared with current requirements. The most important findings
concerning the assessment methods will be also introduced into the assessment manual
(D2.1.1a).
Background: Monitoring data are usually identified from time series of the structural
response parameters that are furnished by instrumentation installed on the structure,
which can be of either static or dynamic type. The acquired quantities are typically
displacements, rotations, accelerations, velocities and settlements. The acquisition and
elaboration of the quantities that are furnished by the installed instrumentation allow
setting up a structural behaviour model that is considered as regular; the periodic
elaboration of the acquired measurements and the comparison with the model allow to
point out indicators of potential structural damages. The availability of periodic surveys
of the cause quantities allows moreover setting up statistical models of the structural
behaviour, where the structural response is statistically correlated to the trend of the
cause quantities; these models allow a control in time of the structural response by
pointing out meanwhile the weight of the cause quantities.
There is also the question of a quick assessment of the safety and serviceability/
operability of safety relevant structures and lifeline structures immediately after an
earthquake. Continuous monitoring systems (installed systems) providing information
about changed modal parameters as a consequence of damage could be used to trigger
warnings and alarm. The measurement system must be a tailored one, which works
together with an expert system. Warning- and alarm levels have to be elaborated in
advance by sensitivity studies carried out with a structural model fitted to reality (using
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 39
test results). Such expert systems have also to consider the influence of changing
environmental conditions, especially temperature.
Work plan: The task work will start with a literature review and a SOA report on (the
few) existing monitoring systems. A feasibility study will be carried out, for which types
of safety relevant structures and lifeline structures such continuous monitoring systems
could be beneficial. The central question is always, which damages are expected and how
strong they will influence measurable parameters. Focus will be again on the
measurement of dynamic parameters. But also the measurement of the position in
space (optical methods, GPS, etc.) and stress measurements provided at important load
bearing elements will be discussed.
One part of D2.1.1c will be the summary of the most important findings, which is also
very important for Task 2.1.5 Layout for an European code on the in-situ assessment of earthquake
resistance of existing structures.
Work program: There are several good tools available (e.g. software SEISMOCARE;
project ENV4-CT97-0588). In this task rules and guidelines for the users (e.g. authorities)
of these systems will be prepared. The first question is a clear definition of the foreseen
goals (e.g. use in the phase of seismic upgrading or use for a proper and quick response
after an earthquake). Next, it will be defined under which circumstances such systems
have to be implemented (e.g. seismic hazard, population density, etc. at the site) and
further what degree of sophistication is necessary for the system. In less important
situations probably less parameters will be needed, while in very important situations all
imaginable information should be combined. During the work there will be a strong
interaction with other Sub-Projects in the project LESSLOSS, which use GIS (e.g.
Research activity 4).
40 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
One part of D2.1.1d will be a summary of the most important findings, which is also very
important for Task 2.1.5 Layout for an European code on the in-situ assessment of earthquake
resistance of existing structures.
It is the opinion of the Sub-Project consortium, that an inexpensive and robust software
should be developed, since the greater part of software available on the market is quite
expensive. The efficiency and robustness of this software will be tested and demonstrated
within Task 2.1.2e Test of output only modal identification software on physical models of structures
damaged at the LNEC shaking table.
Background: In 1997 an important change took place in the Austrian Seismic code
B 4015. The areas of Vienna south-west of the river Danube belong now to seismic zone
3 (effective horizontal ground acceleration 0,8 m/s). There are many old masonry
buildings in this area. Hence, in the case of reconstruction, a new earthquake analysis is
requested by the authorities if considerable changes of horizontal capacity are planned.
During the years many shops were placed at ground floors. Parts of load bearing
structures were removed in order to get additional floor area without considering strong
horizontal loading. The tendency is still holding on, owners of buildings want to get more
and more floor area. There are certainly some dangerous situations existing and more
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 41
restrictive procedures are necessary for the future. Hence reconstruction of masonry
buildings can be a demanding and responsible task for the designer, if also the earthquake
resistance has to be considered. The modelling is frequently a difficult task, hence arsenal
research started a test series on old buildings in February 2002. The main task of the in-
situ tests is the elaboration of eigenfrequencies, modeshapes, damping ratios and dynamic
stiffnessess. First, a five storey masonry building with irregular U ground plan was
investigated. A FE- model was elaborated which was fitted to the test results. Further two
tests were carried out in 2002 and in 2003.
Background: ARS has carried out the procedure described in paragraph 1, objective 2)
for many bridges. Some investigations were done in the framework of European research
projects (e.g. SIMCES, VAB). In SIMCES (System Identification to Monitor Civil
Engineering Structures, BRPR-CT96-0277) the main goal was damage detection and to
check the possibility for developing special monitoring systems for the safety monitoring
of bridges. The VAB project (Andanced Methods for Assessing the Seismic Vulnerability
of Existing Motorway Bridges, ENV4-CT97-0574) was towards the assessment of the
earthquake vulnerability of existing motorway bridges. VCE has tested a large number of
bridges using ambient vibrations.
In 2001 the reaction mass exciter VICTORIA of arsenal research was also successfully
used to excite a railway bridge vertically from a position below the bridge, using the rod
chain described in paragraph 1. This technique opens a much broader spectrum for
practical application, since it is not further necessary to excite the bridge directly at the
deck and to close the bridge (at least some lanes) for traffic.
Work program: Based on past experience accumulated by the participants and on results
found in literature, the benefits of implementation of in-situ measurements,
instrumentation, databases and GIS to concrete bridges with lifeline character will be
studied (feasibility studies, for some important bridges in zone 3 and 4 in Austria).
Within the planned feasibility studies the aspects presented for Task 2.1.2c will be
pursued, but in a much less detailed manner than in the case of Europabrcke.
42 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
There will be close cooperation with Sub-Project 2.3a. Mainly the appropriate calculation
methods, which have to be applied in the single cases, will be discussed. But the work of
both Sub-Projects will not depend timely on each other.
Work program: This sub-task will deal with the seismic capacity of the famous Austrian
steel bridge Europabrcke. RWTH is a specialist for steel structures, hence this task is
given to RWTH.
Within the framework of another project, eigenfrequencies and modeshapes of the bridge
will be identified and a monitoring system with transducers at several important structural
parts will start working beginning of 2004. Hence, also the changes of the modal
parameters due to environmental influences (especially temperature) will be available for a
period of about one year before this sub task starts.
First, a FE model will be fitted to the measured results. Europabrcke is not situated
directly in a zone of high seismicity, but the area Hall and Innsbruck (seismic zone 4) is
not very far. Hence seismic input from zone 4 will be assumed as a hypothetical seismic
load and the maximum stresses and deformations of the bridge deck, the maximum loads
and deformations at the bearings (required clearances, required strength of anchorages),
the maximum loads and deformations of the piers (especially verification of ductility,
which is probably poor!) and the maximum forces at the foundation will be elaborated.
The resulting seismic loads will be compared with the wind loads used for design. All
structural parts, which have to be checked after an seismic event, will be identified.
Next a parametric study will be carried out, assuming that local damage has occurred at
certain parts of the structure. The influence of these damages (stiffness decrease) on the
modal parameters (modal frequencies and mode shapes) will be elaborated. Then it will
be checked, if changes of the modal parameters due to damages can be separated from
the changes due to the environmental influences (which are known from the continuous
monitoring). In the positive case a layout for a tailored monitoring system could be
developed and warning and alarm levels for a save use of the bridge even after an
earthquake could be defined.
Steel bridges are quite different from concrete bridges. They consist of much more
structural elements. Further, their vibrational behaviour is considerably influenced by type
and condition of the connections between the elements. Hence, two separate tasks are
planned for both bridge types.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 43
For the assessment mainly FEMA 310 will be used, but the Austrian seismic code B 4015
has to be considered in parallel.
In this national project the research team has to deal with different structures. Many of
them are masonry buildings and RC buildings. But all of them were built without aiming
for a ductile behaviour. Further, effective ground accelerations in the Austrian seismic
map have been considerably increased within the last years and in addition the maximum
amplification factor in the old spectrum was only 1,6. Hence, the project will be a very
demanding one. It will be of crucial importance to fully understand the structural
behavior and to find out any existing overstrength- and/ or ductile potential before
requesting any retrofit. The project will be finished until September 2004.
Work program: Advanced studies will be carried out using already well-prepared data,
available from the national project activities described above. Past work will be evaluated
and further improved, considering especially all relevant parts of EC8. Much practical
input for Task 2.1.5 is expected from this work.
Work program: Output-only modal identification software will be tested with experimental
results from the activity that will take place at LNEC shaking table. The models will be
44 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
available from other projects. Assessment of damage building state (model updating),
after each stage of increasing level of shaking will be carried out; ambient vibration
measurements will be performed for output-only modal system identification and
compared with traditional input-output vibration measurements.
The involvement of the LNEC shaking table into the Sub-Project work is very important,
since it completes the set of experimental tools, which can be applied for structural
assessment.
Background: At national level, in many European countries studies have been carried
out in recent years for the vulnerability assessment and seismic risk analysis of cities,
regions or countries as a whole.
Naturally these studies rely on the information available for each situation which normally
is organised so that the structures of the building stock are typified according to the more
common or relevant characteristics of the construction techniques or structural materials
in each region. In order to extend these studies in a reliable fashion to the European level,
it is essential that the typification of the building stock is carried out in a co-ordinated
way..
Work program: The purpose of this part of the project is to review the current and more
common types of construction in seismic regions of Europe, based in available published
studies in various countries. This shall provide the identification and establishment of a
set of structural typologies of buildings in Europe, encompassing the relevant
characteristics that influence its seismic behaviour.
Along with this typification effort, the evolution of the seismic design codes in the
different countries shall be examined so that some quantitative measure of the seismic
resistance of the different structural typologies may be inferred.
The proposed approach shall enable a more consistent evaluation of the seismic
vulnerability of buildings throughout Europe and the corresponding seismic risk
assessment across the various regions of Europe. Contacts will be held with the ongoing
project RISK-UE (http://www.risk-ue.net/) in order to avoid duplication of effort and
results. Liaison with Sub-Projects 2.3a, 2.3b and 2.4a will be carried out so that
harmonized results can be obtained.
Task 2.1.4: Update of vulnerability estimates via monitoring and integration of the
vulnerability models in a GIS Environment
It will be not possible within this project to develop a fullyoperable system, but
concepts will be elaborated. It is proposed to set up a methodology/ procedure leading to
up-to-date vulnerability estimates that makes use of the monitoring data. This activity will
concern vulnerability assessments of levels 2 and 3, which are susceptible to be improved
by the monitoring data.
Work program: Within the vulnerability model of Level II, the possibility to have at
disposal a monitoring system is expected to allow from a side improving the evaluation of
some parameters that contribute to the definition of the vulnerability index (for example
the parameter quality of the resisting system, conventional shear resistance and
maintenance conditions). The presence of a monitoring system installed on the structure
could be moreover an additional parameter that concurs to the vulnerability index
evaluation. The monitoring at this assessment level can consist of quick measurements by
means of simple special tools as the seismic bag, or simple hammer tests or some
advanced exciter.
The elaboration of the data that are furnished by the monitoring system could allow
evaluating more precisely the effects, which are due to the strengthening and/or
adjustment intervention. In particular, it could be possible to identify which parameters
are affected by the intervention and in which measure. In both cases the inclusion of the
monitoring implies the revision of the scores and weights of the parameters by means of
the statistical analysis. Target structures are residential buildings in reinforced concrete
and masonry.
The structural models used for the above approaches will be discussed with Sub-Project
2.3a and 2.3b. But the work of the Sub-Projects will not depend timely on each other.
Work program: The results furnished by the monitoring system would constitute the
indispensable basis for the setting up of an appropriate mechanical structural model of
Level 3. The structure is simulated by means of a simplified mathematical model with
concentrated masses and stiffnesses (stick model), which reproduces the fundamental
structural seismic functioning. The identification of the fundamental structural scheme
shall have to be diversified in function of the different structural typologies (the resisting
to an earthquake mechanisms of a box-structure masonry building are different from the
ones of a reinforced concrete frame structure). For the assignment of the geometrical and
46 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
mechanical model elements its necessary to have at disposal a wider and less qualitative
data base than the one that is enough for the Level 2 evaluation, which includes the
physical mechanical material characteristics, the value and the location of possible
damage conditions, a greater geometrical detail, etc. The availability of surveys of the
structural response allows moreover calibrating the mathematical model on the measured
response, so that a more representative computational model of the actual structural
condition is available. The seismic response of the arranged simplified model is computed
by means of a non-linear incremental static analysis of push over type, which furnishes
the horizontal load horizontal displacement curve till the collapse; such curve
constitutes the structure vulnerability function. The non-linearity of behaviour has to be
identified on the basis of the structural typology under exam. Target structures are
bridges, infrastructures (lifelines, hospitals, schools).
The structural models used for the above approaches will be discussed with Sub-Project
2.3a and 2.3b. But the work of the Sub-Projects will not depend timely on each other.
Task 2.1.5: Layout for an European code on the in-situ assessment of earthquake
resistance of existing structures
Work program: Basis for this task is the manual part of D2.1.1a. Further important
contributions will result from all other tasks. Hence, the work of all other tasks has to end
6 months before the end of the project.
The draft of prEN 1998-3 (strengthening and repair of buildings) contains only few
statements on in-situ assessment. Some parts of FEMA 310 seem to be very useful and
will be probably used also for Task 2.1.5 (e.g. checklists).
Partner RWTH will provide recommendations for code improvements with regard to:
importance categories in particular for industrial facilities
evaluation and strengthening measures of existing industrial structures
in-situ monitoring of existing bridges in order to identify potential risk in case of
seismic events.
The work on Task 2.1.5 will be started in the last year. The first draft will be discussed
with the Sub-Projects 2.3a and 2.3b. But the work of the Sub-Projects will not depend
timely on each other.
funds and which will be the main end users: ARS, ISMES, LNEC, VCE) will be
involved.
Passive control systems of seismic vibrations (e. g. seismic isolation and energy
dissipation) are innovative techniques which are worldwide considered to be already fully
mature for providing mitigation of seismic damage for civil structures and components or
equipment and have proven to be reliable and cost-effective for bridges and viaducts,
civil buildings, cultural heritage and critical facilities.
Seismic isolation (SI) provides a method for protecting not only the structures but also
the non-structural members and the structure contents, by means of a considerable
reduction of the seismic loads transmitted through the foundations into the
superstructure. The horizontal stiffness of the SI system has to be sufficiently low as to
make the fundamental response frequency of the structure well below the frequency
range of the ground motion; the SI systems must also possess sufficient damping
capability, in order to limit the horizontal displacement to an acceptable value. For
buildings the SI system is usually installed at the base or at the first floor, while for
bridges and viaducts it is usually installed at pier top.
Energy dissipation (ED) consists in the use of special devices, which attract on
themselves and dissipate there a large amount of the seismic energy: for buildings they are
installed at the base (usually in conjunction with SI devices), or more frequently inside
them between positions subjected to significant relative displacements; for bridges and
viaducts they are installed (similar to the isolators) at pier top or more frequently, between
deck and abutments. ED systems may be used in most cases where SI is not applicable,
e.g. for retrofits of buildings that are not provided with sufficiently large gaps,
construction of high rise buildings, components which require small lateral displacements,
soft soils, etc.
Several types of seismic isolators and energy dissipators have been developed, both inside
and outside Europe. As regard isolators, the High Damping Rubber Bearings (HDRBs)
48 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
can very often provide a simple and economical isolation system, as they combine the
required low stiffness and displacement capacity with a sufficiently large level of damping.
The high-to-medium stiffness HDRBs presently available on the European and non-
European markets are excellent for a wide variety of applications, but there exist several
circumstances where their use is technically difficult, if not impossible. These
circumstances include, for instance, light structures, like small buildings or electrical
equipment, which are quite important potential markets for SI.
