Normative Redesigns of Two Typical Confined Masonry Dwellings in Cuenca, Ecuador: Effects on their Seismic Capacity

0Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This study focused on two representative dwellings from the first generation of confined masonry buildings in Cuenca, Ecuador (1975–1990). First, after a selection and characterization process of the two buildings, the influence of the quality of the brick masonry and the concrete of the confining elements on their seismic capacity curves was analyzed using pushover analysis. Second, using buildings with medium-quality masonry as a baseline, and maintaining a focus on their seismic capacity, the effect of implementing redesign measures based on building codes was studied. The Ecuadorian Standard, the Mexican Standard, and the Guide for the Construction of Earthquake-Resistant Houses with Confined Masonry – Adapted Version for Ecuador were considered for the formulation of the redesigned cases. The latter two were used to analyze the effect of including vertical and horizontal reinforced concrete bands at the edges of openings. Subsequently, after the analyses of four cases, the last two with horizontal bands of heights of 10 and 15 cm, the variation of the pushover curves was examined with respect to those corresponding to the two original buildings. Finally, by bilinearizing the curves obtained, the seismic coefficients of the studied cases were calculated and discussed. The results showed a significant improvement in the seismic capacity of the original buildings with the application of the Ecuadorian Standard and a moderate improvement with the additional confinement provided by the inclusion of bands.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jiménez-Pacheco, J., Ortega-Guamán, E., Quinde, J., Molineros, P., & García, H. (2025). Normative Redesigns of Two Typical Confined Masonry Dwellings in Cuenca, Ecuador: Effects on their Seismic Capacity. Revista Politecnica, 56(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.33333/rp.vol56n1.01

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free