Seismic assessment of mixed masonry-reinforced concrete buildings by non-linear static analyses

  • Cattari, S. (Department of Civil, Chemical and Environmental Engineering (DICCA)) ;
  • Lagomarsino, S. (Department of Civil, Chemical and Environmental Engineering (DICCA))
  • Received : 2011.10.10
  • Accepted : 2012.04.20
  • Published : 2013.03.25


Since the beginning of the twentieth century, the progressive and rapid spread of reinforced concrete (RC) has led to the adoption of mixed masonry-RC solutions, such as the confined masonry. However, together with structures conceived with a definite role for earthquake behaviour, the spreading of RC technology has caused the birth of mixed solutions inspired more by functional aspects than by structural ones, such as: internal masonry walls replaced by RC frames, RC walls inserted to build staircases or raising made from RC frames. Usually, since these interventions rise from a spontaneous build-up, any capacity design or ductility concepts are neglected being designed only to bear vertical loads: thus, the vulnerability assessment of this class becomes crucial. To investigate the non-linear seismic response of these structures, suitable models and effective numerical tools are needed. Among the various modelling approaches proposed in the literature and codes, the authors focus their attention on the equivalent frame model. After a brief description of the adopted model and its numerical validation, the authors aim to point out some specific peculiarities of the seismic response of mixed masonry-RC structures and their repercussions on safety verification procedures (referring in particular way to the non-linear static ones). In particular, the results of non-linear static analyses performed parametrically to various configurations representative of different interventions are discussed.


mixed masonry-RC buildings;displacement based assessment;non-linear static analysis;equivalent frame model


  1. Antoniou, S. and Pinho, R. (2004), "Advantages and limitations of adaptive and non-adaptive force-based pushover procedures", J. Earthq. Eng., 8, 497-552.
  2. Augenti, N. and Parisi, F. (2009), "Numerical analyses of masonry-RC combined systems", Proceedings of PROHITECH 2009 Conference, Rome, Italy, 2, 1109-1114.
  3. Benedetti, D. and Magenes, G. (2001), "Correlation between damage and dissipated energy in masonry buildings", Ingegneria Sismica, 2, 53-62 (In Italian).
  4. Bull, D.K., Ireland, M.G. and Pampanin, S. (2006), "Concept and implementation of a selective weakening approach for the seismic retrofit of R.C. buildings", Proceedings of NZSEE Conference, 9.
  5. Calderini, C., Cattari, S. and Lagomarsino, S. (2009), "In-plane strength of unreinforced masonry piers", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 38(2), 243-267.
  6. Cattari, S. (2007), "Equivalent frame modelling of existing mixed masonry-reinforced concrete buildings: formulation of simplified models", PhD Thesis, University of Genoa, (In Italian).
  7. Chopra, A.K., Goel, R.K. and Chintanapakdee, C. (2004), "Evaluation of a modified MPA procedure assuming higher modes as elastic to estimate seismic demands", Earthq. Spectra, 20(3), 757-778.
  8. Eurocode 8 - Part 1-1 (2005), Design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures. Part 1-1: General rules - Seismic actions and general requirements for structures. ENV 1998-1, CEN: Brussels.
  9. Eurocode 8- Part 3 (2005), Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 3: Assessment and retrofitting of buildings. ENV 1998-3, CEN: Brussels.
  10. Fajfar, P. (2000), "A non linear analysis method for performance-based seismic design", Earthq. Spectra, 16(3), 573-591.
  11. FEMA 356 (2000), "Pre-standard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings", Appl. Tecnol. Council (ATC), Washington D.C.
  12. FEMA 306 (1998), "Evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and masonry wall buildings. Basic procedures manual", Appl. Technol. Council (ATC), Redwood City, CA.
  13. FIB (2003), "Displacement-based seismic design of reinforced concrete buildings, State-of-art report prepared by Task Group 7.2", Edited by Federation Internationale du Beton (Fib).
  14. Italian Code for Structural Design (2008), D.M. 14/1/2008, Official Bullettin no. 29 of February 4 2008 (In Italian).
  15. Istruction document to the Italian Code for Structural Design (2009), Official Bulletin no.617 of February 2 2009 (In Italian).
  16. Galasco, A., Lagomarsino, S., Penna, A. and Resemini, S. (2004), "Non-linear seismic analysis of masonry structures", Proceedings of 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 843.
  17. Galasco, A., Lagomarsino, S. and Penna, A. (2006), "On the use of pushover analysis for existing masonry buildings", Proceedings of First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 1080, CD-ROM.
  18. Gupta, B. and Kunnath, S.K. (2000), "Adaptive spectra-based pushover procedure for seismic evaluation of structures", Earthq. Spectra, 16(2), 367-391.
  19. Jurukovski, D., Krstevska, L., Alessi, R., Diotallevi, P.P., Merli, M. and Zarri, F. (1992), "Shaking table tests of three four-storey brick masonry models: Original and strengthened by RC core and by RC jackets", Proceedings of 10th World Conference on earthquake engineering, Madrid, Spain, 2795-2800.
  20. HAZUS (1999), "Earthquake loss estimation methodology", Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
  21. Lagomarsino, S. and Cattari, S. (2009), "Non linear seismic analysis of masonry buildings by the equivalent frame model", Proceedings of 11th D-A-CH Conference, Zurich, (invited paper), Documentation SIA D 0231, ISBN 978-3-03732-021-1.
  22. Lagomarsino, S. and Magenes, G. (2009), "Evaluation and reduction of the vulnerability of masonry buildings", State of Earthquake Engineering Research in Italy: the RELUIS-DPC 2005-2008 Project, Gaetano Manfredi and Mauro Dolce editors ISBN 978-88-89972-14-4 -Doppiavoce Napol, 1-50.
  23. Lagomarsino, S., Penna, A., Galasco, A. and Cattari, S. (2012), TREMURI program: Seismic analyses of 3D masonry buildings, Release 2.0, University of Genoa, Italy (mailto:
  24. Magenes, G. and Della Fontana, A. (1998), "Simplified non-linear seismic analysis of masonry buildings", Proceedings of the British Masonry Society, 8, 190-195.
  25. Magenes, G. (2000), "A method for pushover analysis in seismic assessment of masonry buildings", Proceedings of 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, (CD-ROM).
  26. Mann, W. and Muller, H. (1980), "Failure of shear-stressed masonry - An enlarged theory, tests and application to shear-walls", Proc. of the International Symposium on Loadbearing Brickwork, London, 1-13.
  27. Pagnini, L., Vicente, R., Lagomarsino S. and Varum, H. (2011), "A mechanical model for the seismic vulnerability assessment of old masonry buildings", Earthq. Struct., 2(1), 25-42.
  28. Panagiotakos, T.B. and Fardis, M.N. (2001), "Deformations of RC members at yielding and ultimate", ACI Struct. J., 98(2), 135-148.
  29. Royal Italian Decree no.193 18 April 1909 (1909) (in Italian).
  30. Seismostruct Program, Release 3.1.0 (
  31. Tomazevic, M. (1978), "The computer program POR", Report ZRMK (in Slovenian).
  32. Tomazevic, M., Modena, C., Velechovsky, T. and Weiss, P. (1990), "The effect of reinforcement on the seismic behaviour of masonry buildings with mixed structural system: an experimental study", Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Moscow, 162-171.
  33. Turnsek, V. and Cacovic, F. (1970), "Some experimental results on the strength of brick masonry walls", Proceedings of the 2nd International Brick Masonry Conference, Stoke-on-Trent, 149-156.
  34. 3Muri Program, Release 4.0.5 (

