FINAL CONFERENCE · COST Action C26: “Urban Habitat Constructions Under Catastrophic Events” Chair: Prof. Federico M.Mazzolani FINAL CONFERENCE Naples, 16-19 September 2010

COST Action C26:

“Urban Habitat Constructions Under

Catastrophic Events”

Chair: Prof. Federico M.Mazzolani

FINAL CONFERENCENaples, 16-19 September 2010

AUSTRIA

BELGIUM

FINLAND

F.Y.REPUBLIC OF

MACEDONIA

FRANCE

GERMANY

GREECE

HUNGARY

ITALY

LITHUANIA

NETHERLANDS

POLAND

PORTUGAL

ROMANIA

SLOVENIA

SWEDEN

SWITZERLAND

UNITED KINDOM

CZECH REPUBLIC

MALTA

TURKEY

CYPRUS

PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES

SPAIN

COST Action C26:

“Urban Habitat Constructions Under Catastrophic Events”

Chair : Federico M.Mazzolani

• The main objective of the Action was to increase the knowledge on the behaviour of constructions located in urban habitats and subjected to exceptional and catastrophic events.

• The main aim of the Action was to define suitable tools to predict the ultimate response of such constructions under extreme conditions, occurring when both the loading and the structural resistance are combined in such a way to reduce the safety level below acceptable values.

Extreme situations can be produced by natural

phenomena (earthquakes, fire, wind storms, heavy

snow, landslides, floods, volcanic eruptions,

avalanches,……)

and man-made actions, both accidental (i.e. gas

explosions, accidental impact from vehicles out of

control) and also occasionally due to bomb blasts

during terrorist attacks.

COST Action C26:



• to characterise the performance of structures under extreme loading conditions,

• to analyse the consequences of catastrophic events, with regard to life safety and economic losses due to direct damage,

• to prepare ad-hoc guidelines for the damage prevention as well as for the repairing of constructions hit by extreme actions during catastrophic events.

EXPECTED MAIN OUT-PUTS (according to MoU) :

COST Action C26:



COST Action C26:



WORKING GROUPS :

• WG1 - FIRE RESISTANCE

• WG2 - EARTHQUAKE RESISTANCE

• WG3 - IMPACT AND EXPLOSION RESISTANCE

• WG4 - RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CATASTROPHIC

SCENARIOS IN URBAN AREAS

• “ad hoc” WG - LEXICON

COST Action C26:



Working Group 1 :

Fire resistance

Chair : Frantisek Wald (CZ);

Vice-chair : Yong Wang (U.K.)

COST C 26 - WG 1 : FIRE RESISTANCE

Main activity directions :

Comparison of national fire models

Simulation of material behaviour

Connection modelling

Members behaviour

Global analyses

Fire after earthquake

FIRE AFTER EARTHQUAKE

COST Action C26:



Working Group 2 :

Earthquake resistance

Chair : Dan Dubina (RO);

Vice-chair :Alberto Mandara (I)

COST Action C26:



COST C 26 - WG 2 : EARTHQUAKE RESISTANCE

Main activity directions:

•Characterization and modeling of seismic actions

•Influence of seismic motion typology on the

structural response

•Innovative materials and technologies for existing

and new buildings in seismic areas

•Seismic protection and retrofit of existing buildings

•Analysis of relevant study cases

COST Action C26:



Working Group 3:

Impact and Explosion resistance

Chair : Mike Byfield (U.K.);

Vice-chair : Gianfranco De Matteis (I)

COST C 26 - WG 3 : BLAST AND EXPLOSION RESISTANCE


•Analysis of Codes and Standards related to robustness

•Vulnerability to progressive collapse due to localised

damage from blast or impact

•Quantification of actions related to extreme events

•Protection systems and design methodologies to resist blast

and impact

•Assessment and repairing of damaged structures

•Testing and numerical simulation

COST Action C26:



Working Group 4:

Risk Assessment for Catastrophic Scenarios in Urban Areas

Chair : Michael Faber (CH);

Co-chair :Maurizio Indirli (I)

COST C 26 - WG 4 : RISK ASSESSMENT FOR

CATASTROPHIC SCENARIOS IN URBAN HABITATS

•Set-up a common methodology for risk assessment

•Explicit accountancy and quantification of structural

robustness

•Analysis of the Vesuvius scenario as a complex study case,

where all WGs are asked to co-operate


VARIOUS TYPES OF RISK :

