Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Gutenberg Richter
Gutenberg Richter
p
=2 /T
p
INCERC Bucuresti
P
S
D
Peri
T
B
=0.07
T
D
=3
5.775/T
2
1.925/T
0
=2.75
T
C
=0.7s
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Perioada T, s
T
C
=1.0s
2.75/T
0
=2.75
T
B
=0.1
T
D
=3
0.7s<Tc 1.0s
=0.05
Tc 0.7s
=0.05
8.25/T
2
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
T, s Perioada
T
D
=2
8.8/T
2
4.4/T
0
=2.75
T
B
=0.16
T
C
=1.6s
1.0s<Tc 1.6s
= 0.05
Period T,s
Period T,s
Figure 7. Normalised acceleration
design spectra for various soil condition
in Romania, P100-2004 code proposal
Period T,s
9
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
Figure 9. Romania. Control period of response spectra, P100-2003
2. Vulnerable buildings in Romania
The major developments in four generations of seismic codes in Romania can be
described as in Figure 10 when the history of overall seismic design coefficient, C
s
for shear wall
and frames structures in Bucharest is represented (1940-2002). The geometry of C
s
is self
explanatory.
One may note the gap of the C
s
for flexible buildings and structures during the period
1963-1978.
However, even for rigid structures built during that period, the maximum C
s
was about
2/3 of the present day C
s
.
It is emphasised that after the 1977 event, new ductility rules for RC structures were
imported from US practice and incorporated into Romanian seismic codes, P100. According to
the EUROCODE 8 requirements the rules were significantly improved after 1989.
10
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
0.1
0.4
0.7
1
1.3
1.6
1.9
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Seismic
design
coefficient
C
s
, %
8-10
6-8
4-6
2-4
Year of code issue
Building period
T , s
10 %
8%
12.5 %
10%
5 %
2.2%
1.8%
2%
Shear walls
Frames
0.3 s
1.5 s
T
c
=1.5 s
1941
1945
1990
1992
1978
1981
1970
1963
7.5%
7.5%
7.2%
6.8%
T
c
=0.4 s
RIGID
buildings
FLEXIBLE
buildings
Ductile structures
Non ductile buildings
Figure 10. Evolution of seismic design coefficient in Bucharest during period 1940-2003
Example of the vulnerable residential, hospital, schools, churches in important cities of Romania
are given in the following:
Vulnerable residential buildings
-from Ministry of Transports, Constructions and Tourism of Romania-
City
Number of vulnerable
buildings
Number of
inhabitants
Bacau 6 208.643
Barlad 6 78.786
Braila 4 232.409
Brasov 8 312.481
Bucharest 123+ ... 2.011.305
Buzau 1 146.926
Campina 2 40.297
Iasi 49 347.606
Roman 1 81.731
Suceava 1 118.183
Targu-Mures 1 164.132
Vaslui 6 78.735
11
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
Vulnerable school buildings
-from Ministry of Education and Research of Romania-
Number of vulnerable schools
City
Requiring
technical
assessment
Having a
technical
report
Having
technical
documents
Total
Bacau 1 - - 1
Barlad 11 - - 11
Brasov 7 2 - 9
Bucharest 13 7 2 22
Constanta - - 1 1
Craiova 2 - 5 7
Galati 1 2 - 3
Giurgiu 2 - - 2
Iasi 3 5 - 8
Pitesti - 1 1 2
Ploiesti 1 5 - 6
Sibiu 3 1 - 4
Vaslui 10 - - 10
Total 54 23 9 86
Vulnerable hospital buildings
-from Ministry of Health and Family of Romania-
Number of vulnerable hospitals
CITY
Severely damaged.
Requiring immediate
technical assessment
Having a technical
report
Approved project
for retrofitting
Retrofitting in
work
Total
Bacau 3 3
Barlad 2 2
Bucharest 13 16 6 10 45
Buzau 9 9
Constanta 7 7
Craiova 4 4
Focsani 2 2
Galati 6 2 1 9
Giurgiu 1 1
Iasi 21 17 2 5 45
Pitesti 2 7 9
Ploiesti 2 2
Sibiu 1 1
Targu-Mures 2 2
Vaslui 4 1 5
12
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
Vulnerable buildings belonging to the cultural heritage
Examples
Orthodox Churches damaged after major historical earthquakes in Bucharest
No. Name Address 1802 1838 1940 1977
1
Manastirea
Plumbuita, de la
Podul Colentinei
Str. Plumbuita 58 severe
2 Manastirea Marcuta
Str. Gentianei din
Sos. Pantelimon
severe
3
Doamnei (fosta
manastire)
Intr. Bis. Doamnei 3,
Calea Victoriei 28
medium
4 Sf. Gheorghe-Nou Bd. Bratianu 27 medium
5 Manastirea Antim
Str. Mitropolitul Antim
Ivireanu 29
light
6 Sf. Elefterie-Vechi Str. Sf. Elefterie 15C medium medium
7 Oborul-Vechi Str. Traian 204 medium medium
8 Sf. Pantelimon Str. Iancu Capitanu 24 severe
9 Popa Rusu Str. Popa Rusu 13-17 medium
10 Precupetii Noi
Str. G-ral Ernest
Brosteanu 12
medium
11 Doamna Ghica-Tei Str. Doamna Ghica 2 medium
12
Manastirea
Sf. Spiridon-Nou
Calea Serban Voda 29 medium
13 Sf, Nicolae Tabacu Calea Victoriei 180 medium medium
14 Sf. Nicolae-Selari
Str. Blanari 16 /
Intr. Selari
collapse
15 Sf. Mina (Vergului) Str. C. F. Robescu 18A medium
16
Herastrau-Sfintii
Apostoli Petru si
Pavel
Str. Nicolae Caranfil
28
medium
17 Dobroteasa
Bd. Mircea Voda
35B
medium
18 Amzei Str. Biserica Amzei 12 light medium
19
Biserica si Scoala
Sf. Silvestru
Str. Silvestru 36 medium
20 Boteanu (cu Bradu) Str. Boteanu 8 medium severe
21 Popa Nan
Str. Popa Nan 47 bis si
Str. Gh. Costa-Foru 5
severe severe
22
Sfantul Apostol
Andrei-Chitila II
Sos. Chitilei 138 severe
23 Aparatorii Patriei II Str. Lunca Barzesti 3 medium
13
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
5
1
6
20
24
10
9
12
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000
Bucharest
Cultural heritage orthodox churches
Figure 11. Distribution by age of churches listed as cultural heritage
(Data source: National Institute of Historical Monuments Bucharest, 2004)
The 87 churches from Bucharest listed by the Romanian Ministry of Culture as historic
monuments (Source: National Institute of Historical Monuments Bucharest, 2004) are
represented in Figure 11.
