GNGTS 2016 - Atti del 35° Convegno Nazionale

426 GNGTS 2016 S essione 2.3 and completeness of information available for the buildings. Classically, this information have been linked to the territorial scale of the investigated area. Consequently, a lot of economic resources have always been required. For all methods, the parameters are almost: construction age, structural type, height, surface, materials. Then, the usual survey methods (Masi et al. , 2014) should be overcome in order to investigate about several other aspects and other important questions. Several parameters are needed in order to investigate about the seismic vulnerability as: - type and organization of the resisting system, - quality of the resisting system, - conventional capacity based on dimensional and strength of structural elements, - topographic and morphological conditions that are more important for historical buildings, - types, stiffness, and connection with masonry walls of floor and roof, - configuration in-plan and in elevation, - non-structural elements, - retrofitting and maintenance level. Moreover, several additional information are need in order to carried out a wide, complete, and complex analysis based on the concept of resilience. In this work, the novel methods are reported as alternative of existing methods. In particular, in order to studies the buildings typologies and the failure modes, the survey has been carried out on damaged historical centre. Then, the results of the study could provide useful indications in order more reliable and fast survey of the historical centres in the post-earthquakes emergency management and in set up of the mitigation strategies pre earthquakes. In order to define an alternative approach to survey the historical centres, two topics play a fundamental role: 1. rapidity of the methods and procedures; 2. reliability of the obtained data. In order to carried out a fast survey, the UAV and aero - photogrammetics tools have been used. In order to validation of the results, several surveys with classic form and classic tools have been carried out. Classic survey form. In this work, a first comparison has been carried out with a rapid inspection form obtained from the post-earthquake damage and safety assessment inspection AeDES form. In particular, the comparison has been carried out with the building identification data. The survey form is able to define the position of each single building, its position in aggregate of buildings, and geometrical description of the buildings as number of storeys, average storey height, average floor area, building age, use, number of units with the respective number of occupants and percentage of utilization. Survey from autonomous aerial robot (unmanned aerial vehicles, uav). Considering the wide extension of survey area, the use of aerial robotic is the best solution. In fact, they are able to capture imagine to higher spatial resolutions that are sub 1-centimeter. On the basis of the fundamental topics of this work, the considered survey method seems able to define a rapid and accurate of geometrical characteristics of the buildings and urban characteristics (as dimension of the streets and so on) and damage assessment after each earthquake, in particular on historical centres that could be not quickly and easily accessible. Significant accuracy can also be obtained on fundamental data as building size and building type. Moreover, the method is able to investigate about the facades of the buildings then about fundamental topics as windows and soft story that are not visible from satellite images. A key role has been played from planning trajectories and motion planning methods. In this work the motion flight planning has been defined on the basis of the survey goals. In particular, the fundamental topics have been: