Conference PaperPDF Available

Monitoring, Assessment and Diagnosis of Fraeylemaborg in Groningen, Netherlands

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Fraeylemaborg is a noble house in an earthquake-stricken area of the Netherlands due to the induced seismicity events in the region. The structure is located in the middle of the town of Slochteren which gave its name to the largest gas field in the world upon its discovery in 1959. The gas extraction has caused small-magnitude shallow earthquakes during the last decade, damaging not only the residential inventory but also the historical structures in the area. The main building of Fraeylemaborg sits on an artificial island surrounded by water channels, rendering the problem of earthquake response even more complicated. A small part of the main structure on the island was built in the 14 th century, while the construction of additional parts and morphological alterations had taken place until the 18 th century. The structure has been subjected to several small magnitude earthquakes causing damages on the load bearing system. An extensive renovation and repair of damages took place in recent years, however the latest seismic events imposed again damage to the structure. This paper presents a project of monitoring, assessment and diagnosis of problems for the Fraeylemaborg, the most important "borg" of the region, underlining the particularities of the induced seismicity problem. The FE model has been calibrated by using ambient vibration tests. Combination of earthquake and soil settlement loads have been applied on the calibrated model. The paper develops scenarios that help in explaining the reasons behind the damages on this structure during the recent shallow and low-magnitude induced seismicity earthquakes.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Monitoring, Assessment and Diagnosis
of Fraeylemaborg in Groningen, Netherlands
Dimitris Dais
1,2
, Eleni Smyrou
2(&)
, Ihsan Engin Bal
2
,
and Jelle Pama
3
1
Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
2
Hanze University of Applied Sciences Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
{d.dais,e.smyrou,i.e.bal}@pl.hanze.nl
3
Structural Design, Hanze University of Applied Sciences Groningen,
Groningen, Netherlands
j.pama@pl.hanze.nl
Abstract. Fraeylemaborg is a noble house in an earthquake-stricken area of the
Netherlands due to the induced seismicity events in the region. The structure is
located in the middle of the town of Slochteren which gave its name to the
largest gas eld in the world upon its discovery in 1959. The gas extraction has
caused small-magnitude shallow earthquakes during the last decade, damaging
not only the residential inventory but also the historical structures in the area.
The main building of Fraeylemaborg sits on an articial island surrounded by
water channels, rendering the problem of earthquake response even more
complicated. A small part of the main structure on the island was built in the
14
th
century, while the construction of additional parts and morphological
alterations had taken place until the 18
th
century. The structure has been sub-
jected to several small magnitude earthquakes causing damages on the load
bearing system. An extensive renovation and repair of damages took place in
recent years, however the latest seismic events imposed again damage to the
structure. This paper presents a project of monitoring, assessment and diagnosis
of problems for the Fraeylemaborg, the most important borgof the region,
underlining the particularities of the induced seismicity problem. The FE model
has been calibrated by using ambient vibration tests. Combination of earthquake
and soil settlement loads have been applied on the calibrated model. The paper
develops scenarios that help in explaining the reasons behind the damages on
this structure during the recent shallow and low-magnitude induced seismicity
earthquakes.
Keywords: Seismic response Induced seismicity Structural monitoring
Ambient vibration tests
1 Introduction
Groningen is the largest gas eld in Europe and 10th in the world. Due to the extensive
gas extraction induced earthquakes of relatively largermagnitude have been recorded
in the very last decade. The building stock in the region comprises single- and two-
storey unreinforced masonry (URM) houses constructed with no seismic considerations.
©RILEM 2019
R. Aguilar et al. (Eds.): Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions,
RILEM Bookseries 18, pp. 21882196, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99441-3_235
URM responds to cyclic load reversals in a non-ductile way unless special mea-
sures are taken. Moreover, low normal stresses on the load bearing and veneer walls in
conjunction with the recursive nature of the seismic actions, irrespective of their low
amplitude, can lead to micro damage [1].
