EXAMPLE 6. BUILDING VALUATION & REDESIGN STUDY

EXAMPLE 6: "STUDY FOR THE VALUATION AND REDESIGN OF A BUILDING ACCORDING TO THE CANC. 5 By combining a Performance Level on the one hand and a Seismic Excitation Level on the other hand, a Design Objective (Assessment or Redesign) is obtained. Performance levels §2.2.1 In order to serve wider socio-economic needs, various levels of performance (i.e. targeted behaviours) are established in the KANEPE, which relate exclusively to the supporting structure of the structure under consideration. In particular, the following three performance levels are defined according to the degree of damage: α. "Limited damage" (A) : The building structure is only slightly damaged, with the structural elements not having suffered significant leakage and retaining their strength and stiffness. The permanent relative floor movements are negligible. β. 'Significant damage' (B): the building structure has suffered significant and extensive but repairable damage, while the structural elements have residual strength and stiffness and are capable of supporting the intended vertical loads. Permanent relative floor displacements are moderate. The load-bearing structure can withstand moderate aftershocks. c. 'Quasi-collapse' (C): the building's load-bearing structure has suffered extensive and serious or severe (mostly irreparable) damage. The permanent relative floor displacements are large. The load-bearing structure is still capable of supporting the intended vertical loads (during and for a period after the earthquake), but without any other substantial safety margin against total or partial collapse, even for moderate aftershocks. Correlation between return period and probability of exceeding the seismic action §2.2.1 (3 h revision of the 2022 EIS) The seismic excitation levels (i.e. the severity of the design earthquake) are defined based on the probability of exceeding a certain value of ground acceleration (depending on the seismic hazard of the area) in a certain period of time corresponding to the lifetime of the structure. A nominal technical lifetime equal to the conventional lifetime of 50 years is generally accepted, irrespective of the presumed 'actual' remaining lifetime of the building. In Table S 2.1, an indicative correlation of the return period and the corresponding probability of exceeding within the conventional 50-year lifetime of the seismic action with the corresponding reduced horizontal ground acceleration is presented.