Activities related to the first two objectives will be carried out by ALGA, while those
related to the third one will be performed by MAURER. Some contribution to these
activities will be also provided by STAP and VCGP, in the role of technical consultants.
The abovementioned objectives will be accomplished by testing the devices on the
shaking table of the ENEA Laboratories of Casaccia (near Rome), using a suitable mock-
up. The design, development and qualification of the devices will be supported by
numerical analyses, which will be carried out by developing original non-linear
mathematical models. Particular efforts will be paid in the dissemination of the results; to
this aim, an User Manual will be prepared by all the partners in the last part of the project
with the aim of helping the Designers and other potential End User to design structures
incorporating such devices. The results of Sub-Project 2.2a activities will also provide
input for the development of European standards for the antiseismic devices and
structures provided with them.
Aim of the research activities to be carried out by ALGA is the development of new
types of Low Stiffness Isolators (LSIs) that could provide a very low horizontal stiffness
while ensuring, at the same time, stability under extreme displacements. The development
of the novel system will also duly consider the need to become to a industrial product
competitive, in term of cost, to similar devices available on the market. ALGA will
develop two types of LSIs: one circular and one rectangular (or square) shaped.
The development of both the two types of the novel LSIs will require activities on the
following topics:
50 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
In addition, the currently available ED devices have the need for a rather frequent
maintenance for ensuring their prescribed performances and frequently for replacement
during the structure life.
The DECS supersede all the above mentioned disadvantages and, in addition, can really
provide a maintenance free performance. The basic idea of the DECS consists in an
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 51
electric generator that produces current exploiting the movements generated by the
earthquake. The current is then dissipated in a short circuit so that all the mechanical
energy supplied to the device is converted into heat. Aim of the research program is to
optimise and industrialise the manufacturing of the DECS. ALGA will develop two types
of DECS, different in size, in order to produce a set of devices able to cover a wide range
of potential applications. A small and a large size of DECS will be designed,
manufactured and tested.
The optimisation and industrialisation of the innovative DECS will require activities on
the following topics:
design of an optimised small size DECS with characteristics of 250 kN;
design of an optimised large scale DECS with characteristics of 1000 kN;
optimisation of the manufacturing process in order to minimise the production costs;
experimental characterisation of the behaviour of the devices;
validation of analysis methods for DECS design and use;
evaluation of the benefits in the design of safe structures;
preparation of design procedure, technical data sheet and/or catalogue;
Timing of the abovementioned activities relevant either to LSIs and DECS is included in
the Deliverable and Milestones lists.
The main scope of this Task is to evaluate the benefits, as well as ascertaining the
limitations, of the two most important types of devices, namely:
sliders coupled with hysteretic elements
friction pendulum (FP) systems.
Sliding bearings have a long history throughout the word of applications in non-seismic
engineering, particularly in bridges, to accommodate movements produced by thermal
variations, creep etc.. In the above applications the relative sliding movements occur at
slow velocities, typical 0.01 mm/s or less, while for seismic applications velocity can be as
high as 500 mm/s. It is well known that sliding velocity dramatically affects dynamic
coefficient of friction, particularly for the composite sliding material used in friction
pendulum. Finally, the reason for undertaking this study resides in the fact that,
conversely to the case of rubber isolators, the former are all of a proprietary nature.
Therefore, experimental studies regarding them are essentially private-party type and their
results have seldom been published, at least with respect to the devices limitations or
shortcomings themselves. Two distinct sub-tasks are reserved to the examination of these
two classes of devices, namely:
- Sub-task 2.2a_2.1 - Evaluation of benefits and limits of isolation systems based on steel hysteretic
sliders
- Sub-task 2.2a_2.2 - Evaluation of claimed characteristics of isolation systems based on friction
pendulum
The specific objective of sub-task 2.1 is that of studying the effects of different types of
sliders coupled with steel hysteretic elements on the structural response. Particularly, the
influence of the most representative parameter of this class of devices will be examined,
i.e. the elastic/post-elastic stiffness ratio.
The activities undertaken within the framework of Task 2.2a.2 are essentially aimed at:
a) Defining a set of representative isolation systems that, utilizing the same mock-up,
permit the achievement of a maximum number of experimental results with a
minimum number of runs in the shake table testing.
b) Designing and manufacturing an adequate number of seismic devices to be used in the
shake table testing campaign.
c) Conducting characterization testing on the seismic devices.
d) Analyzing experimental results to evaluate benefits and limitations of each type of
device, and substantiate or deny claimed characteristics as well as develop possible
improvements thereof.
e) Designing and manufacturing a full-scale friction pendulum device to be subjected to
a long-term test.
The above mentioned activities are propaedeutic or consequent to the activities of Task 3
(Implementation and Validation of Numerical Tools) and Task 4 ( Shaking table tests). It
is stipulated that the characterization tests on seismic devices as per item c) will be sub-
contracted to the Technical University of Munich-Mechanik Lehrstuhl. Alternatively the
work could be sub-contracted to Universitt der Bundeswehr-Fakultt fr Bauingenieur
und Vermessungswesen - Munich.
During the Sub-task 1 tests, there will be used isolation systems with at least four (4)
different types of devices, each subjected to at least (3) time histories. If time permits, the
effects produced by the substitution of sliding bearing with laminated rubber bearings will
be studied. During the Sub-task 2, there will be used at least three (3) mass configurations
and as many friction pendulum systems. Whenever possible, bi-directional tests will be
conducted. Nature and number of devices are listed in the Deliverables table.
Most of the activities of this task are strongly interconnected with other tasks; in
particular ENEA will actively participate in the design and execution of creep tests on the
full scale friction pendulum (which will be carried out at the Montecuccolino labs of
Bologna). Moreover, STAP and VCGP, taking advantage of their experience in designing
structures incorporating energy dissipators, will cooperate with MAURER in the
definition of the main features of the hysteretic devices.
Finite Element codes), which often are not suitable for describing the behaviour of so
highly nonlinear elements.
The main objective of Task 2.2a_3, which will be coordinated and mainly carried out by
ENEA (PROT-PREV Section), is the implementation and the validation, through the
shaking table tests and other laboratory activities, of suitable numerical models of the
devices developed within Tasks 2.2a_1 and 2 and the mock-ups provided with them.
Activities are subdivide into 5 sub-tasks (see the barchart below). Generally, simplified
non-linear numerical models, to be included in the finite element model of the whole
structure, will be developed for each kind of devices and calibrated based on the
qualification tests carried out by manufacturers. When necessary, detailed finite element
models of single devices or components will be implemented in non-linear computer
codes. This numerical activity is particularly aimed:
to help the manufacturers in optimising the device characteristics;
to design the shaking table tests;
to evaluate the benefits of such systems in real applications.
The aforesaid numerical models will then be also included and described in the User
Manual (Task 2.2a_5) for dissemination and exploitation purposes.
In the framework of Task 2.2a_3, the acceleration time-histories to be used for both the
numerical activities and the shaking table tests will also be defined (sub-task 2.2a_3.1 and
corresponding Deliverable 2.2a_3.1). The first step of this activity is the identification of
the maximum credible earthquake within an accepted return period (design earthquake)
and site characterization in terms of shear-waves profiles, local intensity and epicentral
distance as applicable to a selected site. The definition of the design earthquake is mainly
based on a seismotectonic approach, which takes into account both the seismic history of
the region and the seismogenetic potential of relevant neotectonic structures. Earthquake
parameters and site conditions with a fixed scatter will then be used to sort out
accelerograms recorded during events and sites the parameters of which are in the
selected ranges of the site.
After the execution of the shaking table tests, numerical-experimental comparisons will
be done, with the aim of fully validating the models. A deliverable will be released for
each kind of device developed by ALGA and MAURER (sub-tasks 2.2a_3.2-5 and
corresponding Deliverables 2.2a_3.2-5) .
The ENEA shaking table measures 4 m x 4 m and can support up to 300 kN dead load.
Its maximum overturning moment is 300 kNm; thus, the maximum acceleration
applicable at the base of the mock-up will depend on the height of the centre of mass.
The table can be controlled in 6 degrees of freedom, but the tests will be mainly carried
out in the horizontal direction, so as to simplify the evaluation of the results and the
comparison among the different devices.
The first activity of Task 2.2a_4, which will be coordinated by ENEA, will be the design
of the test mock-up. It should be quite a simple structure, like an one degree of freedom mass
able of reproducing a given frequency, namely the first mode of the reference structure
(which could be a building or the deck of a viaduct). The mock-up will be provided with
multipurpose attachments and will be the same for all the anti-seismic systems to be
tested. This will allow for a better comparison of the performances of the different
systems and will help their improvement. The mock-up, which will be designed and
manufactured by ENEA within the first year of the project (Deliverable 2.2a_4.1), will be
conceived in order to take advantage from the maximum potentiality of the shaking table
and to provide the highest excitation to the devices. The aim is to provide accelerations
to the mock-up base up to 1 g and, consequently, forces on the antiseismic devices up to
300 kN.
Four experimental campaigns will be carried out, one for each kind of the devices
developed in Tasks 2.2a_1 and 2. A deliverable, consisting in the design and description
of the test and the analysis of the experimental results, will be released after the
conclusion of each experimental campaign (Deliverables 2.2a_4.2-5). During each
experimental campaign, different set of devices will be tested, if necessary, to analyse
parametrical effects of various geometries or sizes.
Based on the input characterization (Deliverable 2.2a_3.1) two main series of tests will be
performed for each anti-seismic system. The first series will be carried out on the mock-
up subjected to a set of different synthetic earthquake inputs generated to match the same
design acceleration spectrum (AST type) characterized by a PGA (peak ground
acceleration) of 0.41 g, according to AASHTO specifications. The design spectrum,
established by a specific seismic hazard study, will be associated to an average return
period of 900 years, and has a 7.5% probability of exceedance in the expected structural
life (i.e. 70 years) for infrastructure and a design spectrum, established by a specific
seismic hazard study, associated to an average return period of 475 years, and has a 10%
probability of exceedance in the expected structural life (i.e. 50 years) for urban areas. The
second series will be carried out on the same model subjected to time-histories recorded
during the most severe earthquakes in Europe (i.e., Campano-Lucano Earthquake,
December 1980, Friuli Earthquake, September 1976, etc.). The corrected acceleration
time-histories from records obtained during the main shock will be collected from the
CD-ROM European Strong-Motion Database, which was created with the support of
the European Commission, ENVIRONMENT (contract ENV4-CT97-0397).
56 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
The answers to these pertinent and contemporary questions will be found by means of an
extensive programme theoretical, numerical and experimental research activities, together
with the application to a series of case studies. The Sub-project is coordinated by
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 57
ULIEGE, featuring also the participation of CIMNE, IST, ITU, METU, NECSO and
UBRIS, whose involvement in the different tasks of the Sub-project is summarised in the
Table given below:
Task 2.2b.1: Selection of reference structures and infrastructures for case studies
Sub-task 2.2b.1.1: Selection of buildings case studies
General definition of objective
The first objective in the Sub-Project is to select a set of reference buildings which have
to provide elements with realistic dimensions and reinforcements in order to serve as a
common basis for all applications of vulnerability reduction techniques allowing
straightforward comparison between techniques.
provide a common working basis of reference "solids" in a group dealing with a number
of different structural intervention techniques. A similar selection of case study buildings
took place in other studies about other subjects (think of reference studies about the
structural behavior factor in the U.S. Talking about structural interventions in seismic
zones of Europe, on European widely distributed types of buildings, no such selection
exists.
Task 2.2b.1: Selection of reference structures and infrastructures for case studies
Sub-task 2.2b.1.1: Selection of buildings case studies
General definition of objective
The first objective in the Sub-Project is to select a set of reference buildings which have
to provide elements with realistic dimensions and reinforcements in order to serve as a
common basis for all applications of vulnerability reduction techniques allowing
straightforward comparison between techniques.
Advances
A new set of reference structures will be defined using discussions within the Sub-Project
and considering in particular the context of the Turkish building stock.
The types of structures considered structures are:
2 medium rise RC buildings and one medium high rise buildings (12 storeys) made
with cast in situ concrete; all are weak design with respect to the seismicity of their
zone of construction; amongst the 2 medium rise building, one will be selected for the
case study on masonry infills. (METU, CIMNE and ITU)
one precast concrete building. (ULIEGE)
one structure with steel truss bracings. (ULIEGE)
Impact
The set of reference structures defined have a chance to become standard basis for
demonstrations on technological development in the future, because they will allow a
correct comparison between various interventions applied to few well-agreed cases. In
the project, those structures will be used as reference buildings available for design
examples in Objectives 4, 5 and 7.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 59
Advances
A new set of reference structures will be defined using discussions within the Sub-Project
and considering in particular the context of the Portuguese and Spanish context.
The following structures will be selected:
one real case situation of underground station in soft soils, with all geometrical data
and plans will be selected, together with data on soils and materials of the structure
(IST)
one real case bridge with low ductility pier (NECSO, CIMNE)
one real case section of a pipe line (NECSO)
Impact
The set of reference structures defined have a chance to become standard basis for
demonstrations on technological development in the future, because they will allow a
correct comparison between various interventions applied to few well-agreed cases. In
the Sub-Project, those structures will be used as reference buildings available for design
examples in Objectives 5 (bridge and pipeline) and 8 (underground structure).
Simple, little descriptive, method (an unreinforced masonry house, with good mortar,
great openings, at ground level, concrete slabs). This is what is done in the PSI
methodology. A description and the calculation of an index based on structural
characteristics; in that case, the method can be more or less refined. For instance, the
GNDT method which is very detailed and requires a lot of data processing at office
considering the 100 parameters characterizing the structure. That method requires one
inquiry sheet / building type (masonry, RC, etc), considers a high number of parameters
(100 / building). The drawbacks are a long and complex procedure which in the end
often lead to prefer a characterization of blocks of buildings rather than single buildings.
For this reason, more direct methods have been developed, for instance in the Catania
Project, or the ULIEGE 1 method, which consider between 25 and 50 parameters; but
such methods still require a lot of office calculation. So refinements have been developed
more recently, like the ULIEGE 2 method, which is very direct and allows the direct
computation on site of an index considering between 10 and 20 parameters. A numerical
value of "modificator" is defined for each typical structural characteristic which influence
the vulnerability index, so that the street inquirers are able to compute directly the index
of one building by summing up the basic value of the index and the relevant
modifications.
Advances
In spite of the important problem of safety of structures against earthquakes, the Turkish
building stock has not yet been the subject of development of rapid screening methods.
Based on the important post earthquake data set, screening methods will be calibrated. It
will considers typical types of structures which can be found in the study area of Istanbul:
masonry houses with wooden floors, masonry houses with concrete floors, multi-storey
concrete-masonry buildings. It is in particular envisaged to work on the basis of the
GNDT basic and derived methods mentioned in the state of the art, taking advantage of
similar extrapolation work done recently by different researchers, including the Sub-
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 61
Project 2.2b coordinator. The guidelines will refer not only to structural features but also
to building location, seismic hazard and site conditions.
Impact
The Turkish building stock is wide and deeply concerned by the problems of seismic
resistance. The envisaged development of the applicability of rapid screening method in
that context has an enormous societal potential in a country where the life and property
of many citizens is endangered by earthquakes.
Sub-task 2.2b.2.2: Evaluation of real buildings response from strong motion arrays
General definition of objective
METU operates two strong motions arrays in western Turkey and is in the process of
establishing a third in the south. Objective 9 is to take advantage of any fresh data which
would be recorded if an earthquake of sufficiently large magnitude should trigger any of
these systems in order to make the evaluation of the motion data in particular in
buildings.
Advances
Currently, METU operates two strong motions arrays in western Turkey (BYTNet and
DATNet), and is in the process of establishing a third in the south (MATNet). The total
number of sensors in these three arrays is 40. METU will also procure shortly five
building dynamic response systems comprising 12 sensor channels each for monitoring
retrofitted building response in high hazard areas. If an earthquake of sufficiently large
magnitude should trigger any of these systems, the set of data provided by these up to
date measuring equipment will be of the highest interest. Evaluation of the recorded
information would constitute an invaluable source for verification of building responses
in real site conditions.