The herein study focuses on the assessment of the current condition of Fraeyle-
maborg, an emblematic historical building of the region that has suffered damage due
to several earthquakes, among which the Slochteren event (2017) that its epicenter lied
only 2 km away from Fraeylemaborg.
2 Fraeylemaborg and Its Damage History
The historical building of Fraeylemaborg in Slochteren sits on the gas eld of the
Groningen region. Fraeylemaborg (Fig. 1) was built in 1300 as an austere stone house.
In the 16
th
century, the house expanded and was embellished, and a moat around the
structure was dug. After 1670 the two wings were added giving its U-shaped shape,
while in 1781, a major renovation took place that determined the current appearance of
the mansion [2]. The structure is composed of thick clay brick walls and wooden oors.
The plan of the building is 28.6 m long and 22.6 m wide. The top of the tower reaches
20 m height. The tower did not exist in the initial state of the building but was added in
a later phase, therefore, there is a partial connection of the tower to the building,
namely, only two sides of the tower are connected to the adjacent walls of the structure
while the other two simply sit on the wooden oor. The extensive damage on the
building (Fig. 2) due to the recent seismic activity (Table 1) has been repaired so no
cracks on the building walls were visible at the time of assessment.
3 Damage Scenario, Field Measurements and Numerical
Model
The cracks on the structure, both horizontal and vertical, were scattered along the walls
without any distinctive pattern, atypical for cracks caused by a seismic excitation which
tend to develop diagonally accumulating at the wall bottom and extending along the wall
height. Moreover, the small cracks on the retaining walls and the open bended shape of
the vertical rod of the wall anchors (Fig. 2d) evidence movement of the retaining wall
followed by the soil beneath and resulting in differential displacements and settlement of
the structure. These observations led to the hypothesis that soil movements initiated by
earthquake events, not the seismic loading itself, inicted damage, correlating thus the
damage patterns with the deformability of the foundation [3].
Fig. 1. Fraeylemaborg
Monitoring, Assessment and Diagnosis of Fraeylemaborg 2189
For validating the aforementioned hypothesis, a detailed 3-D numerical model
(Fig. 3) was constructed utilizing the Finite Element software Abaqus [4]. Solid 10-
node quadratic tetrahedron elements (C3D10) were used. The structural elements, i.e.
the clay brick walls and wooden oors, were modeled as solid homogenous members
with isotropic elastic properties.
A rather simple experimental study was carried out to obtain some rough material
properties of the existing structure: Six bricks retrieved during the previous restoration
works were subjected to compression tests. Their compressive strength was 0.25 MPa
in average (standard deviation 0.052 MPa), a value considerably lower than those
obtained from recent experimental studies [5,6] on clay bricks currently used in the
construction in Groningen. Due to lack of any other material tests the elastic material
properties of the URM walls and the wooden oors were calibrated based on the
ndings from in-situ ambient vibration measurements carried out on the building
within this study. Force-balanced accelerometer sensors with ultra-low self-noise, both
in uniaxial and triaxial versions, were placed at the top oor (Fig. 4) and the top of the
tower in appropriate locations, while the motion at the foundation level was assumed
zero. The sensors were xed on the brick walls as the wooden oor did not provide a
rigid diaphragm.
Fig. 2. (a) View from North towards South (in red the wing with extensive damage), (b & c)
Wall cracks, (d) Cracks on the retaining wall and detachment of the vertical rod of the anchors
that constrain the wall to the soil layer beneath.
Table 1. The main events recorded in the Groningen region after the Huizinge event (2012).