2
4
16
20
16
29
47
50
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000
Bucharest
All orthodox churches
Figure 12. Distribution by age of all orthodox churches
(Data source: Atlas Guide of religious buildings in Bucharest, Vol 1, 2, 3, 1999)
14
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
3. Fragility functions for representative building types
Table 5 lists the several typical modern model building in contemporary Romania.
Table 5. Model building types in Romania
Height
No. Label Description Range Typical
Name Stories Stories Meters
1
2
RC1M
RC1H
Concrete Moment Frame
Mid-Rise
High-Rise
4 - 7
8+
6
10
17.1
28.5
3
4
RC2M
RC2H
Concrete Shear Walls
Mid-Rise
High-Rise
4 - 7
8+
6
10
17.1
28.5
The building capacity curve (also known as a push-over curve) is a plot of a building
lateral load resistance as a function of a characteristic lateral displacement (i.e., a force-
deflection plot). It is derived from a plot of static-equivalent base shear versus building (e.g.,
roof) displacement. In order to facilitate direct comparison with earthquake demand (i.e.
overlaying the capacity curve with a response spectrum), the force (base shear) axis is converted
to spectral acceleration and the displacement axis is converted to spectral displacement.
The three control points that define model building capacity in Figure 13 are related to:
Design capacity
Yield capacity
Ultimate capacity
Sa
Sd
Dy Du Dd
Au
Ay
Ad
Ultimate
Capacity
Yield
Capacity
Design
Capacity
Figure 13. Example Building Capacity Curve, HAZUS
The classification suggested by Park, Ang & Wen was adapted for the damage states, Table 6.
15
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
Table 6.
Range of damage index Damage state
DI 0.1 None
0.1 < DI 0.25 Slight
0.20 < DI 0.40 Moderate
0.40 < DI < 1.00 Extensive
DI 1.00 Complete
In RISK-UE project, example of building fragility curves for Slight, Moderate, Extensive
and Complete structural damage states for above typical building types were computed. Example
results are indicated in Figure 14, Figure 15 and Figure 16.
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
1941-1962 1963-1969 1970-1977 1978-1989 1989-2002
Seismic code period
A
y
,
'
g
RC1H
RC2H
Figure 14. Yielding acceleration, A
y
according to seismic code period
16
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
1941-1962 1963-1969 1970-1977 1978-1989 1989-2002
Seismic code period
A
u
,
'
g
RC1H
RC2H
Figure 15. Ultimate acceleration, A
u
according to seismic code period
RC1H, 1990-2002
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 10 20 30 40 5
SD, cm
P
(
>
d
s
|
S
D
)
0
Slight
Moderate
Extensive
Complete
Figure 16. Fragility Curves for Slight, Moderate, Extensive and Complete Damage
17
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
PRIORITY FP6-2002-INCO-MPC-1
References
JICA Technical Cooperation Project "Reduction of Seismic Risk for Buildings and Structures" with Romania, 2002-
2007, Ref.#7241011E0
P100-2004, draft code for design of earthquake resistant buildings in Romania.
Vrancea Earthquakes. Tectonics, Hazard and Risk Mitigation, 1999. Contributions from the First International
Workshop on Vrancea Earthquakes, Bucharest, Romania, Nov.1-4, 1997, Wenzel, F., Lungu, D., Editors,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 374 p.
Arion, C., 2003. Seismic Zonation of Romania considering the soil condition and seismic sources. PhD Thesis
UTCB, Bucharest, 181p.
Lungu D., Arion, C., Aldea A., Seismic protection of the cultural heritage buildings, oral presentation at The VII
th
National Conference for protection of cultural heritage patrimony, Bucharest, March 31 April 2 2005.
Lungu D., Aldea A., Arion, C., Demetriu S.,Cornea T., 2000. Microzonage Sismique de la ville de Bucarest -
Roumanie, Cahier Technique de lAssociation Franaise du Gnie Parasismique, No.20, p.31-63
Lungu, D., Cornea, T., Aldea, A., Zaicenco, A., (1997). Basic representation of seismic action. In: Design of
structures in seismic zones: Eurocode 8 - Worked examples. TEMPUS PHARE CM Project 01198:
Implementing of structural Eurocodes in Romanian civil engineering standards. Edited by D.Lungu,
F.Mazzolani and S.Savidis.Bridgeman Ltd., Timisoara, p.1-60.
Radu, C. manuscripts, (1994). Catalogues of earthquakes occurred on Romanian territory during the periods 984-
1990 and 1901-1994.