Impact
Reduction of vulnerability requires better understanding of ground motions. Many
networks and arrays are in operation ready for recording these whenever an earthquake
will hit. When (or if) additional information becomes available from national networks of
building monitoring systems during the course of the project this will be utilized fully.
The impact of these data will be a better understanding of the problems of vulnerability
of buildings, of their real weak points, in particular the hammering problem which
presents difficulties in the modeling of a group of buildings in urban area.
62 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Advances
The urban renewal methods have been a strong practical development put into practice in
Istanbul. This development wish has been pushed in the back by the felt urgency of
seismic problems in the Istanbul area following the earthquakes of 1999 and a dramatic
re-evaluation of the seismicity of the zone is of the highest interest for other regions of
Europe. Every region or city possessing different features in the various aspects of
structural content of building stock, city plans, organization of the city, etc..., it is
intended to try to take advantage of the experience of Istanbul and apply it to selected
pilot urban regions in Europe (see Sub-Project 2.4b).
Impact
Urban renewal method as an integrated activity between engineers, city planners,
sociologists, economists and non-governmental organizations is a new concept. Its
practical application still raises difficulties. Confronting it to other "test" situation than
Istanbul will make its efficiency progress, for the good sake of a more generalized
application in the future.
Advances
The research will bear on the optimised upgrading of structures by existing techniques
and methods that cause minimum disturbance in the building in service. This imply the
definition of the less intrusive techniques and the determination of the minimum
acceptable performance levels expected after a probable earthquake; this a new concept
and the procedure to determine the least added capacity to achieve the performance
targets will be established. Practical design recommendations will describe techniques
using new added members satisfying the specified minimum performance objectives and
field implementation techniques offering acceptable solutions for buildings in use.
Relative costs of different intervention techniques will be established, based on the wide
recent experience in Turkey.
Impact
Pre and post earthquake interventions on structures are case-by-case problems in which
engineers and technicians face difficult problems. Documents with technical indications
on adequate retrofitting measures well adapted to the continuity of life and, in particular
of the use of buildings, are a real societal need in countries with fast growing populations
where an interruption of activity of one building is an enormous difficulty. The project
will provide these informative documents.
structural elements, generally columns, which are then unable to carry the gravity loads.
This results in partial collapse of the structure on the side hit by the neighbour building;
eventually, the collapse can be total.
Other types of structural event between 2 neighbour structures can sometimes happen: it
is the case if the 2 structures belong to the same building and are separated by a so called
"expansion joint" aiming at the reduction of thermal stresses and cracks; it is in fact a
voluntary crack. If the columns are not duplicated, beams and slabs belonging to one
structure are supported on corbels of the other structure. The earthquake motion of the
2 structures may deprive those beams of support; they then collapse.
The requirement in codes against hammering imposes that a gap of given dimensions,
chosen to avoid the phenomenon, is realised. Many existing structures do not fulfil this
criterion and will hit one another in earthquakes. The 2nd type of situation described
above, expansion joint without duplication of column, is dealt with by requiring a length
of the support surface large enough to avoid the falling down of beams.
Unfortunately there exist in our cities in Europe and Turkey a large number of buildings
non-seismically designed or designed to comply to old codes or designed to comply to
codes which underestimated the zone seismicity. All these building do not comply with
what is nowadays agreed as being the rule, so that they are in very serious danger of
collapse in case of an earthquake. Upgrading solutions have to be found for these widely
distributed problems.
Advances
To develop practical retrofitting for joints, ULiege group intends to generalise concepts
that it has used recently to mitigate problems of narrow joints in a real case existing
structure in high seismicity region (0,4g). The basic idea is that a tuned reconnection of
blocks can represent a good option. The tuned reconnection is envisaged in the following
way:
when neighbour structures tend to separate, this relative move should be slowed down
using adequate tension "springs" attached to the structure in an adequate way.
the adequate character requires a correct fastening to the existing structure and a
correct design of the "springs". A correct fastening to the existing structure required
to move away from the joint so the spring is the weak point in the connection.
Looking at the complete structure, the adequacy of reconnection is a matter of sizing
of all the connectors over the height and of deciding how many degrees of freedom
this reconnection should envisage.
when neighbour structures tend to hit each other, this relative move can be acceptable
or unacceptable, depending on the relative position of the neighbour structures, for
instance whether the storeys at same level or not or whether the joints are wide or not,
and of the type of tension reconnection envisaged.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 65
In some case, installing dampers or damping material in the joint may contribute to a
solution. Having solved a real case issue in a 14 storey building, the ULiege group intends
to generalise in the present research the application of the concepts by analysing several
other typical real case situations and developing adapted solutions. To our knowledge,
such a study has not been developed before.
Impact
The main outcome of this research work will be guidance for engineers in charge of
solving that type of structural problem. This guidance intends to cover a wide number of
possibilities. The use of such a guide may have a large impact on public safety, because
the problems with expansion joints and with joints between buildings problems are
widely present in our cities. At a later stage, the guidance developed in the research will
find its place in the Eurocode 8 section on repair and strengthening of buildings (EN
1998-3). Given the innovative character of the subject, it could also be a starting point for
specific technological developments about calibrated "reconnections springs" and
damping material to be injected in joints.
Advances
The research steps will be:
66 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
experimental
analytical developments
Impact
The design method for elements retrofitted with FRP which will be established is needed
to enable designers to define the required sections of FRP necessary to achieve given
elements properties in terms of both resistance and ductility.
Advances
The most innovative aspects of the study are: development of a formulation for the basic
substances of composite materials using the mixing theory and a non-linear formulation
of the homogenization theory, as well as a general formulation for the treatment of the
anisotropy for composite materials. Sophisticated constitutive models will combine
effects of stiffness degradation with plasticity and viscosity, allowing interpreting the
results in terms of damage and/or fracture. The behavior of anchorages and unions
between the new material and the concrete, which often restricts the use of FRP will be
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 67
studied. These models will allow performing numerical studies on the reliability of FRP
retrofitted structures.
Impact
This research will provides guidance for the selection and design of FRP systems for
externally strengthened concrete structures using numerical approaches (constitutive
models together with finite element technique). The study can be used to select an FRP
system for increasing the strength, stiffness or ductility of reinforced concrete structures.
The sophisticated constitutive models for reinforced concrete elements repaired by
external bonding/wrapping of fiber-reinforced polymer composites, considering the
behavior of anchorages and unions between FRP and concrete, allow interpreting the
results in terms of damage and/or fracture. The study on the reliability of FRP retrofitted
structures is one of the most relevant aspects which can be solved by means of the
proposed model.
Sub-task 2.2b.4.3: Models for the analysis of masonry structures retrofitted with
FRP
General definition of objective
Objective 5.3 consists in developing models to account for FRP reinforcement of infill
panels. In the case of masonry infills, simplified analytical models can produce
probabilistic estimates of vulnerability. UBRIS will develop these simplified analytical
models and calibrate them by experimental studies.
Although infill panels may be subjected to in-plane shearing forces arising from the lateral
sway of the structural frame, provided there is adequate contact between the infill and
frame, the primary form of loading that induces collapse is out-of-plane inertia loading
acting on the panel itself. Research conducted recently at UBRIS, on behalf of the UK
nuclear industry, showed through full-scale shaking table tests that unreinforced masonry
infill panels could generate substantial out-of-plane strength if membrane arching action
could develop. Such arching action can arise if adequate contact exists between the top
edge of the panel and the soffit of the beam above it. When subjected to out-of-plane
inertia loads, a panel will bend elastically in the first instance, but very soon the flexural
strength at critical bed joints is exceeded, and the panel cracks. The crack patterns
observed in the previous UBRIS shaking table tests followed classical yield-line failure
patterns, which were dependent on the fixity of the panel edges. In most panels, vertical
68 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
arching was by far the dominant action and, if adequately sustained, enabled panels to
survive out-of-plane frame accelerations in excess of 2g.
The previous UBRIS study showed that there is considerable potential for reducing the
risk of out-of-plane collapse of infill panels if adequate arching action can be created. A
particular problem, however, is the cyclic degradation (crushing) of the mortar joints (and
in some cases the masonry units themselves), which can destroy the arching paths. This
degradation may be exacerbated by in-plane shearing of the panel caused by the sway of
the surrounding frame. There is a need, therefore, for forms of retrofitting that bind the
cracked panel together so that cyclic degradation is minimized and arching action is
sustained. Layers of FRP bonded onto one or both faces of the infill panel are an
obvious potential solution.
A further aspect of the previous UBRIS study was the development of a simplified,
single-degree-of-freedom dynamic model of a cracked infill panel. This model adapted
the strip form of analysis that is commonly used for static flexural analysis of panels and
slabs. The panel is modeled as a series of vertical and horizontal cracked strips, each of
which forms a three- or four-pinned arch between its supports. The total flexural
strength of the panel is the summation of the flexural strengths of the individual strips.
The UBRIS dynamic model considered only a single vertical strip cracked at mid-height,
as this was shown to be an adequate lower bound assumption for the panels considered
in that study. The model reduces to a single-degree-of-freedom since the deflected
geometry of the panel can be related to its central lateral displacement. The UBRIS
model accounts for the inertia of the panel, crushing of the panel joints, the non-linear
arching force, support stiffness and sliding of the panel at the supports.
Monte Carlo studies of panel responses when subjected to a large number of different
out-of-plane acceleration time histories showed that a Gumbel Type III extreme value
probability function could be used to estimate the minimum support acceleration needed
to cause collapse. This acceleration could then be compared with the corresponding
predicted acceleration to which the panel is likely to be exposed, allowing the risk of
panel collapse to be estimated.
The UBRIS dynamic model is currently limited to modeling the vertical arching action in
a plain panel (i.e. without openings). However, it is relatively straightforward to extend it
to include the effects of horizontal arching and openings, which would significantly
extend the models value.
Advances
The UBRIS dynamic model will be reformulated to cater for combined horizontal and
vertical arching, with openings, subjected to out-of-plane seismic loads. This will be
implemented in a new, PC-based, software tool that will include basic statistical post-
processing. Any strengthening effects from the application of FRP sheets to the faces of
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 69
a panel will be simulated by suitable adjustment of the joint strengths of the dynamic
model. The new software tool will enable rapid assessment of the risk of out-of-plane
collapse of the most common types and configurations of infill panels.
The efficacy of the new dynamic model will be evaluated against a set of full-scale shaking
table tests to be conducted on the 15t capacity, 6 d.o.f. shaking table at UBRIS. These
tests will use existing infill-panel test rigs (accommodating 2m high by 3m wide panels),
which will be adapted to suit the needs of the new research. The set of tests will cover
two representative kinds of masonry units, one made from a dense material (e.g. solid
fired clay bricks or solid concrete bricks) and one made from a lightweight material such
as hollow clay bricks or lightweight concrete blockwork. A total of eight specimens will
be tested using simulated Eurocode 8 compatible input accelerations (with building
amplification effects), as indicated provisionally below.
The tests will enable an evaluation of FRP application methods and details, as well as of
the efficacy of this method of masonry reinforcement for typical types of infills. As well
as being a proof of concept, the experimental program will give a clear indication of the
structural mechanisms underpinning the FRP reinforcing scheme, as well as the
magnitude of strengthening achieved. The resulting experimental database will be
compared with numerical simulations derived from the new dynamic model software.
Impact
The research will clarify the mechanics of the out-of-plane behavior of masonry infill
panels when unreinforced and when reinforced with FRP sheets on their faces. The
research will also result in clear guidance on how existing infill panels may be
strengthened using FRP and associated boundary condition enhancements, and the scale
of enhanced performance that may be achieved.
The software tool will enable rapid and relatively simple risk assessments to be made of
the out-of-plane collapse potential of infill panels when subjected to seismic loads. For
example, engineers would be able to construct relevant design charts from the output
data from the software tool. In due course, the findings will be incorporated into the
repair and strengthening of buildings section of Eurocode 8.
In summary, the research will offer a much enhanced understanding of infill panel
behavior, as well as providing a straightforward analytical tool, and guidance on how
panels may be strengthened using a readily useable technology. Given the vast numbers
of inadequately designed infill panels across Europe and worldwide, the research could
70 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
have a significant impact on mitigating the risk of collapse of such panels and the
consequent potential for loss of life and damage to property.
Advances
Through comparison of the performance of the application processes, the knowledge on
these processes will increase significantly. With this increased knowledge a suitable
optimisation of the application processes is possible, within the boundary conditions. The
reinforcements with FRPs will be significantly improved and optimised through the
development of new application procedures, using new techniques with vacuum bags,
heating, pre-stressed fibres. New technologies on the reinforcement of e.g. confined
rectangular columns will be developed through a study on new systems and technologies
of reinforcement of these structures.
Through the development of guidelines on the FRP-reinforcements and design tool for
these reinforcements, the use of these kind of reinforcements will be accessible to a far
bigger number of Engineers.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 71
Impact
The main outcome of this research will be the creation of guidelines on the FRP-
reinforcements and a design tool for these reinforcements. Through these to tools the
FRP-reinforcements can be used in far more structures than it is nowadays. These tools
are made possible first by the development of new application processes for FRP-
reinforcements (e.g. confined rectangular columns) and the optimisation of existing
processes (through the use of new techniques). Also the decrease of the uncertainties that
exist in the design and the application composites materials will contribute significantly to
the development of guidelines and design tool. Further the optimisation of the type
application process to obtain a better result according to the boundaries conditions
(temperature, moisture, vacuum, pollution...) will be an important part of the guidelines
and design tool.
The composite materials have a very good behaviour on fatigue, known examples are
their use in blades of wind turbines, aeroplanes, towers of wind turbines, etc. In the
reinforcement with composite materials however, it is very different because there are
two materials (the material of the structure to be reinforced and the FRP) and other
materials that have to be jointed together. The fatigue behaviour of the systems that are
created by joining these materials is unknown in the majority of the cases.
Advances
Through tests that will be done on the durability of reinforcements (and reinforced
elements) that are subject to different environmental conditions, fundamental knowledge
72 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
on the durability of the reinforcements will be gained. The tests will include one test on a
reinforced joint of a concrete pipeline and one test on a concrete pier of a bridge as
structural element.
Impact
The main outcome of this research will be the fundamental knowledge on durability and
fatigue of FRP reinforcements, gained through real tests. With the gained knowledge on
durability, FRP reinforcements can be better designed on requirements of this aspect. A
better combination of fibres, application processes and protective coatings can be
formulated, so durability of the reinforcement will be improved. With the gained
knowledge on fatigue, the joints between composite materials and other material
(concrete) can be better designed. This also will be achieved through a better
combination of fibres and application processes.
Advances
Case studies on the use of composites materials in the retrofitting of bridges and pipelines
will be performed, registered and be made public to practitioners. Hereby the knowledge
(e.g. advantages and disadvantages) on FRP retrofitting among practitioners and the
public will increase significantly.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 73
Impact
The main outcome of this research will be two complete case studies on FRP retrofitting
of:
a concrete pipeline
a railway bridge
These studies will include an analysis of the structure to be reinforced, the causes of the
need to reinforce the structure, a number of solutions to reinforce the structure (among
which traditional solutions and FRP retrofitting) and a comparison between the solutions.
Advances
In this research program is intended to study the seismic behaviour of 2 old masonry
towers and one church. For the analysis will be used 3D non-linear models. Is also
programmed the study of one of the towers with a computer program for the analysis of
block structures.
The models will be developed as fixed structures (without base isolation) to be calibrated
with the dynamic characteristics measured in the real structures. For each model will be
used the following methodology of analysis:
Definition of the dynamic characteristics of the real structure (modes of vibration and
frequencies) with a measurement campaign;
Calibration of the 3D model with the measured dynamic characteristics;
Analysis of the structure with increasing level of the seismic action to determine the
damage evolution in the structure.