Place Date Lat [°] Lon [°] Depth [km] M PGA [cm/s
2
]
Huizinge 16-08-2012 53.345 6.671 3 3.6 (M
L
)85
Zeerijp 08-01-2018 53.363 6.751 3 3.4 (M
L
) 114
t Zandt 13-02-2014 53.357 6.782 3 3.0 (M
L
)71
Zandeweer 05-11-2014 53.374 6.678 3 2.9 (M
L
)82
Slochteren 27-05-2017 53.211 6.834 3 2.6 (M
L
)34
2190 D. Dais et al.
The measurements from the ambient vibration analysis were processed with
Artemis software [7]. Operational Modal Analysis (OMA) was carried out by means of
Frequency Domain Decomposition (FDD) technique enabling the acquisition of the
natural frequencies (Fig. 5) and the corresponding mode shapes, directly from the raw
measured time series data of the structure under natural conditions.
The numerical model was then calibrated to provide similar rst modes and mode
shapes, achieving a good match as shown in Fig. 5. The modulus of elasticity of the
URM walls was derived as E = 1 GPa. The difference between this value and the value
of 4.7 GPa estimated after tests on Groningen resembling wall specimens [5,6]is
justiable considering that materials used some centuries ago are expected to have
considerably lower properties than similar modern materials.
The subsequent modes represent local modes. The wooden oors do not behave as
rigid diaphragms, thus a semi-exible assumption simulates more accurately the real
case. The displacement values corresponding to the rst mode deformed shape, as
computed by both Abaqus and Artemis analyses, are presented in Fig. 6exhibiting a
satisfactory match between eld and numerical analysis results. The values indicated
have been normalized with respect to the maximum value of deformation obtained
from the sensors placed at the top oor. The primary translational direction is along y
axis. The structure in the rst mode shape oscillates in the y direction and the x
component is negligible, thus the x component is not presented in the gure.
Fig. 3. The 3-D numerical model in Abaqus (the clay brick walls in maroon color, wooden oor
in green).
Fig. 4. Locations of the accelerometer sensors during ambient vibration measurements. The
blue arrows indicate the direction the sensors recorded.
Monitoring, Assessment and Diagnosis of Fraeylemaborg 2191
The OMA results highlight also that the tower does not follow the main structure in
y direction, while in x direction its displacements are not negligible. Such a response is
explicable considering the connection of the tower to the main walls beneath, as
already mentioned, nevertheless, it is difcult to be captured by the numerical model in
which the tower was modelled as fully xed to rest of the building. At this point the
response of the tower attached on the top oor of the structure is explained. According
to the results from the Artemis analysis, the tower in the rst mode seems to deform
incoherently with the rest of the building, while the component of displacement is not
negligible in the x direction. This behavior can be explained by the way that the tower
is connected to the building. For the scope of this study, the xed connection is deemed
adequate, however, the real response of the tower should be taken into account in the
nal assessment of the response of the structure.
Fig. 5. The rst six modes of the model as obtained with Artemis software by means of
Frequency Domain Decomposition (FDD) (a) and comparison of the rst 6 modes as calculated
by Abaqus and Artemis Modal software (b).
Fig. 6. Normalised displacements in y direction for the 1
st
mode shape derived from Artemis
(red) and Abaqus (black). Note: Sensors at positions 3 and 5 are uniaxial and record only in x
direction.
2192 D. Dais et al.
4 Numerical Analyses
Since the validated numerical model provides a realistic estimation of the response of
the structure, analyses were conducted to gain further insight. In particular, the fol-
lowing scenarios were considered:
Settlement in the North side of the structure
Static equivalent horizontal earthquake load
Settlement in the North side of the structure and then static equivalent horizontal
earthquake load
As there are no measurements of the soil deformations, a possible settlement pattern
was regarded. As explained above, a likely opening of the front (North side) retaining
walls would impose a possible lateral and/or vertical movement of the foundations.
This may be a plausible explanation for the extensive cracks in the front (North) walls
of the structure, after seismic events. A soil movement of such would result in dif-
ferential settlements in the front part of the structure.