•Vulcanic eruption (ash, mud, lava and pyroclastic flows)

•Seismic activity

•Tsunami

•Landslides

•Fire

•Impact (bombs, missiles)

•Explosion

COST Action C26:



PHASE 3 PHASE 2 PHASE 1

9 MONTHS 6 MONTHS 24 MONTHS

9 MONTHS

MODELLING

WG 1-2-3- 4

DIAGNOSIS WG 1-2-3- 4

0

ANALYSIS

WG 1-2-3- 4

SE

MIN

AR

EV

AL

UA

TIO

N S

TA

GE

FIN

AL

CO

NF

ER

EN

CE

CO

NC

LU

SIV

E D

OC

UM

EN

TS

WO

RK

SH

OP

ST

AT

E O

F T

HE

AR

T

1ST YEAR 2ND YEAR 3RD YEAR 4TH YEAR

MONTHS

W

O

R

K

S

H

O

P

S

Y

M

P

O

S

I

U

M

C

O

N

F

E

R

E

N

C

E

COST Action C26:



WORKSHOP IN PRAGUE

(30th-31st March 2007)

48 papers ; 386 pages

COST Action C26:



SYMPOSIUM IN MALTA

(22-25 October 2008)

75 papers ; 518 pages

COST Action C26:



Based on 210 COST papers (25 reports)

COST Action C26:



FINAL REPORT

Chapter I:Characterization of catastrophic actions on constructionsChapter II:Analysis of behaviour of constructions under catastrophic eventsChapter III:Evaluation of vulnerability of constructionsChapter IV:Protecting, strengthening and repairingChapter V:Strategy and guidelines for damage prevention

COST Action C26:



151 papers (86 COST & 65 non COST) + 8 keynote lectures; 1050 pages

MEXICO NEW ZEALAND PAKISTANRUSSIA SINGAPORE SOUTH AFRICA

TAIWAN THAILAND UNITED ARAB

EMIRATES

USA

COST Action C26:



JAPAN SOUTH KOREA KOSOVO LUXEMBOURGIRAN IRAQ

ALGERIA AUSTRALIA BRAZIL CANADA CHINACHILE

COST Action C26:



LOGO

The three Gorgon sisters were daughters of the ancient Sea Gods, Ceto and Phorcys. Two Gorgons, Stheno and Eluryah were immortal, but the third, Medusa was not. She had been a female of absolute beauty, mostly

for her long, silky hair. She bragged at being more beautiful than the Goddess Athena, and one day, while in her temple, she was ravished by the

Sea God Neptune. Athena was outraged by this and turned Medusa into the Gorgon she became famous for being.

THE MEDUSA MYTH

She turned her beautiful hair into snakes and let it be that she could no longer see the handsome men who came to court her, as they would instantly be turned to stone if they looked into her eyes.

Perseus, in trying to rescue his mother Danae from King Polydectes, was challenged to retrieve the head of Medusa. He was able to do so with the help of Athena and Hermes. Perseus was given a shield

of reflection and a curved sword to remove her head.The blood of a Gorgon was said to be all powerful. It could be a lethal poison or hold magical powers, as it was used to grant Erichthonius the power to reanimate the dead. When Medusa was dying, she sprang

forth from her blood the winged horse Pegasus and the giant Chrysaor, who later became the King of Iberia.

While fleeing the other two Gorgons, Perseus used the helmet of Hermes which made him invisible and allowed him to escape unharmed. After the death of Medusa, Perseus was said to bring her head to Athena after having used it

in battle to defeat his enemies. Athena cast the head into her shield and there it

remained.

THE MEDUSA SYMBOL

The Medusa face...to protect Urban Habitat Constructions

against Catastrophic Events

The Gorgon has been depicted in artwork throughout archaic Greece. Shields bore a Medusa head in order to fight off evil spirits.

Doorways had Gorgon plaques above the archways to prevent evil from entering the homes. The Gorgon face, or gorgoneion, is similar to many other cultures’ icons to ward off the spirits.

Therefore……………………….

Let exceptional situations be avoided

WELCOME TO THE FINAL COST C26 CONFERENCE

Documents

FINAL CONFERENCE · COST Action C26: “Urban Habitat Constructions Under Catastrophic Events” Chair: Prof. Federico M.Mazzolani FINAL CONFERENCE Naples, 16-19 September 2010