Definition of a base isolation solution for the structure.
Analysis of the base isolated structure with increasing level of the seismic action for
the study of the damage evolution in the new situation.
For each structure will be tested several base isolation solutions. The analysis of the
evolution of the damage with the increase of the seismic action level will allow the
definition of the vulnerability functions for each case.
Impact
The use of base isolation to reduce the vulnerability of old masonry structures is still very
limited in number of applications and they do not include the development of
vulnerability functions for the quantification of the probability of collapse.
Thus, the user manual that will be delivered at the end of the research is needed to help
designers in applications of base isolation to old masonry structures and to quantify the
probability of collapse before and after intervention.
against the primary goal of isolation systems: to protect the sensitive internal equipment
and non-structural elements.
Advances
In this study, causal implementable control algorithms will be developed for auto-
adaptive seismic isolation systems and compared to optimal controller derived from the
solution to the Euler-Lagrange equations when the structure is excited by different
earthquakes. Numerical solution to the two-point boundary value problem resulting from
optimal control theory is performed using a gradient approach in which the state and
costate equations are solved exactly based on the iterations made on the control function.
The evaluation of the exact optimal solutions is important for basically three reasons.
Firstly, the ideal best performance achievable by an intrinsically non-linear auto-adaptive
device can be obtained only by the exact optimal solution of the corresponding non-
linear structure. Secondly, the exact optimal solutions are evaluated in order to check the
real optimality of the proposed causal sub-optimal control schemes. Lastly, a careful
analysis of the optimal response and control trajectories may help to improve the
proposed algorithms or to develop better non-linear control rules.
Impact
Standard base isolation may be not applicable for sensitive historical structures. Adaptive
base isolation can then be the solution to achieve protection.
The use of energy dissipation devices is an advanced technique for vibration control and
it has reached a great development in many countries but not in the field of precast
framed concrete structures. Energy dissipation devices absorb, reduce and localise the
damage produced by the dynamic loads, reducing thus the action on the structural
members. It operates in the same way as a fuse that protects the structure in case of an
overload and can be replaced after its damage during a strong earthquake. In spite of
these advantages, the incorporation of energy dissipating devices into prefabricated
structures has not been studied extensively. Therefore, this research aims to establish the
characteristics of energy dissipation devices able to improve the behaviour of framed
precast concrete structures in seismic areas.
Advances
A complete numerical study of the possibility of using energy dissipation systems in the
design of framed precast concrete structures will be performed. The most important and
innovative aspects of this study are:
The development of an energy dissipation device and the numerical characterisation
of its mechanical properties and of its dynamic behaviour. An analysis will be
performed to select the energy dissipation type; a mixed dissipation device is
envisaged, which combines two different mechanisms of energy dissipation: yielding
of metals and visco-elastic behaviour.
The seismic design of the framed precast concrete structures using energy dissipation
devices, overcoming the disadvantages of these structures of being too flexible and
with a limited capacity of energy dissipation.
The possibility of upgrading existing structures using energy dissipation devices is
another important aspect which will be studied.
It has to be pointed out that one of the innovative features of this research is the type of
mixed energy dissipation device which will be proposed, composed of metal (assuring
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 77
plastification) and elastomers (assuring viscoelastic behaviour). This device has to types of
dissipation mechanisms, being able to adapt to the level of structural vibration: for low
vibrations it has viscoelastic behaviour and for severe actions it plastifies, modifying
drastically the structural response. The energy dissipation device which will be proposed
will reduce the effects derived from the large lateral displacements of the structure and
will increase the total damping capacity of the structures.
Impact
The study will clarify the problem of using energy dissipation systems in the design of
framed precast concrete structures and will propose design solutions. The traditional way
to rehabilitate industrial halls to include earthquake resistant design requires major
structural changes and, sometimes, it can have an effect on the production process. The
use of energy dissipation systems, which drastically improves the seismic structural
behaviour, does not require modifications of the production process of the enterprise.
Once the proposed solution tested adequately in a future, it could be proposed its
inclusion in National and European codes. Another achievement of this study is the
development of fragility curves, for framed precast concrete structures with and without
energy dissipative devices. Such curves are largely used in safety assessment and in
seismic risk assessment problems.
Structures made of precast walls and slabs have long interconnection lines along which
connection forces are distributed and, consequently, relatively low stresses. However due
to the small cross section of the interconnection difficulties of achieving the adequate
bond for ductile behaviour may arise.
Structures made of linear elements have concentrated connection zones, which are the
weak points in the structure. Furthermore, for this type of structure, the earthquake
effects applied to the structure may include relative rotation between different pilars at
the foundation level generating significant tension forces in beams and, if not well
78 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
accounted for, the falling down of those beams. This effect has been a commonly
observed effect of earthquakes on precast concrete structures, in particular on industrial
halls and bridges.
The research activity developed at ULiege will bear on precast concrete structures made
of linear elements and will aim at the definition of adequate connections between those
elements. Due to the nature of earthquake action, such connections work cyclically in the
plastic field and are thus energy dissipative elements. The principle to use such energy
dissipative connections is agreed by the 2003 version of Eurocode 8 - Seismic Design,
provided that -see Part 1, section 5.11.2.1.3 of Eurocode 8- local ductility criteria are
realised and demonstrated by tests.
Advances
In the present research, it is intended to make a complete feasibility study about the use
of such connections which can significantly increase the level of safety of precast
concrete structures. Such use raises 3 general problems, plus another problem in case of
upgrading an existing structure. The 3 general problems are:
the connections have to be designed such that they possess a correct deformation
capacity, adapted to the rotation required by the regional earthquake, without
significant loss of strength; this raises the problem of the lay out of the connection
the connection design strength must be adapted to the required capacity of the
structure; this raises the problem of the dimension of the connections ;
the distribution of connection strength through out the elevation of the structure
should be defined to maximise the plastic redistribution and, accordingly, the total
energy absorbed by the structure; this raises the problem of giving different size to the
connections over the height of the structure.
In addition to these standard problems, one additional problem for existing precast R.C.
structures, is the definition of dissipative connections which can be added to the
structures, meaning an effective design of the connection with respect to the properties
of the existing elements and a versatile way to attach from outside these connections to
the existing concrete elements.
The innovation in this work is the development of realistic design of energy dissipative
connections for precast concrete structure made of linear elements (beams, columns).
Though the concept exists and its application is allowed, the process of defining a set of
adequate and allowable design for such dissipative connections applied to precast
concrete structures is an innovation, either for new design or for upgrading existing
structures. Also the definition of the best design using such connections in multi storey
buildings is an innovation.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 79
Impact
The deliverables of the work will be of different natures. A design recommendation will
be established, which will provide awareness of the problems and propose design
solution, with engineers explanations. Some standard connection design will be
established. Though some experimental tests would be needed to complement the
numerical tests developed in the research, it is considered that the proposed connections
will have been studied with enough detail to be proposed as standard design to be
included in the National Annexes to Eurocode 8, in a first stage, and in a prescriptive
Annex of Eurocode 8 at its 5 years revision in 2008.
The deliverables mentioned above will enable engineers to deal with problems of
upgrading reinforced concrete moment frame structures in general and those made of
precast elements in particular. As mentioned before, there are numerous post earthquake
survey examples of precast R.C. structures totally dismantled. This is a sad outcome, in
particular if one considers that implementing dissipative connections in such structures
can be a low cost operation which prevents casualties and interruption of economic
activity.
It is expected that once the research results are obtained which means once realistic
achievable design can be made on a justified basis the implementation of upgrading
solutions to existing precast structures will be promoted. In parallel, such design will be
substituted to typical existing solutions of brittle nature (eg single pin connection) in new
design as well.
Another type of steel structure which demonstrated problems in past earthquake are truss
braced frames. This results from different factors:
in structures designed for non seismic zones or following old design codes, the
overstrength design of connections and the ductility condition for sections in which
holes are drilled were not the rule ; the result has been connections or bar failures ;
80 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
For all the cited reasons, it would be much more effective convenient to design and build
up truss braces using connections possessing a calibrated resistance which is less than the
buckling resistance and the nominal yielding resistance of the bars. In that way:
the control on buckling loads is achieved. There is no diagonal buckling;
brittle failure of connections is avoided since they are designed to behave plastically ;
no overloading of columns must be feared ; effective ductility of existing braces can
be achieved by substituting badly designed connections by calibrated dissipative
connections.
Advances
The practical implementation of energy dissipative connections in truss braced requires
that some conditions are fulfilled:
1) dissipative connections design must be developed. An on going research effort
initiated the ULIEGE (CECA Contract 7210 PR 316) has been used to develop
successfully such design. These might be patented in the context of the mentioned
contract.
2) Guidance for the conceptual design of truss braced structures using dissipative
connections must be developed.
This second step is the subject of the research activity to be developed. The objective is
to provide to the designers the ability to define the dimensions of some dedicated types
of dissipative connections, so that the connections possess the adequate strength,
stiffness and elongation capacity to meet the local ductility requirements corresponding to
the intended global plastic mechanism of the structure. The mentioned developments will
cover:
3 typologies of truss braced frames: X, V, inverted V;
typical existing design to upgrade;
new design, which will in fact be upgrades of present standard design for new
structure.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 81
Impact
The developments on dissipative connections for truss bracings will classically contribute
to a more comprehensive Eurocode for its 5 years revision in 2008. It will have its most
striking impact by allowing a breakthrough of a European developed technology. Like in
the case of the "dogbone" or "Reduced Beam Section", another ULIEGE development
which has contributed to expand the market shares of the EU steel producer ARBED in
the U.S., it is intended to use the technological development made is CECA 7210-PR 316
contract and the design developments made in the present project to push up European
industry in worldwide projects.
The developments on dissipative connections for truss bracings will have another striking
impact in providing one well defined up grade solution for all steel structures, which
would happen to be underdesigned to present requirements, due to old standards or to
rise of regional seismicity level.
Since underground structures are surrounded by soil, earthquake effects depend strongly
on the geotechnical environment. In very stiff soils, structures tend to move as rigid
bodies and earthquake effects are not relevant. However in soft soils, deformations may
be large and the structure may have to withstand large relative displacements, depending
on the relative soil-structure stiffness. In these situations the most common type of
analysis to evaluate earthquake effects on underground structures comprises a model that
includes both the structure and the surrounding soil. It is obvious that the behaviour of
the structure is very strongly conditioned by the surrounding soil.
82 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
This is a qualitative difference with structures above the ground like buildings and
bridges. Those structures are generally modelled considering their elastic properties, their
non-linear behaviour being considered by the division of the computed internal forces by
means of the respective behaviour factor q. In the analysis of these structures the soil is
often considered by its influence on the design response spectra and it is modelled by
means of springs. It is generally not necessary to simulate it explicitly as a volume, as it is
generally the case of underground structures.
Another difference is due to the fact that the most important modes of vibration of
underground systems (= structures + soil) may only depend slightly on the dynamic
characteristics of the structures, as the mass of soil is much larger than the mass of the
structure itself. This means that more precision is necessary in the characterisation of the
dynamic characteristics of the soil. That is why the stiffness and damping characteristics
of the soil are usually evaluated by means of a non-linear analysis considering the
expected amplitude of deformation of the soil under the design seismic action. Thus the
structural displacements and deformations are essentially impose by an external source
(the surrounding soil) and are not a function of a coefficient, as the q-factor, chosen by
the designer. Therefore a new design approach, that leads to better conception and
evaluation of the ductility demand on the structure is necessary.
Advances
In the work,
it will be shown that the standard design methodology is inadequate for the seismic
design of large underground structures in soft soils and that it may lead to the
construction of unsafe structures
methodologies for the seismic design of large underground structures in soft soils and
for the assessment of such structures will be developed.
this will also allow the identification of weak points in existing structures and
therefore the definition of the most adequate intervention strategies for vulnerability
reduction of existing underground structures not designed to withstand earthquake
effects.
The work thus concerns essentially the problem of analysis of underground structure.
Reference is made to soil properties when necessary, in particular to define the problem
and its range of application as a function of soil and structure properties. In order to
achieve the proposed objectives it will be necessary to develop theoretical concepts and
to perform the analysis of several example structures. This will be done according to
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 83
Impact
This research should show to the scientific community and the European authorities the
need and the advantages of creating a part of EC8 specifically dedicated to the seismic
design of underground structures. It is hoped that the deliverables of this project can be
used as a background documents for the development of such a part of EC8.
As there are limits to the ductility that is possible to provide to a structure there are also
limits to the deformations it may withstand. If these limits are below the ones imposed by
the seismic action, the design of safe underground structures may imply the need for soil
treatment to reduce the deformations imposed on the structure. Since there are usually
strong restrictions to this type of work in urban areas, this practical information may be
important for the planning of urban underground networks.
Current seismic design codes for new buildings, including the prEN (2003) version of
Eurocode 8 do not treat the problem of irregularity and torsional response sufficiently.
The relevant clauses are based on elastic considerations of simple models or are totally
empirical. Moreover, some codes, especially the American ones (IBC, NEHRP 2000,
SEAOC Blue book), confuse the problem of torsional response of irregular structures by
assuming independence between strength and stiffness of structural elements and by
using member displacement ductility factors as the underlying criterion for member
design. A DBD approach can, in principle, take realistically into account the coupling
between member strength and stiffness (by using a yield deformation that depends on
dimensions of the member and not its strength) and places the emphasis on absolute
member deformations as the criterion. So, it is intrinsically better suited than forced-
based approaches to tackle the problem of torsion of irregular structures. The primary
question to be resolved, then, is the calculation of member inelastic displacement
demands in 3D in the presence of torsion, in the framework of DBD (meaning that such
calculation may have to take place before members are dimensioned and detailed,
rendering the use of nonlinear models difficult).
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 85
Unlike the abundance of unidirectional cyclic test results, the available experimental
information on member deformation capacity under bi-directional seismic demands is
86 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
very limited. This information will be gathered and processed in conjunction with the
unidirectional data, in order to extend the deformation-based acceptance and design
criteria from the case of unidirectional to that of bi-directional loading. This task will be
organised in two subtasks:
nonlinear one, as well as for the estimation of global displacement demands), before their
full dimensioning and detailing.
2.3a.1-1, 2.3a.1-2 and 2.3.a.2-2, followed by member strength and energy dissipation
through hysteresis).
Part of this Task will be devoted to post-tensioned piers. Conventional wisdom in seismic
design of bridges is against prestressing piers that are expected to develop plastic hinging.
Recent tests in Japan have demonstrated the beneficial effect of prestress on the cyclic
behavior of piers. Ultimate deformation increases and residual displacements decrease
with prestressing. As a result prestressing of bridge piers have received considerable
attention in the April 2002 Japanese code drafts for seismic design of prestressed
concrete structures. It is, therefore, worthwhile reconsidering the present European
attitude against prestressed bridge piers.
displacement response of bridge structures will also be studied and a methodology will be
proposed to account for it in the framework of DBD methodologies for bridges.
Sub-task 2.3a.5-2: Procedures for design of bridge piers for the non-collapse
performance level directly on the basis of displacement and
deformation demands, without undue iterations between
analysis and verifications
The development of simple procedures will be pursued for the estimation of pier inelastic
deformation demands (chord or plastic hinge rotations), through linear analysis, static or
modal (dynamic), extending therefore the applicability of the Equal Displacement
rule to the level of member deformations, without recourse to pushover analysis for the
correspondence between the global displacement demand the local deformation demands
(plastic hinge or chord rotations). On the basis of this, the development of procedures
will be pursued, to facilitate direct design of piers on the basis of displacements and
deformations, without an unduly large number of iterations between analysis and member
verifications.
including regular and irregular configurations, and multi-span continuous and simply
supported deck.