The seismic hazard study for the exact location of the structure were taken into
consideration in order to have an estimation of the seismic forces. A very thorough grid
of site-specic parameters has been established for the calculation of the elastic design
response spectrum [8] in correspondence with the newly developed Dutch seismic
guidelines (Draft NPR 9998:2017) [9]. The obtained response spectra for return periods
475 and 2475 years are presented in the Fig. 7. Specically, for each return period, two
response spectra are created: one coming from the exact site-specic response (UHS
data) and one from the smooth design spectrum as calculated by the Draft NPR
9998:2017 parameters and specication. The rst mode shape of the structure (T1 = 0.
35 s as calculated by the analysis in Abaqus) falls into the plateau of the design spectra
according to the existing seismic codes and the spectral acceleration is 0.62 g. This
acceleration was imposed to the building in a quasi-static way. It should be noted that
the main purpose of this paper is to explain the possible causes of the observed
damages, but not to nd the accurate damage distribution in the building for a specic
seismic load level. In this respect, the seismic acceleration levels applied to the
structure during the numerical analyses are rather indicative.
In this paper only the results for acceleration in the x direction of the building will
be shown. In Fig. 7, the response spectra from the strongest record from the earthquake
events Huizinge (2012), Zeerijp (2018) and Slochteren (2017) are highlighted as well.
The waveforms were retrieved from the Seismic Network dataset of KNMI [10]. The
epicenter of the Slochteren (2017) record (PGA 34 cm/sec
2
) was about 2 km from
Fraeyelemaborg and it caused some limited damages to the walls of the structure. It
ought to be noted that for the records from the 3 seismic events the direction of the
maximum PGA was calculated and the corresponding response spectra are presented in
Fig. 7. More specications about the calculation of the direction of the maximum PGA
can be found in the study by Smyrou et al. [11]
The third and last scenario that was taken into consideration was the combination of
the rst and the second scenario. Precisely, rstly the settlement pattern was imposed
and then the seismic loading was taken into effect.
Monitoring, Assessment and Diagnosis of Fraeylemaborg 2193
In Fig. 8, the response of the North-West wall of the structure is presented for the
scenario (1). The location of the aforementioned wall can be seen in the Fig. 8(a) and
(b). The contour of the maximum principle stresses shows that the regions with the
maximum stresses are in good agreement with the damage pattern traced in the real
structure, as shown in Fig. 8(a) and (b).
Fig. 7. The response spectra as prescribed by the new-developed seismic code of the
Netherlands (NPR) [9] and from the exact site-specic response (UHS data). The response
spectra from the strongest record from the earthquake events Huizinge (2012), Zeerijp (2018) and
Slochteren (2017) are highlighted as well.
Fig. 8. (a) The crack pattern observed in North-West wingof the structure, (b) the response of
the same wall for the scenario (1), (c) the response of the structure for the scenario (2) (North
side) and (d) the response of the structure for the scenario (3) (North side). For (b), (c) and (d) the
contours show the maximum principal strengths with the grey parts depicting the locations that
the stresses are evolving excessively.
2194 D. Dais et al.
For the scenario (2), the same results are shown in the Fig. 8c. It can be easily
inferred that the regions of the maximum stresses are in the diagonal direction a
typical crack pattern for URM under seismic excitation. As it was noted above, this is
the expected crack pattern if the damage was caused solely by the earthquake load.
Lastly, for the scenario (3), it can be stated that the regions with the possible
damage extend in a wider part of the front walls as in comparison with the scenario (2).
Thus, it is evident that the imposed settlements have impact on the response of the
structure under seismic loading. More specically, it must be taken into consideration
that for the design earthquake load the potential damage will be more extensive for the
case that the building has already suffered some settlements.
5 Conclusions
Fraeylemaborg experienced severe damages during the past seismic activities. This
study combines the collected data and the numerical analyses results to nd out pos-
sible scenarios for explaining the damage.
The numerical models used in the study were calibrated by using the ambient
vibration test results. It was found out that the modulus of elasticity of the brick
masonry is up to 5 times lower than the reported value for the residential URM houses
in the region. This is also in line with the compression tests conducted on representative
bricks from the structure. Furthermore, the numerically determined mode shapes and
vibration periods are in good agreement with the eld measurements.