Cited by

  1. Quasi-static cyclic tests of two mixed reinforced concrete–unreinforced masonry wall structures vol.71, 2014,
  2. Seismic assessment and retrofitting of Pombalino buildings by pushover analyses vol.7, pp.1, 2014,
  3. Seismic vulnerability and risk analysis of the old building stock at urban scale: application to a neighbourhood in Lisbon vol.15, pp.7, 2017,
  4. Efficiency and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Seismic Strengthening Techniques for Old Residential Buildings in Lisbon 2017,
  5. Seismic vulnerability assessment of a mixed masonry–RC building aggregate by linear and nonlinear analyses vol.14, pp.8, 2016,
  6. Fragility curves for old masonry building types in Lisbon vol.13, pp.10, 2015,
  7. TREMURI program: An equivalent frame model for the nonlinear seismic analysis of masonry buildings vol.56, 2013,
  8. Simplified survey form of unreinforced masonry buildings calibrated on data from the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake 2017,
  9. The seismic performance of stone masonry buildings in Faial island and the relevance of implementing effective seismic strengthening policies vol.141, 2017,
  10. Modeling the Seismic Response of Modern URM Buildings Retrofitted by Adding RC Walls vol.20, pp.4, 2016,
  11. Use of the model parameter sensitivity analysis for the probabilistic-based seismic assessment of existing buildings pp.1573-1456, 2018,
  12. Building survey forms for heterogeneous urban areas in seismically hazardous zones. Application to the historical center of Valparaíso, Chile vol.12, pp.7-8, 2018,
  13. Seismic Evaluation and Strengthening of an Existing Masonry Building in Sarajevo, B&H vol.9, pp.2, 2019,