Regarding the first issue, which will be investigated in this Task, it is noted that isolator
units normally fail by exceedance of their displacement capacity. In comparison to other
earthquake-resistant structural elements designed to present seismic codes, isolators are
considered to have substantially lower overstrength margins. This lower overstrength is
counterbalanced by the requirement of the codes for enhanced reliability for the design of
the isolators (for bridges in the order of 150%). However isolators have (or may be
designed to have) a certain degree of overstrength beyond their design displacement
capacity, which depends on the failure mode of each kind of isolator. Namely:
Shear stiffness of elastomeric bearings may increase rapidly, until ultimate failure by
loss of stability or rollout is reached.
Sliding devices may exhibit a steep increase in stiffness, due to the resistance of an
outer ring, followed by increased friction and ultimate loss of support.
Elastoplastic devices exhibit various possible behaviour paths beyond their design
displacement capacity.
For buildings the IBC (International Building Code) and NEHRP 2000 have the same
requirement as Eurocode 8 for bridges, but exempt from the requirement to produce a
restoring force those isolations system which are capable of remaining stable under full
vertical load while accommodating a specified value of the total maximum displacement.
All these requirements aim mainly at controlling residual displacements that may be
induced by non-symmetric seismic input (especially for near-fault seismic actions), in
combination with deviation from horizontality of the sliding bearings, due to placement
inaccuracies or tilting of supports. The cumulative effects of a sequence of seismic events,
typically following the main earthquake, are also an important factor. Nonetheless, there
is no published theoretical or experimental justification of these code requirements.
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 93
The evaluation of code requirements for the displacement re-centering capacity of seismic
isolation systems will be carried out through parametric nonlinear dynamic analyses for
the isolation systems commonly used in Europe. The nonlinear dynamic analyses will be
performed for seismic actions which include or not near-fault effects as well as follow-up
seismic events (aftershocks) From this evaluation, proposals will be developed for code
revisions, with the aim of relaxing current code requirements where these are found to be
over-conservative, or make them more stringent where they do not provide sufficient
safety.
In this Sub-Project, the present need for further research in the field of probabilistic risk
assessment of structures is addressed, through a number of highly focused research tasks.
The activity is subdivided into four Tasks. The first three tasks concern individual
components of larger infrastructural systems of a urban industrial region. The fourth
Task aims at a synthesis of the previous results finalised at a risk analysis of the whole
region, taking into account the interactions among the components in each infrastructure.
94 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
The participants involved in this task are UROMA, USUR, ULJ, UNAP, UPM and
FEUP. All the partners have a past record of involvement in the subject though with
differences in the approaches and the applications. It is the purpose of the Task to foster
exchange and achieve a synthesis allowing an harmonised theoretical framework for
probabilistic risk assessment to be established.
How far would future seismic risk be affected by removal of vulnerable populations
form high-risk locations and building complexes, and redeveloping them at a higher
standard?
What are the benefits of restricting future development in zones of ground motion
amplification?
A list of possible mitigation actions for each city to be evaluated will be drawn up in
conjunction with the city authorities in each case. Four different types of action will be
considered:
Modification of existing buildings, using standard techniques and some innovative
techniques developed in Sub-Project 2.2b
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 97
To allow for local site effects, microzonation studies will be performed to characterize the
local site amplification. Where available, effects will be correlated with damage observed
during moderate to large magnitude earthquakes. Where appropriate scenarios will be
developed from combined theoretical analysis combined with available ground motion
recording, allowing for the influence of topography and basin effects
Based on these outcomes, a set of quantified statements about the benefits of each
possible mitigation action, and its expected costs, will be developed for each city. Each
will be presented with an assessment of the uncertainty involved.
The previous tools are to be applied and tested in two/three case study areas in regions
of moderate and high seismic risk. Examples of the questions to which answers are
required to support such decision-making are:
What are the benefits of improving standards of safety for lifeline systems, such as gas
distribution networks, whose failure may have high detrimental effects on the
immediate post-event emergency?
What are the benefits of restricting future urban development in particular zones of
higher than average expected ground motion, or prone to significant, earthquake-
induced permanent ground deformations?
Can significant benefits be expected through implementation of real-time, post-
earthquake operational analysis?
The application of project results to reference cities in which significant experience and
data have already been collected in previous projects is expected to calibrate the answers
to the previous questions.
Given the spatial extension of the area covered by a lifeline network, the objective of this
task is to calibrate simple methods for predicting the areal variation of both types of
earthquake ground response, to be implemented in a GIS environment. Thus, the main
steps of this task are outlined as follows:
Ground failure
identification of areas of potential soil instability and/or fault rupture
use of existing relationships relating permanent ground deformation (PGD) to
magnitude and distance
close connection with Sub-projects 1.3 and 1.4 to quantify PGDs due to earthquake
induced landsliding
production of hazard maps in terms of PGDs.
Ground shaking
development of a hybrid deterministic/stochastic approach to predict ground shaking
from known earthquake sources in a wide frequency range
experimental and numerical analysis of effects of soil heterogeneity on the spatial
variability of ground motion, with emphasis on parameters such as peak ground
velocity and displacement, maximum axial and shear strains, duration, that closely
control the seismic response of lifeline systems
development of empirical formulas, based on the previous results, relating peak ground
strains to a few parameters representative of subsoil conditions (e.g. soil stiffness, local
slope of the bedrock, depth of the bedrock, lateral impedance) and peak ground
velocity or displacement; the subsoil configuration parameters may be estimated also
by combining different geophysical methods such as refraction and gravimetric surveys
generation of hazard maps in terms of peak ground deformations
application to few selected urban areas (e.g. Catania, Thessaloniki, Istanbul)
Calibration of improved vulnerability functions for lifeline systems will be carried out for
the previous two classes of ground motion, i.e. under permanent or transient ground
deformations. As regards the case of permanent ground deformations, extensive use will
be made of the results of the ongoing European project QUAKER (Fault-Rupture and
Strong Shaking Effects on the Safety of Composite Foundations and Pipeline Systems),
under the Energy, Environmental and Sustainable Development research programme,
of which the co-ordinator of this Sub-project is a partner.
6) Using vulnerability data embedded in the software (or externally provided) assess
damage to different classes of lifelines and nodes.
KOERILoss will be integrated with the results of the previous tasks, specifically at steps
(5) and (6).
By exploiting the GIS ability to process real time information, the previous two goals of
damage scenarios could be strengthened and fast comparisons, implementations and
modifications of initially proposed scenarios could also be performed.
The availability of the dense (100 free-field stations) urban array I-NET (Istanbul
Earthquake Rapid Response and Early Warning System) in the Istanbul urban area
suggests to study the feasibility of developing an early-warning system for the most risky
lifeline networks, on the example of an already existing Japanese network for hazard
monitoring and fast control on the gas distribution system. I-NET is capable of
automatically generating ground motion and damage distribution maps to be
communicated to end-users and SAR agencies.
The sub-project 2.4b activity on this topic could benefit from integration and exchanges
with the Joint Research Activity (JRA7) of the proposed NERIES network, if the project
will be approved in the future, because of the common participation of some partners
(DPC and KOERI) and the common aims of the studies. A form of co-operation
between the two research activities could be envisaged because, on one hand, both are
supposed to collect data on the elements at risk, to organise the data through useful
database architectures, and to provide methods that can be easily shared (within the EC
community). On the other hand, since NERIES aims at producing a tool for quick
assessment and common methods for loss estimation, it could benefit from the use of
new methods and innovative techniques to be developed by the engineering research
within the LESSLOSS IP, as a deepest level of investigation.
coordinated Project Components. Two premises lead to such decision; (i) optimise
project resources by avoiding the creation of yet another set of Sub-Projects and (ii)
facilitate the full and effective interaction between RTD deliverables and demonstration
activities.
Taking the above into account, it results obvious that the demonstration actions have in
fact been described already, in Section 2.1, where the whole program of activities of the
respective RTD Sub-Projects within which each of these demonstration components fits
in. Herein, a digest of the latter is given.
Earthquake disaster scenario and loss estimation exercises for Istanbul, Lisbon
and Thessaloniki and Catania
Within the scope of the activities of Sub-Projects 2.4a and 2.4b, disaster scenario
predictions and loss estimation exercises will be carried out in four European cities;
Istanbul, Lisbon and Thessaloniki and Catania. These will address the possible effects of
realistic earthquake events in both the building stock and infrastructure facilities of these
important and large cities. Due to the holistic nature of the exercise, the work will
mobilise in full the relevant Sub-Project teams, described above. Furthermore, full
cooperation and interaction with related authorities, at both local and national levels,
forms also an integral and required part of this demonstration activities.
Workshops
LESSLOSS will organize one major International Workshops addressing Stakeholders
and the relevant scientific/technical User Communities. This event is foreseen at the end
of the project and will constitute a major instrument for training, since it aims at
disseminating the up-to-date and effective guidelines and recommendations for mitigating
landslide and earthquake losses that will be the product of the LESSLOSS project. The
workshop will take place in Italy, and will be organised by JRC, who has vast experience
in organising such type of events with assured participation of relevant local, national and
international institutions and individual professionals.
The production and distribution of these training/guidance technical reports has already
been planned and budgeted within the current project. As mentioned above, other
potentially effective initiatives, taking for instance advantage of the web-based
LESSLOSS facility that will be implemented within the scope of the Dissemination
activities (Section 2.2), will also be considered and activated as the project progresses.
With regards to the operations and administrative coordination, the main tasks will be
overall direction of the project (planning of resources, control of results, control of
expenses), general partnership policies (ownership, confidentiality,
background/foreground compensations), project consortium agreement, arbitration
policies, interface with the management board of the partners, information exchange plan
and dissemination policies, discussion of obtained results and encountered problems,
control of the planning and deliverables, overall technical coordination and management
of the project, preparation of the plenary meetings and of the specialised technical
workshops, coordination of technical exchanges between partners and ensuring a good
information transfer on the project evolution to all its contributors.
With regards, instead, to the scientific coordination, the role of the coordinator will be
that of ensuring that the specific technical and scientific targets of the project will be duly
met. So as to ensure an optimised scientific management activity, a Sub-Projected
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 107
management structure, which coincides with the S&T organisation described earlier, has
been adopted, owing to the following:
coordination of sub-projects is more practical and effective
individual partners feel more self confident in their specific topic of excellence
the distribution of tasks and budget was certainly optimised
the deliverables will be better achieved
each sub-project could prepare a separate work-plan and time-schedule.
Planning: The stages involved in the production of this project and which will have to
be reviewed according to the progress throughout the project life cycle involve setting
goals and objectives and establishing time and resource requirements, identifying major
tasks and agreeing a budget, building the project team and appointing key staff.
Co-ordination and control: All project activities will have to be monitored in terms of
time, cost and quality against the project plans. A major part of the project management
activity will involve problem-solving by modifying plans. As tasks have been suitably
scheduled this will involve co-ordinating task progress. Whenever a part (task) of the
project wishes to do something differently the implications for the rest of the project
must be considered and negotiated.
ALGO will be the responsible partner for the management of the central dissemination
activity of the project. The EU-MEDIN infrastructure that is set up in the context of the
respective initiative of the EC will be used for the dissemination of the project results.
The following objectives of dissemination and exploitation will be considered within
LESSLOSS project:
Ensure a European wide dissemination of the project outcomes to main target group
of civil protection decision-makers and other interested industrial or non-profit parties
Monitor relevant market evolutions and explore exploitation possibilities
Disseminate information about the project, its objectives, the approaches and results
Facilitate collaboration and information exchange between partners (internal
dissemination)
Promote, where applicable, the use of tools, technologies and applications resulting
from the project amongst the target groups: civil protection agencies, the academic and
research community, developers and industry
Create two-way communication channels with stakeholders, academic communities
and industry for disseminating the project deliverables and conclusions
Ensure that the products of the project live on in a commercial context, in the research
community and in the operational context
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 109
All the above objectives will be considered within the EU-MEDIN Knowledge
management platform, which will be developed and managed by ALGO and features the
following tasks:
The public web site will be one of the main channels for wider public information
dissemination and may contain some of the information also available on the partners'
site, subject to partners' agreement.
The portal will be designed and implemented according to the EU-MEDIN approach
and requirements. It will provide the following four sections: (i) Project Information, (ii)
Intranet, (iii) Data Repository and (iv) EU-MEDIN interface. A presentation of the
partnership presenting the background and the role of the partners will be provided in
110 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
the project information section. There will be also other specific areas for downloading
material available to the public (papers, brochures, demos etc), for publishing project
collaboration issues (call for proposals, tenders, job opportunities etc), a calendar with the
public activities of the project etc. The web server of LESSLOSS will provide this
infrastructure to other partners as well in order to host their data and applications (e.g.
Intranet and Document management centre, Training applications, Data Repository etc)
in the context of the project. An electronic newsletter (e-zine), periodically published
(monthly), will be also provided in this section of the portal. The e-zine will include
project news and results and will be sent automatically to all the subscribers of the
LESSLOSS portal every month.
ALGO will be the main partner in charge of the design, development and maintenance of
the LESSLOSS Information Portal.
This task will be the main contribution of the academic organizations involved in
LESSLOSS to the project dissemination activity. Such partners have to provide the
material that they have presented to ALGO (responsible partner for the dissemination
work-package) as well as the required metadata in order to keep track of the project
results and the dissemination activity. For this reason the ALGO will perform a monthly
call for the submission of dissemination activity metadata. The metadata can be submitted
on-line through the EU-MEDIN infrastructure through an interface with the EU-
MEDIN Metadata service. The interface will form the way for submitting and publishing
metadata concerning LESSLOSS IP resources to the EU-MEDIN database. Alternatively
ALGO will collect such data provided by the consortium and will create the respective
metadata set supported by JRC. The data corresponding to these metadata will be stored
in the Data Repository of the project that will be organized and hosted by ALGO in the
server of the Project Information Portal.
The Collaboration Framework that will be developed will be tested in the context of
LESSLOSS and it will be available to support collaborative tasks of other IPs in the field
of Natural Hazards and Disasters. The envisaged framework will be developed using rich-
media conferencing solutions and collaboration technology tools. This technology can be
also used for organizing on line workshops and fora.
A major objective of the project is to describe current best practice or usual practice in
each area investigated. Thus LESSLOSS intends to produce a series of Technical reports
addressed to specific Users Communities and Stakeholders, such as: Design/assessment
Guidelines and/or User Manuals addressing the technical communities (e.g.: designers,
building assessors), Pre-normative Documents addressing regulatory authorities and
standardization bodies, Mapping/Zonation of Hazards and/or Risks addressing
authorities and public administrations responsible for urban planning and risk mitigation.
The final number (average - one per Sub-Project) and titles will be available at month 12
(M12). The contents of the Reports should be provided at M18 and their production is
foreseen at M36. JRC will be responsible to coordinate the collection of these reports.
Documents created in the project will be made public according to the Dissemination
Policy defined in the Dissemination and Use Plan of LESSLOSS. Alternatively the
Executive Committee can decide concerning the availability and restrictions of the project
outcome.
Reporting on best practice means that the partners will undertake to write up (or where
appropriate encourage others to write up) areas of the technology which seem neglected
or that will be useful to this project or any other project working in this area. Examples
might include writing up the state of the art in the particular area worked in, or creating a
European Seismic Engineering Glossary or storing experimental data in relational
databases of the project repository. ALGO will be responsible to host the applications
that will be developed in the server of the projects portal. With respect to this activity,
the partners will undertake to publish all this information on the data repository of the
project with an assigned, persistent URL that will be used to access this material through
the EU-MEDIN metadata service.
Two multimedia CDs for the presentation of the project results are planned, at the mid
(18M) and final (36M) stage of the project duration. ALGO will be responsible for the
creation of the projects CD ROMs.
Two basic types of printed dissemination material will be produced according to the
defined EU-MEDIN standardization:
and respective disasters. This approach will benefit the EC services to have consistent
information and uniform presentation of all the project of FP6 in progress. Three
brochures (start, middle and end of the project) are normally planned. Normally thousand
copies of each brochure are considered for production. ALGO will be in charge of the
design and production of the project brochures. The project can produce more brochures
with specific subject and with customized layout and content if this is considered
necessary by the Executive Committee
User Groups, initially based on the database of the EU-MEDIN stakeholders, will be set-
up. They will be expanded with the collaboration of the participants to the consortium,
both at the national and European level. All participants will undertake to provide a list of
potential users and stakeholders of the expected results of LESSLOSS.