The emblematic tower of the structure sits on the bearing walls not with full xity
but with a relatively loose support system. The tower thus found in the ambient test
results to move separately than the rest of the structure, an important aspect that needs
to be reected in future numerical models.
The structural cracks observed in the past events were compared with numerically
created loading simulations on the calibrated computer model of the structure. It was
found that the lateral and/or vertical soil movement along the URM retaining walls,
triggered by the seismic events, can be a reasonable scenario that occurred during the
latest seismic events.
Acknowledgments. The authors would like to thank the board of Fraeylemaborg Foundation,
and specically Mrs. Marjon Edzes and Mr. Gerard de Haan for their help and cooperation.
Fugro ofces in Groningen and in Istanbul are also acknowledged for their insights into the soil
properties in the region. Special thanks to Mrs. Bern Yardak, Mr. Jelmer Bakker and Mr.
Remco van den Belt, students of Hanze University of Applied Sciences, for the valuable data
collected during their undergraduate project. Finally, the nancial support from EPI Kennis-
centrum in Groningen is gratefully acknowledged.
Monitoring, Assessment and Diagnosis of Fraeylemaborg 2195
References
1. Dais D, Bal IE, Smyrou E (2017) Discussion on the response of unreinforced masonry to
low-amplitude recursive loads: case of Groningen gas eld. In: Proceedings of the
international conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake
engineering, Rhodes, Greece
2. https://toerisme.groningen.nl/en/see-and-do/culture/museums-and-monuments/
fraeylemaborg/1102
3. Manos GC, Kotoulas L, Matsou V, Felekidou O (2015) Dynamic and earthquake behaviour
of greek post-byzantine churches with foundation deformabilityexperimental investigation
of stone masonry material properties. In: Psycharis I, Pantazopoulou S, Papadrakakis M
(eds) Seismic assessment, behavior and retrot of heritage buildings and monuments.
computational methods in applied sciences, vol 37. Springer
4. Abaqus-Inc. (2013) Abaqus User Manual, Version 6.13. Dassault Systèmes Simulia
Corp. Providence, RI, USA
5. Messali F, Ravenshorst G, Esposito R, Rots J (2017) Large-scale testing program for the
seismic characterization of Dutch masonry walls. In: 16th world conference on earthquake,
Santiago, Chile [4753]
6. Graziotti F, Tomassetti U, Rossi A, Kallioras S, Mandirola M, Penna A, Magenes G (2017)
Full scale shaking table test on a URM cavity wall terraced house building. In: 16th WCEE,
Santiago, Chile
7. Structural Vibration Solutions A/S. ARTeMIS Modal 5 (2016). http://www.svibs.com
8. http://seismischekrachten.nen.nl/webtool.php?lang=en
9. Draft NPR 9998:2017
10. KNMI (1993) Netherlands seismic and acoustic network. Royal Netherlands Meteorological
Institute (KNMI). Other/Seismic Network. https://doi.org/10.21944/e970fd34-23b9-3411-
b366-e4f72877d2c5
11. Smyrou E, Tasiopoulou P, Bal I E, Gazetas G (2011) Ground motions versus geotechnical
and structural damage in the February 2011 christchurch earthquake. Seismological Res Lett
82(6): 882892
2196 D. Dais et al.
... Given the lack of any experimental data for the materials found in the structure, the elastic properties of the model calibrated against ambient vibration tests that took place on site. More details on the site tests and on the nonlinear material properties can be found in Dais et al. (2019). The model was able to accurately reproduce the experimentally obtained mode shapes of the structure both global and local. ...
... The nonlinear numerical model was subjected to different scenarios to see if a correlation can be established between the analytical findings and the past damage. As explained in Dais et al. (2019), there are findings (i.e. crack patterns, concentration of damage) in the structure that support the occurrence of a soil settlement in the NW wing; thus, a settlement was applied in that wing analytically. ...
