GNGTS 2022 - Atti del 40° Convegno Nazionale

308 GNGTS 2022 Sessione 2.2 case of elastic (i.e., Fig.2(a)) and inelastic (i.e., Fig.2(b)) SDOF considering the typical damping of 5%. For this last parameter different percentages are chosen that cover the whole range of possible values. Finally, in Fig. 3 are reported the IM-based fragility curves by software simulations and numerical calculations, differentiating the concept of operations depending on the assumption of elastic (i.e., Fig.3(a)) or inelastic (i.e., Fig.3(b)) SDOF by the use of Cloud Analysis. In this regard, the choice of the EDP-threshold against which the parameters defining the cumulative probability curve (mean θ, and random dispersion β) are calculated is rather complex. In the contextof global regulatory frameworkand inthecaseof seismicdesign, nospecific formulations are foreseen but reference is often made to guidelines (CNR-DT 210/2013). Generally, the in-plane horizontal relative displacement is considered as engineering demand parameter and according to Italian technical code (NTC-2018) the typical non-damage reference value of inter-story drift ratio is indirectly defined as the corresponding to 0.002h, that is 7 mm for h=3.5 m. The findings allowed to observe that, for example, taking as a reference a cumulative probability (F i by Eq. 1) equal to 0.5, the corresponding values of PGA are underestimated by 23% and 20%, for ν=0.05, respectively in the case of elastic linear and inelastic behaviour. It is well known that the derivation of fragility curves is a time-consuming process, thus the aim of this work is to provide a simplified approach for the estimation of physical damage. Consequently, this study developed through an actual numerical application, a simplified method for the characterization of the seismic behaviour of a sub-structural glass facade wall given the current growth in the glass demand for construction field. In doing so, an interesting comparison was carried out between the seismic performance results by numerical analyses on a FE three-dimensional models and by the exposed method based on SDOF approximation. Fig. 2 - Maximum displacements by Finite Element simulations in Abaqus/CAE and numerical resolutions according to Newmark method considering an elastic (a) and inelastic (b) SDOF.