Although the project portal, the contacts of all project participants and the presentation
of technical papers at scientific conferences will reach a large audience of potential users,
specific actions will be carried out to target two strategic user communities. The first
community is comprised of regulatory authorities and standardization bodies. The second
important community is comprised of all EU, National and local authorities concerned
with risk-based urban planning as well as those related with the implementation of
mitigation plans (such as large-scale strengthening projects). JRC-Ispra and all the other
contractors involved in European standardization bodies will address the first
community; the second one will be targeted by the Department of Civil Protection of
Italy with the support of ISMES. Note that DPC has periodic meetings (typically every
six months) with the Civil Protection Authorities of the other European Countries and
this provides the opportunity to disseminate project results as well as to collect lists of
114 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
potential users, to be added to the project mailing list or to be contacted for specific
promotion actions. DPC will also participate in the workshops to be organized in several
towns, such as Istanbul, Thessaloniki, Catania and Lisbon. This may provide
opportunities for dissemination meetings with local authorities in charge of mitigation
activities.
LESSLOSS will consider the possibility to make Sub-Project with other EC funded
project in the research areas addressed by the project Technical Annex. Sub-Project
activity includes exchange of project deliverables; participation to each other's plenary
meetings etc. More specifically this task is considered as follows:
2.5.7 Exploitation
LESSLOSS partners have the experience and the infrastructure to exploit software tools,
knowledge and information that will be developed or created along the projects life. A
joint marketing effort of the European Technology developed in the course of the
project will be coordinated by ISMES, which is the only industry organisation
Outline implementation plan for the full duration of the project 115
experienced in all technical aspects covered by LESSLOSS project. By carrying out the
above Dissemination and Use Plan, important information and further contacts will be
gathered and it will be possible to develop a Final Exploitation Plan (FEP) that will
outline the actions to be carried out after project completion. Exploitation will take
advantage of the fact that tools, demonstrators and documents developed within the
project continue to exist beyond the life of the project. The projects Data Repository will
be used for this purpose and could even develop into a tool for e-sales, if so agreed with
the IPR owners of each product. Furthermore the Information Portal of the project will
be an important persistent and continuing resource for developers and commercial
implementers in the European Community and beyond. The relationship between
LESSLOSS and the EU-MEDIN initiative will also contribute to protract and increase
the visibility and accessibility of the project results.
The FEP will consider both public and proprietary results generated by LESSLOSS:
a) Public Results
The exploitation of results published in the technical literature or freely available from the
Data Repository is generally insured by the above planned dissemination activities. The
training and research material that will be produced within the context of LESSLOSS will
be available for use through the LESSLOSS site: it will be used for academic purposes by
many universities, including but not limited to those participating in the project. Results
will also influence all earthquake engineering activities, such as development of building
codes, consulting, testing and design.
Further actions may be needed to facilitate, accelerate or amplify practical use of project
results and will be identified and described in the FEP. Such actions may obviously
include further research, that was not carried out due to time and resource constraints.
Other important actions to be identified depend on entities other than the Contractors, as
for instance is the case of issuing a Building Code. In such case the FEP will provide
indications on the entities responsible for such actions and on the activities that the
Contractors plan to carry out to stimulate the implementation of such actions.
b) Proprietary Results
In this case the responsibility of industrial exploitation resides finally with the Contractor,
which owns the IPR. LESSLOSS activities however are very important to prepare and
facilitate the exploitation. The planned dissemination activities in particular determine a
visibility of all products that could not be achieved independently from the project. The
possibility of creating a joint LESSLOSS trademark should be investigated. Also the
transformation of the Data Repository into an e-sale tool is envisaged. The FEP will
therefore identify the product portfolio resulting from the project ant the corresponding
IPR owners. For each product a top level description of the user base will be developed
on the basis of the experience gained during demonstration, validation and dissemination
activities. The FEP will estimate size, extent and influence of the user base, nature of end-
116 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
user organizations, categorisation of their needs and identification of key user segment
profiles. Mailing lists and user groups developed for dissemination purposes will be used
to support active promotion to potential customers. Product specific commercial
agreements or service partnerships will be encouraged and possibly established during
special Exploitation Sessions to be organised in the course of the three project annual
meetings.
Finally, some project deliverables may be exploited in sectors other than earthquake or
landslide engineering. For instance the implementation of the web based R&D
Collaboration Framework, that will be developed and tested in the context of
LESSLOSS, is expected to greatly improve the interactivity among partners and Sub-
Project activities of other technical cooperation projects. Hopefully more IPs in the field
of Natural Hazards can use and exploit the capabilities that this framework will provide.
Other activities, such as participation in the annual European Science Week, will be
planned and scheduled as information on the media/information resources made
available by the Commission to the project are know. It is also noted that, in carrying out
activities aimed at raising the participation and awareness of the wide public, the
Consortium will take advantage of the large experience gained by DPC on these type of
activities.
The list of major milestones given above, can be further subdivided into a series of
operational milestones, that follows more closely the progress of the project, providing
also direct connection to the achievements and deliverables of each of the RTD Sub-
Projects, described in detail in Section 2.1, and which in turn feature themselves an
explicitly connection (see Section 2) to the overall objectives of LESSLOSS, defined in
Section 1.2.
- Month 24
Calibration of advanced numerical modelling against well-documented cases of
landslides
Development and validation of proposed theoretical and experimental model(s)
Calculation model for evaluation of performance of stiff inclusions as slope
stabilisation measure
Engineering method(s) for computing sliding triggering and ensuing deformations
Validation of numerical estimation against existing well-documented recordings of
landslides
Completion of numerical simulations of the case histories using various modelling
techniques
- Month 36
Low cost high accuracy GPS station
LIDAR application for landslide hazard zonation
Application of models of landslide hazard zonation to focus regions in Europe
Earthquake Disaster Scenarios Predictions and Loss Modelling for Urban Areas
- Month 12
Selection of Case Study locations and loss estimation methodology to be used for
each
Completion of inventories, scenario earthquake definition and vulnerability data for
each city
- Month 24
Completion of first loss estimates with and without mitigation actions
- Month 36
Disaster scenario and loss estimation exercises for three European cities
European
Commission
Project Output Access
Project
Monitoring
EU-MEDIN
Document
Exchange Scientific
Platform Co-ordinator
Project Data Management
Manager
Co-ordination Committee
Executive
Committee
Contractors Endorsement
requests
Assembly Project Steering
Advisory
Sub-Project Committee
Participant No. 1
No. 1
Technical
Focus
Participant
Team leaders
No. 2
Sub-Project Sub-Project
No. 2 Leaders
Participant
No. 3
Participant
No. 4
Sub-Project
No. 13
Project
Participant Communication
No. 46 Instrument
In addition, an Advisory Committee will support the Executive Committee in the long-
term focus of the Project.
Additional tasks under the direct responsibility of the Scientific Co-ordinator are (i)
administration and chairmanship of the Contractors Assembly and the Executive
Committee, (ii) managing contacts with national projects and connections with
international organisations and Other Integrated Projects or Networks of Excellence, (iii)
managing contacts with Codes and Standards Organisms involved in the subjects of the
Project. A specific Contractors Committee may be introduced to support the Scientific
Co-ordinator in such functions.
The second member of the Co-ordination Committee, the Project Manager, is the
responsible for the operation and administrative co-ordination of the overall Project, a
Project Management 123
The Contractors Assembly will take place on a yearly basis, unless extraordinary
circumstances require otherwise, under the chairmanship of the Project Co-ordinator, and
might also feature the presence of representatives from the Commission, who will be
invited to attend such meetings.
- supervising the project progress, reviewing and assessing all deliverables and initiate
corrective actions if needed
- co-ordinating the activities among the Sub-Projects, with the support of the Advisory
Committee
- supporting the Co-ordination Committee in preparing meetings with the Commission
and related data and deliverables.
- reviewing the Project Plan and deciding upon changes in Sub-Project leadership or in
Advisory Committee membership
- making proposal to the Contractors Assembly for the review and/or amendment of
Project Plan, if required
- making proposal to the Contractors Assembly to suspend all or part of the Project or to
terminate all or part of the CONTRACT, or to request the Commission to terminate
the participation of one or more Contractors
- reviewing and deciding in case of defaulting/under-performing Participants, and
preparing proposal to the Contractors Assembly with regard actions to be taken
In particular, the three experts will be the Supervisors of the three Areas of the Project
(environment, urban areas and infrastructures), respectively Prof. Kyriazis Pitilakis, Prof.
Polat Gulkan and Dr. Eduardo C. Carvalho. The Advisory Committee shall meet at least
twice a year in coincidence with the Executive Committee meetings, under the
chairmanship of the Project Co-ordinator.
Sub-Projects, two other Sub-Projects have been created to deal explicitly with the
important aspects of Dissemination and Training.
With regards to milestones, reference is made to Section 2.6 above, where the milestones
for the entire duration of the project are given. Herein, an 18-month selection of the
latter is listed, following the format adopted, and justified, in Section 2.6. It is noted,
however, that a much more detailed list can be obtained in Section 4.6, where the
description of each Sub-Project is provided.
- Month 18
Assessment of existing structures and models
- Month 18
Extension of N2 method
Pilot infrastructure study
Earthquake Disaster Scenarios Predictions and Loss Modelling for Urban Areas
- Month 12
Selection of Case Study locations and loss estimation methodology to be used for
each
Completion of inventories, scenario earthquake definition and vulnerability data for
each city
- Month 18
Completion of first loss estimates with and without mitigation actions
Sub-Project 1.2: Landslide zonation, hazard and vulnerability assessment (18 months)
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6
1.2.1 Mapping inventory for landslide hazard X X X X X X
1.2.2 Probabilistic landslide hazard zonation techniques X X X X X X
1.2.3 Mitigation methods and policies X X
132 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Sub-Project 1.4: Landslide disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling (18 months)
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6
1.4.1 Landslide risk assessment and disaster scenarios prediction X X X X X X
1.4.2 Unified global hazard and risk assessment for landslides... X X X X X X
1.4.3 Loss estimation models X X X X X
1.4.4 Early warning systems to calibrate loss models and evaluate losses X X
Sub-Project 2.2b: Techniques and methods for vulnerability reduction (18 months)
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6
Task 2.2b.1
Task 2.2b.2
Task 2.2b.3
Task 2.2b.4.1
Task 2.2b.4.2
Task 2.2b.4.3
Task 2.2b.5.1
Task 2.2b.5.2
Task 2.2b.5.3
Task 2.2b.5.4
Task 2.2b.5.5
Task 2.2b.5.6
Task 2.2b.6.1
Task 2.2b.6.2
Task 2.2b.7.1
Task 2.2b.7.2
Task 2.2b.7.3
Task 2.2b.8
Task 2.2b.9
Sub-Project 2.3b: Probabilistic risk assessment: methods and applications (18 months)
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6
Task 2.3b.1
Task 2.3b.2
Task 2.3b.3
Task 2.3b.4
Sub-Project 2.4a: Earthquake disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling for urban
areas (18 months)
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6
Task 2.4a.1
Task 2.4a.2
Task 2.4a.3
Task 2.4a.4
Task 2.4a.5
Task 2.4a.6
Task 2.4a.7
Task 2.4a.8
Sub-Project 2.4b: Earthquake disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling for
infrastructures (18 months)
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6
Task 2.4b.1
Task 2.4b.2
Task 2.4b.3
Task 2.4b.4
Sub-Project 2.1
Sub-Project 1.1 In-situ assessment, monitoring and typification
Landslide monitoring and
warning system
Sub-Project 2.2a
Development and manufacturing of energy
dissipation devices and seismic isolators
Sub-Project 1.2
Landslide zonation,
Sub-Project 2.2b
hazard and vulnerability
Techniques and methods for vulnerability reduction
assessment
Sub-Project 2.3a
Sub-Project 1.3
Displacement-based design methodologies
Innovative approaches
for landslide assessment
Sub-Project 2.3b
Probabilistic risk assessment: methods and
applications
Sub-Project 1.4
Disaster scenarios Sub-Project 2.4a Sub-Project 2.4b
predictions and loss Disaster scenarios Disaster scenarios
modelling for predictions and loss predictions and loss
landslides modelling for urban areas modelling for
. infrastructures
1.1.2
1.1.1.2
Mitigation methods
1.2.3
and policies
Probabilistic
1.2.2
1.2.1
1.2.3.1
inventory for hazard techniques to
landslide hazard zonation reduce
techniques uncertainties
Hazard zonation
1.2.3.2
1.4.1.2 disaster
Vulnerability planning and
assessment mitigation
policies
1.3.2
triggered
Development
1.3.2.1
ground motion
and
mechanisms
improvement
of constitutive
Earthquake-
1.3.3.2
relationships
triggered
ground failure
Laboratory
1.3.2.2
mechanisms
investigation
of the
Advanced
1.3.3.3
mechanical
behaviour of Geomechanic
geomaterials al modelling
1.3.6
Landslide risk
1.4.1
assessment and
disaster scenarios Early warning
1.4.4
prediction systems to
calibrate loss
models and
Development evaluate losses
1.4.1.1
conditions
analysis and
earthquake
shaking
scenarios
Evaluation of Sub-
Sub-Project 2.4a
1.4.1.3
alternative Loss
1.4.3
preventing estimation
measures models
Sub-
Sub-Project 2.4b
Fig. 10 Sub-Project 1.4 - Landslide disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling
Task 2.1.4
Task 2.1.1
Update of
Rules, guidelines and development vulnerability
of tools estimates via
monitoring
Task 2.1.5
Layout of European assessment code
Task 2.1.6
Demonstration of
assessment
Fig. 11 Sub-Project 2.1 - In-situ assessment, monitoring and typification of buildings and
infrastructures
Detailed implementation plan First 18 months 139
TASK 2.2a_3
Implementation and validation of
numerical tools
(ENEA)
TASK 2.2a_4
Shaking table tests
(ENEA)
TASK 2.2a_5
User Manual
(STAP)
Resistance
Structural analysis
Technology
Durability Underground
Fatigue stations
Pipe lines
Base isolation
Bridge piers
( IST, ITU )
Case studies Case studies
Historical structures
Design examples Infrastructures
Buildings Auto adaptative
devices design
Energy dissipation
Devices and
Connections
( ULIEGE, CIMNE)
Pre-cast concrete
Steel
DBD Methodologies for the design of piers Floor spectra for equipment in industrial plants
JRC, UPAT, DENCO CEA
Industrial plants
system logic
tanks Task 2.3b 4
piping Risk analysis over a region
cooling towers UROMA
UNAP
UBRIS
Uncertainties:
USUR
Effects of mitigation actions
all
Dissemination to 3 cities
Fig. 16 Sub-Project 2.4a - Earthquake disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling for
urban areas
Fig. 17 Sub-Project 2.4b - Earthquake disaster scenario predictions and loss modelling for
infrastructures
Detailed implementation plan First 18 months 143
Estimated indicative
Dissemination level
Deliverable name
Delivery Number
Lead participant
person-months
(proj. month)
WP nunmber
Delivery date
Nature
1 Annual report 1.1 UNIMIB 2 R PU 12
2 Historical datasets 1.1 UNIMIB 5 R PU 12
Report on spatially distributed deterministic
3 1.1 UNIMIB 4 R PU 12
models and rainfall thresholds
Report on procedures for the determination
4 of the transition from slow to fast moving 1.1 UNIMIB 4 R PU 12
landslides
5 Mid term Report 1.1 UNIMIB 1 R PU 18
Report on GPS station component
performance and suitability for integration,
6 integration problems and potential problems 1.1 UNEW 4,3 R PU 18
for mass production and performance of
automated processing and analysis.