Article
In case of induced seismicity, expectations from a structural monitoring system are different than in the case of natural seismicity. In this paper, monitoring results of a historical building in Groningen (Netherlands) in case of induced seismicity has been presented. Results of the monitoring, particularities of the monitoring in case of induced earthquakes, as well as the usefulness and need of various monitoring systems for similar cases are discussed. Weak soil properties dominate the structural response in the region; thus, the ground water monitoring as well as the interaction of soil movements with the structural response has also been scrutinized. The proposed study could be effectively used to monitor historical structures subjected to induced seismicity and provide useful information to asset owners to classify the structural health condition of structures in their care. It was shown that the in-plane cracks at the building would normally not be expected in this structure during small induced earthquakes happening in Groningen. One explanation provided here is that the soil parameters, such as shrinking of water-sensitive soil layers, in combination with small earthquakes, may cause settlements. The soil effects may superimpose with the earthquake effects eventually causing small cracks and damage.
... These earthquakes have a significant impact on the URM buildings that were not designed according to any seismic design criteria and are characterized by very slender cavity walls, absence of reinforcement, and little cooperation between walls and floors. Accumulation of damage under small and recursive earthquake motions becomes an important issue in case of induced seismicity, mainly because after the strongest shakings a damage-claim procedure is triggered, in which engineers are asked to judge whether the present cracks and damages are caused by the specific earthquake or not ( Dais et al., 2019). Already inherently difficult, the evaluation becomes cumbersome due to the ambiguity of the relevance to the previously existing damages. ...
Conference Paper
This paper aims to quantify the cumulative damage of unreinforced masonry (URM) subjected to induced seismicity. A numerical model based on discrete element method (DEM) has been develop and was able to represented masonry wall panels with and without openings; which are common typologies of domestic houses in the Groningen gas field in the Netherlands. Within DEM, masonry units were represented as a series of discrete blocks bonded together with zero-thickness interfaces, representing mortar, which can open and close according to the stresses applied on them. Initially, the numerical model has been validated against the experimental data reported in the literature. It was assumed that the bricks would exhibit linear stress-strain behaviour and that opening and slip along the mortar joints would be the predominant failure mechanism. Then, accumulated damage within the seismic response of the masonry walls investigated by means of harmonic load excitations representative of the acceleration time histories recorded during induced seismicity events that occurred in Groningen, the Netherlands.
Book
Full-text available
I was somewhat surprized with the fog in Groningen upon my arrival. This is not the fog that covers the beautiful landscapes of the northern Netherlands in the evening and in the early morning. No... It is the fog that obscures the real aspects of the earthquake problem in the region and is crystallised in the phrase “Groningen earthquakes are different”, which I have encountered numerous times whenever I raised a question of the type “But why..?”. A sentence taken out of the quiver as the absolute technical argument which mysteriously overshadows the whole earthquake discussion. Q: WhydowenotuseEurocode8forseismicdesign,insteadofNPR? A: Because the Groningen earthquakes are different! Q: Whydowenotmonitorourstructuresliketherestoftheworlddoes? A: Because the Groningen earthquakes are different! Q: WhydoesNPR,theDutchseismicguidelines,dictatesomeunusualrules? A: Because the Groningen earthquakes are different! Q: Whyarethehazardlevelsincrediblyhigh,evenhigherthanmostEuropean seismic countries? A: Because the Groningen earthquakes are different! and so it keeps going... This statement is very common, but on the contrary, I have not seen a single piece of research that proves it or even discusses it. In essence, it would be a difficult task to prove that the Groningen earthquakes are different. In