Urban non-engineered buildings in Mérida, Venezuela. Seismic performance and proposals for retrofit and for new construction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.12.091Keywords:
Vulnerability, risk, mitigation, non-engineered buildings, seismic strengthening, VenezuelaAbstract
The seismic risk for an informal settlement in Mérida (“La Milagrosa”) is qualitatively assessed and retrofit strategies are proposed. The buildings in the settlement are thoroughly examined and four prototype buildings are chosen to represent the vast majority of houses in “La Milagrosa”. The structural behavior of these buildings under gravity loads and seismic actions is deeply analyzed; this study shows that the prototype buildings are unsafe for gravity loads, and that the seismic demands largely exceed their capacity. Based on these conclusions, feasible retrofit strategies are proposed, together with draft recommendations for new similar constructions. Earlier quantitative estimative appraisals show that the proposed seismic strengthening measures can be very effective in reducing fatalities and economical losses, and are significantly more cost-efficient than reconstruction-based approaches. These conclusions might be generalized to many non-engineered urban areas in earthquake-prone regions of the developing world.
Downloads
References
(1) ISDR (International Secretariat for Disaster Reduction). (2001). Countering disasters; targeting vulnerability, information kit of the 2001 World Disaster Reduction Campaign. http:/ www.unisdr.org/2001/campaign/pa-camp01-kiteng.htm.
(2) EERI/IAEE (Earthquake Engineering Research Institute-International Association of Earthquake Engineering). (2005). Encyclopedia of housing construction types in seismically prone areas of the world. http://www.world-housing.net.
(3) Murty, C.V.R., Brzev, S., Faison, H., Comartin, C.D., Irfanoglu, A. (2006). At risk: the seismic performance of reinforced concrete frame buildings with masonry infill walls. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute-International Association of Earthquake Engineering.
(4) Bolívar, T. (Coordinator). (1994). Densificación y vivienda en los barrios Caraque-os, Contribución a la determinación de problemas y soluciones. Caracas: Consejo Nacional de la Vivienda (CONAVI) - Ministerio de Desarrollo Urbano.
(5) Castillo, A. (2006). Seismic Risk Scenarios for Buildings in Mérida, Venezuela. Detailed Vulnerability Assessment for Non-Engineered Housing (Doctoral Dissertation). Barcelona: Technical University of Catalonia. Available online at: http://www.tdx.cat/TDX-0303106-104140.
(6) Castillo, A., López-Almansa, F., Pujades, L.G. (2011). Seismic risk analysis of urban non-engineered buildings: application to an informal settlement in Mérida, Venezuela. Natural Hazards, 59(2): 891-916. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9805-9
(7) IAEE. (2001). Guidelines for earthquake-resistant non-engineered construction. International Association of Earthquake Engineering
(8) CEN. (2005). EN-1996 Design of masonry structures. European Committee for Standardization.
(9) MINDUR-FUNVISIS. (2001). Norma COVENIN 1756:2001. Edificaciones Sismorresistentes. Caracas: Dirección General Sectorial de Equipamiento del Ministerio de Desarrollo Urbano - Fundación Venezolana de Investigaciones Sísmicas.
(10) Paulay, T., Priestley, M.N.J. (1992). Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. John Wiley. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470172841
(11) ACI-318. (2011). Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary. American Concrete Institute.
(12) Yoshimura, K., Croston, T., Kagami, H., Ishiyama, Y. (1999). Damage to Building Structures Caused by the 1999 Quindío Earthquake in Colombia. http://www.arch.oita-u.ac.jp/a-kou/STRENG-LAB/paper/PDF/colombia-1.pdf.
(13) Pujol, S., Ramírez, J., Sarria, A. (1999). Coffee Zone, Colombia, January 25 Earthquake, Observations on the Behavior of Low-Rise Reinforced Concrete Buildings. http://nisee.berkeley.edu/lessons/colombia.pdf.
(14) PEER (Pacific Earthquake Enginnereing Center). (2000). PEER 2000/09: Structural Engineering Reconnaissance of the August 17, 1999 Earthquake: Kocaeli (Izmit), Turkey. http://peer.berkeley.edu/publications/peer_reports/reports_2000/0009.pdf.
(15) USGS (United States Geological Survey). (2000). Implications for Earthquake Risk Reduction in the United States from the Kocaeli, Turkey, Earthquake of August 17, 1999. http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2000/c1193/.
(16) Ellul F., D'Ayala D. (2004). On the vulnerability assessment of modern low technology engineered residential construction. En 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, paper Nº 880. Vancouver, Canada. PMCid:PMC1739173
(17) Valluzzi, M.R., Binda, L., Modena, C. (2005). Mechanical behavior of historic masonry structures strengthened by bed joints structural repointing. Construction & Building Materials, 19(1): 63-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2004.04.036
(18) EERI/IAEE. (2011). Seismic design guide for low-rise confined masonry buildings. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute-International Association of Earthquake Engineering. http://www.confinedmasonry.org.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the print and online versions of this journal are the property of the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the licence. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 licence must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the final version of the work produced by the publisher, is not allowed.