Zonation and landslide hazard by means of
7 1.1 SGI-SW 3 O RE 18
LS DTM
Slope stability analyses geometry from LS
8 1.1 SGI-SW 3 O RE 18
DTM
Recommendations for planning, surveillance,
inspection with LS DTM. Usefulness of LS
9 1.1 SGI-SW 2 R RE 18
DTM in landslide hazard mapping and slope
management.
10 Reports on methods of slope stabilisation 1.2 GDS 12 R PU 12
Report on numerical modelling of well-
11 1.2 SAA 14,3 R PU 18
documented cases of landslides
Report on methodologies of landslide hazard
12 1.2 NGI 22 R PU 18
zonation vulnerability assessment
Technical report with selected well
13 documented case histories of major seismic 1.3 NTUA 30 R PU 12
landslides
Technical report presenting the development
and validation of soil constitutive models to
14 1.3 UNIMIB 35 R PU 18
predict large slope displacements, especially
for liquefaction induced lateral spreading
Technical reports presenting the effects of
15 1.3 GDS 33 R PU 18
landslides on the built environment.
Detailed implementation plan First 18 months 145
Estimated indicative
Dissemination level
Deliverable name
Delivery Number
Lead participant
person-months
(proj. month)
WP nunmber
Delivery date
Nature
Report on improved large scale modelling
16 techniques both deterministic and 1.4 BRGM 10 R PU 18
probabilistic for ground failure evaluation
Report on loss estimation models, analysis of
17 some well-documented landslides and 1.4 NGI 14 R PU 18
remedial methods for landslide mitigation.
Report on application of landslide zonation
18 1.4 SGI-MI 10 R RE 18
on two focus regions in Europe
Rules, Guidelines and Software Tools:
19 2.1 VCE 9 R PU 9
Permanent monitoring: feasibility studies
20 Assessment and models of existing buildings 2.1 ARS 7 R PU 9
Rules, Guidelines and Software Tools:
21 2.1 ARS 7 R PU 12
Pre-earthquake assessment
Rules, Guidelines and Software Tools:
22 Structural inspection after earthquakes: 2.1 RWTH 9 R PU 12
industrial structures
Rules, Guidelines and Software Tools:
23 2.1 ISMES 10 R PU 12
Databases and GIS implementation
24 Typification of buildings and infrastructure 2.1 LNEC 9 R PP 12
Level II vulnerability assessment via
25 2.1 ISMES 10,3 O PP 18
monitoring
26 Seismic input 2.2a ENEA 2,8 O PU 6
27 Shaking table mock-up 2.2a ENEA 2,8 O PU 12
28 Circular LSIs prototypes 2.2a ALGA 4 P CO 12
29 Square LSIs prototypes 2.2a ALGA 6 P CO 12
30 Sliding isolators and SHS 2.2a MAURER 4 P PU 12
31 Characterisation tests of SHS 2.2a MAURER 1 R PU 12
32 Full-scale FP 2.2a MAURER 3 P PU 12
Validation of LSIs analysis method and
33 2.2a ALGA 2 R PU 18
design procedure
34 Small size DECS device 2.2a ALGA 7 P CO 18
35 Large size DECS device 2.2a ALGA 10 P CO 18
36 Analysis of the shaking table tests on SHS 2.2a MAURER 2,8 R PU 18
37 Models of FP 2.2a MAURER 3,5 P PU 18
38 Characterisation tests of FP models 2.2a MAURER 1 R PU 18
39 Numerical analysis of the SHS 2.2a ENEA 3 R PU 18
40 Numerical analysis of the LSIs 2.2a ENEA 3 R PU 18
146 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Estimated indicative
Dissemination level
Deliverable name
Delivery Number
Lead participant
person-months
(proj. month)
WP nunmber
Delivery date
Nature
41 Shaking table test report for SHS 2.2a ENEA 4 R PU 18
42 Shaking table test report for LSIs 2.2a ENEA 4 R PU 18
Nonlinear method for control of auto-
43 2.2b ITU 14 O PU 12
adaptative semi active base isolators
Rapid screening method of vulnerability of
44 2.2b ITU 21 R PU 12
building stock in Istanbul
Design guide of low disturbance upgrading
45 2.2b ITU 18 R PU 18
methods
46 Analysis of hammering problems 2.2b ULIEGE 7 R PU 18
47 Urban rehabilitation plan for pilot city 2.2b METU 21 R PU 18
Results of experimental tests on FRP.
48 Computation method of resistance 2.2b ITU 16 R PU 18
considering steel and FRP
Integration of knowledge on FRP retrofitted
49 2.2b CIMNE 12 O PU 18
structures
Beta version of software for masonry
50 structures. Experimental database and 2.2b UBRIS 15 O PU 18
software calibration
Guidelines for the application of FRP
51 2.2b NECSO 6,4 R PU 18
retrofitting. Stage 1
Experimental data on durability and fatigue
52 2.2b NECSO 6 R PU 18
resistance. Stage 1
DBD models for base isolated historical
53 2.2b IST 5 R PU 18
buildings. Chosen structure, 3D model
Analysis of 3 energy dissipation devices
54 2.2b CIMNE 12 O PU 18
application to 3RC structures
Analysis of 3 precast RC structures with
55 2.2b ULIEGE 5 R PU 18
dissipative connections
Design method for X truss braces with
56 2.2b ULIEGE 5 R PU 18
dissipative connections
Methodology of analysis for underground
57 2.2b IST 6 R PU 18
structures in soft soils. 1 design
Detailed implementation plan First 18 months 147
Estimated indicative
Dissemination level
Deliverable name
Delivery Number
Lead participant
person-months
(proj. month)
WP nunmber
Delivery date
Nature
Proposals for acceptable deformations of RC
members at different performance levels and
58 for overall partial safety factors on member 2.3a UPAT 9 R PU 12
deformation capacity under unidirectional
loading.
Simple rules for estimation of effective elastic
59 stiffness of RC members for use in linear 2.3a UPAT 3 R PU 12
analyses emulating nonlinear ones.
Evaluation of definition of design
displacement capacity of common isolator
60 types within current bridge design practice 2.3a DENCO 3 R PU 12
and investigation of the effects of its
exceedance on bridge seismic response
Effects of axial force variation in the seismic
61 response of bridges isolated with friction 2.3a UPAV 6 R PU 12
pendulum systems
Ductility-dependent equivalent damping
62 2.3a UPAV 8 R PU 12
equations for DBD
A displacement-based adaptive pushover
63 2.3a UPAV 10 R PU 12
methodology for 2D structures
Acceptable deformations of RC members at
64 different performance levels under 2.3a UPAT 3 R PU 18
bidirectional loading.
Comparisons of results of nonlinear dynamic
and linear analyses - static or modal - for a
65 2.3a INSAL 10 R PU 18
representative sample of irregular in plan
buildings.
Comparisons of experimental results to those
of nonlinear analyses with various modelling
approaches and degrees of sophistication.
66 2.3a INSAL 10 R PU 18
Main model parameters affecting reliability of
predictions of nonlinear analysis for member
deformations.
Advancement of simplified modelling
strategies for 3D phenomena and/or
67 2.3a INPG 12 R PU 18
boundary conditions for base-isolated
buildings or specific soil-structure interaction
148 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Estimated indicative
Dissemination level
Deliverable name
Delivery Number
Lead participant
person-months
(proj. month)
WP nunmber
Delivery date
Nature
Tools for estimation of secant-to-yield
stiffness, of ultimate deformation and of
68 shear force capacity of RC piers, on the basis 2.3a UPAT 6 R PU 18
of test results.
Simplified models/procedures for estimation
of secant-to-yielding stiffness, equivalent
69 damping, ultimate deformations and shear 2.3a JRC 6 R PU 18
capacity of bridge piers on the basis of
numerical analysis.
Procedures for estimation of pier inelastic
deformation demands, developed through
70 2.3a DENCO 5 R PU 18
nonlinear analyses (static or dynamic) of
typical bridges.
Procedures for design of piers for non-
collapse performance directly on the basis of
71 displacement and deformation demands, 2.3a UPAT 6 R PU 18
without iterations between analysis and
verifications.
Evaluation of iterative DBD procedures for
72 2.3a JRC 5 R PU 18
bridges.
Proposals for redefinition of displacement
capacity of common isolator types and for
73 construction measures to enhance seismic 2.3a DENCO 3 R PU 18
behaviour of the bridge at large
displacements
Evaluation of current code requirements for
74 displacement re-centering capacity of seismic 2.3a DENCO 4 R PU 18
isolation systems and proposals for revision.
Rules for construction of displacement floor
spectra in industrial facilities, taking into
75 2.3a CEA 11,7 R PU 18
account nonlinearity in the equipment
and/or in the supporting structure
Extension of N2 method to probabilistic
76 2.3b ULJB 18 R PU 12
assessment of 3D structures
Critical review and advancement of the
77 probabilistic methods for seismic safety 2.3b UROMA 27 R PU 12
assessment
Detailed implementation plan First 18 months 149
Estimated indicative
Dissemination level
Deliverable name
Delivery Number
Lead participant
person-months
(proj. month)
WP nunmber
Delivery date
Nature
Application of probabilistic methods for
78 seismic safety assessment to selected case 2.3b UROMA 26 R PU 18
studies
Critical review and advancement of the
79 methods for probabilistic seismic risk 2.3b UROMA 29 R PU 18
assessment of road networks
Critical review and advancement of the
80 methods for probabilistic seismic risk 2.3b UBRIS 25 R PU 18
assessment of water supply systems
Critical review and advancement of the
81 methods for probabilistic seismic risk 2.3b UNAP 28 R PU 18
assessment of industrial plants
Report on mitigation options and actions to
82 2.4a UCAM 3,5 R PU 3
be studied for each of the 3 cities
Report on the selection of 50 year and 500
83 2.4a INGV 24 R PU 12
year scenarios for each location
Report on building stock inventory and
84 2.4a UCAM 25 R PU 12
vulnerability data for each case study
AUTH
Report for each city containing results of
85 2.4a KOERI 31 R PU 18
reference loss estimates
LNEC
Technical report on available tools for
identification of areas prone to permanent
86 2.4b SGI-MI 8 R PU 12
deformations during earthquakes and
prediction of the induced effects.
87 Technical report on the hybrid/stochastic
numerical approach, with examples of 2.4b INGV 15 R PU 18
application to selected city case histories
88 Technical report including a CD, containing
the dataset of the inventory of lifelines in the 2.4b KOERI 13 R PU 18
reference cities
89 Technical report on the non linear analyses
2.4b AUTH 16 R PU 18
of selected pipeline configurations
TOTAL 913
150 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Objectives:
- Implement in-situ and remote monitoring techniques;
- Use GIS for geodatabase and data analysis;
- Define alert thresholds through data analysis.
Description of work:
- In situ and remote monitoring techniques
- LIDAR for topographic or bathymetric mapping
- Low cost GPS stations for in-situ monitoring
- Monitoring shallow slope failures
- inSAR techniques for monitoring small and relatively slow phenomena
- GIS-geodatabases and analysis
- Alert thresholds through GIS data analysis
Deliverables:
- Historical datasets
- Report on spatially distributed deterministic models and rainfall thresholds
- Report on procedures for the determination of the transition from slow to fast moving
landslides
- Report on GPS station component performance and suitability for integration, integration
problems and potential problems for mass production and performance of automated
processing and analysis.
- Zonation of landslide hazard by means of LS DTM
- Slope stability analyses geometry from LS DTM
- Recommendations for planning, surveillance, inspection with LS DTM. Usefulness of LS
DTM in landslide hazard mapping and slope management.
Objectives:
- Application of advanced landslide zonation methods to focus areas in selected landslide prone
regions in Europe and development and implementation of new models of landslide mapping.
- Evaluation of the technical and economic efficiency of conventional and innovative
stabilization methods by numerical modelling of well-documented slides
- Development of tools for pre-disaster planning and mitigation policies
Description of work:
- Mapping inventory for landslide hazard (Hazard Zonation)
- Probabilistic landslide hazard zonation techniques and vulnerability assessment
- Mitigation methods and policies
- Stabilization to prevent ground movements and instabilities
- Tool for pre-disaster planning and mitigation policies
Deliverables:
- Report on methods of slope stabilisation as stated above
- Report on numerical modelling of well-documented cases of (non earthquake triggered)
landslides
- Report on methodologies of landslide hazard zonation vulnerability assessment
Objectives:
- Investigate analytically and experimentally the mechanical behaviour of geomechanics
involved in mass movements
- Improve existing or/and develop new constitutive relationships to predict landslide
movements under static and seismic conditions
- Investigate landslide mechanisms and triggering forces including topographic and site effects
- Develop deterministic tools to predict displacements and to evaluate loses
Description of work:
- Documentation of selected landslides
- Constitutive relationships of soil behaviour to predict landslide movements
- Development and improvement of constitutive relationships
- Laboratory investigation of the mechanical behaviour of geomaterials involved in mass
movements
- Landslide mechanisms and triggering forces
- Hydraulic-triggered ground motion mechanisms
- Earthquake-triggered ground failure mechanisms
- Advanced geomechanical modelling of localised and diffused failure
- Deterministic tools to predict landslide displacements
- Validation of developed constitutive relationships, triggering mechanicsms and tools
- Evaluation of consequences of landslides
Deliverables:
- Technical report with selected well-documented case histories of major seismic landslides (to
include any new landslide that may occur in a seismic event during the life of the project).
- Technical report presenting the development and validation of soil constitutive models to
predict large slope displacements, especially for liquefaction induced lateral spreading. Soil
behaviour linking shear strength with displacements on the shear surface which could be used
in both co-seismic and post-seismic kinematics of sliding mass. Description, analysis and
validation of alternative failure/deformation mechanisms, using displacement and velocity
criteria.
- Technical reports presenting the effects of landslides on the built environment.
Objectives:
- To develop a global methodology for aseismic and seismic landslide risk assessment and
disaster scenarios prediction
- To elaborate landslide loss models in relation with work-packages 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3
- To assess risk due to landslides triggered by any kind of mechanism either by performing
disaster scenario predictions (deterministic and probabilistic) or by implementing new
procedures of early warning systems.
Description of work:
- Landslide risk assessment and disaster scenarios prediction
- Development and improvement of existing large scale deterministic modelling tools and
calibrations
- Probabilistic analysis and earthquake shaking scenarios
- Evaluation of alternative preventing measures
- Unified global hazard and risk assessment for landslides under static nad seismic conditions
- Loss estimation models
- Early warning systems to calibrate loss models and evaluate losses
Deliverables:
- Report on improved large scale modelling techniques both deterministic and probabilistic for
ground failure evaluation
- Report on loss estimation models, analysis of some well-documented landslides and remedial
methods for landslide mitigation.
- Report on application of landslide zonation on two focus regions in Europe
Objectives:
- Optimised use of high-tech and other tools for pre-earthquake assessment, structural
inspection after earthquakes and installed instrumentation (permanent monitoring).
- Examples of dynamic in-situ assessment. Descriptions of the structures, measured dynamic
properties, up-dated FE models. Elaboration of an easy to understand open access
documentation as a possible basis for interpolation in cases of similar structures (e.g. in EU-
MEDIN database, SAMCO database, etc.). Special interactions with D&I: European
databases& Internet Portal will be necessary.
- Improved vulnerability estimates making use of an installed monitoring system
Description of work:
- Rules and guidelines for the implementation and use of in-situ assessment methods, installed
instrumentation, databases and GIS implementation.
- Elaboration of improved FE-models of several existing masonry buildings, which are already
assessed by dynamic in-situ testing.
- Feasibility studies on application of dynamic in-situ tests, instrumentation, databases and GIS
to important bridges. Study of the expected benefits. Co-operation with Sub-project 2.3a.
- Advanced studies of infrastructure, e.g. the already assessed Austrian hospitals in seismic
zones 3 and 4. Cooperation with Sub-project 2.2b (optimum retrofit methods).