any case it barricades a healthy technical discussion because most of the times the arguments converge to one single statement, independent of the content of the discussion. This is the reason why our first research activities were dedicated to study if the Groningen earthquakes are really different. Up until today, we have not found any major differences between the Groningen induced seismicity events and natural seismic events with similar conditions (magnitude, distance, depth, soil etc...) that would affect the structures significantly in a different way. Since my arrival in Groningen, I have been amazed to learn how differently the earthquake issue has been treated in this part of the world. There will always be differences among different cultures, that is understandable. I have been exposed to several earthquake engineers from different countries, and I can expect a natural variation in opinions, approaches and definitions. But the feeling in Groningen is different. I soon realized that, due to several factors, a parallel path, which I call “an augmented reality” below, was created. What I mean by an augmented reality is a view of the real-world, whose elements are augmented and modified. In our example, I refer to the engineering concepts used for solving the earthquake problem, but in an augmented and modified way. This augmented reality is covered in the fog I described above. The whole thing is made so complicated that one is often tempted to rewind the tape to the hot August days of 2012, right after the Huizinge Earthquake, and replay it to today but this time by making the correct steps. We would wake up to a different Groningen today. I was instructed to keep the text as well as the inauguration speech as simple as possible, and preferably, as non-technical as it goes. I thus listed the most common myths and fallacies I have faced since I arrived in Groningen. In this book and in the presentation, I may seem to take a critical view. This is because I try to tell a different part of the story, without repeating things that have already been said several times before. I think this is the very reason why my research group would like to make an effort in helping to solve the problem by providing different views. This book is one of such efforts. The quote given at the beginning of this book reads “How quick are we to learn: that is, to imitate what others have done or thought before. And how slow are we to understand: that is, to see the deeper connections.” is from Frits Zernike, the Nobel winning professor from the University of Groningen, who gave his name to the campus I work at. Applying this quotation to our problem would mean that we should learn from the seismic countries by imitating them, by using the existing state-of-the-art earthquake engineering knowledge, and by forgetting the dogma of “the Groningen earthquakes are different” at least for a while. We should then pass to the next level of looking deeper into the Groningen earthquake problem for a better understanding, and also discover the potential differences.
Article
Full-text available
A shaking table test on a two-storey full scale unreinforced masonry (URM) building was performed at the EUCENTRE laboratory within a comprehensive research programme on the seismic vulnerability of the existing Dutch URM structures. The building specimen was meant to represent the end-unit of a terraced house, built with cavity walls and without any particular seismic design or detailing. Cavity walls are usually composed of an inner loadbearing leaf and an outer leaf having aesthetic and weather-protection functions. In the tested specimen, the loadbearing masonry was composed of calcium silicate bricks, sustaining two reinforced concrete floors. A pitched timber roof was supported by two gable walls. The veneer was made of clay bricks connected to the inner masonry by means of metallic ties, as seen in common construction practice. An incremental dynamic test was carried out up to the near-collapse limit state of the specimen. The input motions were selected to be consistent with the characteristics of induced seismicity ground motions. The article describes the characteristics of the building and presents the results obtained during the material characterization and the shaking table tests, illustrating the response of the structure, the damage mechanism and its evolution during the experimental phases. All the processed data are freely available upon request (see http://www.eucentre.it/nam-project).
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The evaluation of the seismic response of unreinforced masonry buildings is a popular topic all over the world. In recent years, also the Netherlands started to face seismic risk, since the induced seismicity in the north of the country considerably increased (the gas extraction started in 1963, and earthquakes have occurred since the early ‘90s, with the highest magnitude equal to 3.6 on the Richter scale experienced near Huizinge in 2012). This phenomenon has a wide impact on the built environment, which is mainly composed by unreinforced masonry. These buildings were not designed for seismic loading, and present specific characteristics such as very slender walls (a ratio height/thickness equal to 25), limited cooperation between walls and floors, and use of cavity walls, often connected by weak and corroded ties. To predict the behaviour of unreinforced masonry buildings, the use of numerical models and simple analytical design methods is required. These approaches necessitate the characterisation of the masonry at both material and structural level. An extensive large-scale testing program was performed at the Delft University of Technology to create benchmarks for the validation of the numerical and analytical models. The attention was mainly devoted to a terraced house typology, which was widely adopted for housing in the period 1960-1980. These houses were characterised by loadbearing walls of calcium silicate bricks and walls of clay bricks as outer leaves. In this framework, the paper presents an overview of the cyclic pushover tests performed on full-scale walls under either in-plane or out-of-plane loading. Seven full-scale unreinforced masonry (URM) walls were tested under in-plane loading. Two different series of solid brick masonry walls were considered: four specimens (COMP-0a, COMP-1, COMP-2, and COMP-3) were characterized by a high aspect ratio (H/B = 2.5), whereas three specimens (COMP-4, COMP-5, and COMP-6) had low aspect ratios (H/B = 0.6). Also two different configurations were considered, according to the provided boundary conditions at wall ends: cantilever walls, and double clamped walls. Five full-scale URM walls were tested in the out-of-plane direction by applying cyclic loading using a system of airbags. Two different geometries of brick masonry walls were considered: two specimens (COMP-0b and COMP-7) were characterized by a high aspect ratio and tested in a one-way spanning configuration; other three specimens (COMP-10, COMP-11, and COMP-12) had low aspect ratios and were tested in a two-way spanning configuration. All the walls were composed by solid calcium silicate masonry, except specimen COMP-10 which was made of perforated clay brick masonry. Sample COMP-12 contained a window opening, so that two asymmetric piers were determined at the sides of the window. For both the in-plane and the out-of-plane tests a description of the material properties, of the employed set-ups, and of the loading procedures is provided. An overview of the main results is presented.
Conference Paper
During the last years, induced seismicity in the northern part of the Netherlands increased and the seismic assessment of unreinforced masonry (URM) structures became an important issue. As the problem is recent, the current building stock is not designed to withstand earthquakes and national guidelines are under development, but currently not yet legally mandatory. Consequently, the validation of analysis methods, such as numerical models, for the assessment of URM buildings became of importance. In order to provide benchmarks for the validation procedures, an extensive experimental campaign was carried out at Delft University of Technology in 2015. The campaign selected as case study a terraced house typology, which was extensively built in the Netherlands during the period 1960-1980. The focus was on the characterisation of the typology at various levels: material, connection, component and assemblage level. In this paper, the experimental findings related to a cyclic pushover test on an assembled structure resembling a typical Dutch terraced house are presented.
Chapter
The dynamic and earthquake behaviour of Post-Byzantine Christian churches made of stone masonry is examined. All these churches developed damage to their masonry elements due to the amplitude of the gravitational and seismic actions combined with the deformability of the foundation. The numerical results together with assumed strength values are utilized to predict the behaviour of the various masonry parts in in-plane, shear, and normal stress as well as out-of-plane flexure. It is shown that the foundation deformability partly explains the appearance of structural damage. When comparing the numerically predicted regions that reach limit state conditions with actual damage patterns a reasonably good agreement in a qualitative sense can be observed. The masonry walls near the foundation, the door and window openings and the roof appear to be the most vulnerable either in out-of-plane bending or in in-plane shear for the critical combination of seismic forces and gravitational loads. The vaults and domes of the superstructure also appear to be vulnerable. The effectiveness of retrofitting schemes is also discussed. A relatively mild retrofitting scheme is examined that utilizes special mortar injections as well as semi-temporary shoring together with wooden and metal ties. The numerical investigation is supplemented with a series of limited laboratory tests on constituent materials which represent old stone masonry.
Abaqus User Manual, Version 6.13. Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp
  • Abaqus-Inc
Abaqus-Inc. (2013) Abaqus User Manual, Version 6.13. Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp. Providence, RI, USA
Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI)
  • Knmi
KNMI (1993) Netherlands seismic and acoustic network. Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI). Other/Seismic Network. https://doi.org/10.21944/e970fd34-23b9-3411-b366-e4f72877d2c5