- Building typification at European level. Co-ordination of National Inventory Information.
Interaction with Sub-project 2.3a, 2.3b and 2.4a.
- Concepts for up-dated vulnerability estimates via monitoring. E.g. Case study for the already
assessed Austrian hospitals. Cooperation with Sub-project 2.3a and 2.3b.
- Elaboration of a layout for a European code for the in-situ assessment of the earthquake
resistance of existing structures. Cooperation with Sub-projects 2.3a and 2.3b.
Deliverables:
- Rules, Guidelines and Software Tools: Pre-earthquake assessment, Structural inspection after
earthquakes, Permanent monitoring, Databases and GIS implementation
- Assessment and models of existing buildings
- Typification of buildings and infrastructure
- Level II vulnerability assessment via monitoring
Objectives:
- development, design and manufacturing of innovative low stiffness seismic isolators to be used
in civil applications characterised by light structures (residential houses) or for light industrial
equipment;
- evaluation of the benefits, as well as ascertaining the limitations, of sliders coupled with
hysteretic elements;
- design and manufacturing of friction pendulum isolators;
- design and execution of two experimental campaigns on shaking table.
Description of work:
Prototypes of circular and square low stiffness isolators will be designed, manufactured and
qualified through laboratory tests by ALGA. Prototypes of hysteretic sliders will be designed,
manufactured and qualified through laboratory tests by MAURER. STAP and VCGP will
contribute to this phase as consultants. Main features and mechanical characteristics of the
devices will be provided to ENEA. Mathematical models will be implemented and numerical
analyses will be carried out to help the manufacturers in optimizing the devices and to design the
shaking table tests. A set of significant acceleration time-histories will be developed by ENEA
and used in both numerical analyses and shaking table tests. A suitable mock up will be designed
and manufactured by ENEA and used to test the devices in real (or even higher, if possible)
seismic conditions. In the first half of the project, two experimental campaigns will be carried out
by ENEA on the low stiffness isolators and the hysteretic sliders. The results will be analysed by
ENEA and the manufacturers.
Deliverables:
- Seismic input, Circular LSIs prototypes, Square LSIs prototypes, Mock-up for shaking table
tests, Sliding isolators and steel hysteretic sliders, Characterisation tests of steel hysteretic sliders
- Full-scale Friction Pendulum, Validation of LSIs analysis method and design procedure, Small
size DECS device, Numerical analysis of the steel hysteretic sliders, Shaking table test report for
steel hysteretic sliders, Analysis of the shaking table tests on steel hysteretic devices
- Models of Friction Pendulum, Characterisation tests of Friction Pendulum models, Numerical
analysis of the low stiffness isolators, Shaking table test report for low stiffness isolators
Milestones and expected result:
The most significant milestone are the delivery of: seismic input and mock-up for shaking table
(ENEA); low stiffness isolators (ALGA); steel hysteretic sliders and friction pendulum
(MAURER). Characterisation tests will be carried out on the prototypes prior their sending to
ENEA. Two complete experimental campaigns (on low stiffness isolators and steel hysteretic
sliders) will then be carried out. Moreover, most of the preliminary activity related to the
development of devices and design of tests scheduled for the second part of the project, starts
from months 12.
156 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Objectives:
- Development of rapid screening of vulnerability for Turkish building stock
- Development of urban rehabilitation methods.
- Reduction of buildings vulnerability by low disturbance methods. A design guide.
- Design guide for mitigation of hammering and joints problems between buildings.
- Design guide for vulnerability reduction by Fibers Reinforced Polymers (FRP's).
- Design method for the protection of historical structures by base isolation.
- Development of optimum adaptive base isolation systems.
- A design guide for the improvement of structural response of precast RC and steel structures by energy
dissipative devices and connections.
- Development of design methodologies for underground structures in soft soils.
Description of work:
- Selection of reference structures and infrastructures for case studies.
- Selection of low disturbance upgrading methods and preparation of a design guide.
- Analysis of hammering between structures, with and without reconnections over expansion joints.
- Development of knowledge, design method, models and technology for the use of FRP's in the
reduction of RC and masonry structures vulnerability.
- Development of displacement based design for the base isolation of historical structures.
- Definition of method for control of auto adaptative base isolation devices
- Extended 3D modeling of soft soil and underground structures to settle a design method.
- Analysis of RC and steel structures including energy dissipative devices and connections.
- Case studies using techniques and methods of above subjects in applications to reference structures and
infrastructures
Deliverables & Milestones:
- Rapid screening method of vulnerability of building stock in Istanbul
- Design guide of low disturbance upgrading methods
- Analysis of hammering problems
- Urban rehabilitation plan for pilot city
- Results of experimental tests on FRP. Computation method of resistance considering steel and FRP
- Integration of knowledge on FRP retrofitted structures
- Beta version of software for masonry structures. Experimental database and software calibration.
- Guidelines for the application of FRP retrofitting. Stage 1.
- Experimental data on durability and fatigue resistance. Stage 1
- DBD models for base isolated historical buildings. Chosen structure, 3D model.
- Nonlinear method for control of auto-adaptative semi active base isolators.
- Analysis of 3 energy dissipation devices application to 3RC structures
- Analysis of 3 precast RC structures with dissipative connections.
- Design method for X truss braces with dissipative connections.
- Methodology of analysis for underground structures in soft soils. 1 design.
Milestones and expected result:
- Selection and drawings of 5 reference buildings: 1 medium rise RC, 1 high rise RC, 1 medium rise
masonry, 3 precast RC, 1 steel truss brace.
- Selection and drawings of 1 reference bridge, 1 pipeline section and 1 underground structure.
- Selection and description of Istanbul area for building survey
- Selection of 8 buildings for analysis of hammering and joints problems and their mitigation
Detailed implementation plan First 18 months 157
Objectives:
- RC member acceptance criteria in terms of deformations at different performance levels for DBD.
- Calculation of member inelastic deformation demands in irregular in plan RC buildings within DBD.
- Advancement of nonlinear analysis for direct design or evaluation of the design of new RC buildings.
- Estimation of secant-to-yield stiffness and energy dissipation in RC or PC piers for analysis in DBD.
- Estimation of deformation capacity and shear resistance for verification of bridge piers in DBD.
- Procedures for calculation of inelastic deformation demands in bridge piers for DBD.
- Redefinition of displacement capacity of common bridge isolator types and construction measures to
enhance seismic behaviour of the isolated bridge at large displacements.
- Evaluation of code rules for displacement re-centering of bridge isolators and proposals for revision.
- Development of displacement floor response spectra for equipment in industrial facilities
Description of work:
- Based on test data on the cyclic deformation capacity of RC members or piers, proposals will be made
for acceptable deformations at different performance levels for seismic design of buildings or bridges.
- The torsional response due to irregularity in plan of RC buildings will be numerically studied, using
member deformations as the criterion, for development of analysis methods appropriate for DBD.
- Different possibilities for evaluation of inelastic deformation demands in bridge piers will be pursued and
their implications for the advancement of DBD in bridges will be established.
- The displacement capacity and re-centering of common isolator types will be investigated along with the
possibility of benefiting from isolator overstrength close to ihis capacity. Construction measures will be
sought to enhance behaviour of the isolators beyond their design displacement capacity, along with means
to account in bridge design for uncertainties in isolator behaviour beyond their design capacity.
Deliverables:
- Acceptable values and safety factors for uniaxial deformation of members at various performance levels
- Acceptable deformations of RC members at different performance levels under bidirectional loading.
- Analysis of irregular in plan buildings, on the basis of comparisons of nonlinear and linear analyses.
- Estimation of effective stiffness of RC members for use in linear analyses emulating nonlinear ones.
- Ductility-dependent equivalent damping equations for DBD
- Advancement of nonlinear analysis methods with various models for the direct design of new buildings
- A displacement-based adaptive pushover methodology for 2D structures
- Advancement of simplified modelling strategies for 3D phenomena or/and specific boundary conditions
- Estimation of secant-to-yield stiffness, ultimate deformation and shear capacity of piers from test results.
- Estimation of secant-to-yield stiffness, ultimate deformations and shear capacity of piers from analysis.
- Rules for simple estimation of pier inelastic deformation demands.
- Procedures for pier DBD from inelastic deformation demands, without analysis-verification iterations.
- Evaluation of iterative DBD procedures for bridges.
- Evaluation of definition of isolator design displacement capacity and of global effects of its exceedance
- Redefinition of isolator displacement capacity; measures to enhance behaviour at large displacements
- Effects of axial force variation in the seismic response of bridges isolated with friction pendulum systems
- Proposals for revision of code requirements for displacement re-centering capacity of isolation systems.
- Displacement floor spectra in industrial facilities, considering equipment or structural nonlinearities.
Milestones and expected result:
- Advancement of displacement-based procedures and of nonlinear analysis for building seismic design.
- Development of displacement-based seismic design procedures for bridges with or without isolation
158 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Objectives:
Development of methods for the determination of structure-specific fragility curves (i.e. not fragilities for
classes of structures), accounting for all sources of uncertainty: seismic motion, mechanical parameters,
capacity models, and for multiple correlated modes of failure. Structural analysis tools will include both
state-of-the-art and practice-oriented models.
Application of the above methods to a wide range of structural typologies (buildings, bridges, structural
elements in industrial plants and water supply systems) demonstrating their feasibility for use in practice.
Use of the above methods to validate existing and proposed deterministic procedures for seismic safety
assessment of structures (Eurocode 8).
Development of methods for seismic risk analysis of infrastructures of regional extension consisting of a
road network connecting vulnerable facilities to rescue centres, as a tool for optimal allocation of upgrading
interventions.
Description of work:
The activity within this Sub-Project as it regards individual structures will be two-fold, including theoretical
developments (Task 2.3b.1) and real case applications (Task 2.3b.2). The former will start considering
existing methods for fragility analysis (SAC/FEMA, Response surface, Montecarlo, etc.), which will then be
extended to include the aspects indicated in the objectives. A considerable portion of the activity will be
devoted to assessing the potential for practical application of the methods to actual building and bridge
structures and industrial plants, and then to using the methods to check the consistency of the deterministic
normative approaches across a set of selected structures (Task 2.3b.3).
For what concerns infrastructures, the state-of-the-art is less advanced and existing approaches differ widely
in scope and objectives, ranging from the evaluation of total expected direct losses, up to follow the
evolution in time of social and economic consequences at a regional scale (prolonged interruption and
progressive restoration of production activities). The work in the first 18 months will focus on the
definition of a relatively simplified infrastructural model that allows quantitative evaluation of its post-
earthquake functional capacity and identification of critical components (Task 2.3b.4).
Deliverables:
- Report on Extension of N2 method to probabilistic assessment of 3D structures
- Report on Critical review and advancement of the probabilistic methods for seismic safety assessment.
- Report on SoA of the probabilistic methods for seismic safety assessment
- Report on Application of probabilistic methods for seismic safety assessment to selected case studies
- Report on Critical review and advancement of the methods for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of
road networks
- Report on Critical review and advancement of the methods for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of
water supply systems
- Report on Critical review and advancement of the methods for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of
industrial plants
Milestones and expected result:
- Delivery of report on Extension of N2 method
- SoA of the probabilistic methods for seismic safety assessment
- Critical review and advancement of the methods for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of road networks
- Critical review and advancement of the methods for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of water supply
systems
- Critical review and advancement of the methods for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of industrial
plants
Detailed implementation plan First 18 months 159
Objectives:
To create a tool, based on state-of-the-art loss modelling software, to provide strong, quantified
statements about the benefits and costs of a range of possible mitigation actions, to support
decision-making by city and regional authorities for seismic risk mitigation actions; to apply the
tool to three major European earthquake -risk cities; and to contribute to a seismic risk
mitigation policy for future implementation at European level.
Description of work:
- Selection of case study locations and mitigation options. For each of the three case study cities,
draw up in conjunction with City authorities, a set of mitigation actions for evaluation and
corresponding locations within the city
- Development of appropriate earthquake scenarios for each location. For each case study
location, ground motion scenarios will be developed, based on a 50-year and 500-year event.
Definition of these scenarios will derive from the requirements of the loss modelling software to
use; microzonation studies will be performed to characterize the local site amplification.
- Assembly of inventory data for the principal elements of the building stock at risk. Building
inventories will include residential, commercial and industrial uses, and historic buildings as
appropriate. Sample survey techniques will be developed for providing detailed data for structural
assessment.
- Develop vulnerability data. Develop building performance data consistent with the loss-
modelling software to be used, including capacity curves, fragility curves in terms of spectral
values of ground motion; use will be made of data developed in WP 2.3 with adaptations where
needed.
- Adaptation and application of loss estimation software. Loss modelling will be carried out using
one of two existing GIS-based software packages which have been developed for this kind of
urban analysis, KOERIloss, and LNECloss; each will be developed for the specific outcomes
envisaged in this project; on at least one of the test sites, both packages will be used. A range of
model runs will be used for each earthquake scenario, to examine the sensitivity of the results to
the key inputs.
- Evaluation of mitigation actions. Revised loss estimates will be prepared based on alternative
mitigation actions and estimates of uncertainty
Deliverables:
- Report on mitigation options and actions to be studied for each of the 3 cities
- Report on the selection of 50 year and 500 year scenarios for each location
- Report on building stock inventory and vulnerability data for each case study
- Report for each city containing results of reference loss estimates
Milestones and expected result:
- Selection of Case Study locations and loss estimation methodology to be used for each
- Completion of inventories, scenario earthquake definition and vulnerability data for each city
- Completion of first loss estimates with and without mitigation actions
160 LESSLOSS - Risk Mitigation for Earthquakes and Landslides
Objectives:
Improving key tools needed to predict the ground shaking and loss scenarios, as well as to
devise mitigation measures, for infrastructures such as water, gas and oil distributions systems,
and at calibrating them on some representative European cities with moderate-to-high hazard
exposure. The key tools referred to include methods for: (a) Efficiently generating maps for
low-to-intermediate frequency strong earthquake ground motion, and for induced permanent
and transient deformations in urban/regional areas; (b) Collecting/compiling the information
required for generating lifeline inventories; (c) Estimating earthquake-induced damage and
losses to lifeline systems, including indirect costs; (d) Evaluating uncertainties involved in the
analysis; (e) Performing post-earthquake operational analysis. The WP will draw both from the
results of current CE Projects (Risk_UE, ending in 2004, and QUAKER, ending in 2005), and
from the lessons of the 1999 Turkey earthquakes.
Description of work:
Development of new software and application to two/three urban case study areas in regions of
moderate and high seismic risk (Catania, Thessaloniki, Istanbul) for which substantial data is
already available. The most innovative aspects reside in objectives: (a) where combination of
different approaches will be sought (empirical formulas based on numerical analyses, integration
of different geophysical methods such as refraction and gravimetric surveys, attenuation
relations, specific site response analyses); (c) where vulnerability/fragility curves appropriate for
European lifeline systems (for which information is very scarce) are to be constructed and
introduced into an already existing loss estimation methodology, which works on geo-cells; (d)
where parametric studies will be made to quantify uncertainties, and (e) where real-time GIS
acquisition of damage data will allow fast comparison and modification of initial zonation
scenarios.
Deliverables:
- Technical report on available tools for identification of areas prone to permanent
deformations during earthquakes and prediction of the induced effects.
- Technical report on the hybrid/stochastic numerical approach, with examples of application
to selected city case histories
- Technical report including a CD, containing the dataset of the inventory of lifelines in the
reference cities
- Technical report on the non linear analyses of selected pipeline configurations
Other
Research Inst.
(9%)
(24%) Universities
(45%)
Industry
(22%)
warning systems
ARS, ISMES, LNEC, RWTH, VCE
UNIMIB, SGI-SW, UNEW,
VCE
Vulnerability reduction
Landslide zonation, hazard Development and manufacturing of energy dissipation devices and
and vulnerability assessment seismic isolators
predictions and loss predictions and loss modelling predictions and loss modelling
modelling for urban areas for infrastructures