Seismic Retrofitting of Mid-Rise Unreinforced Masonry Residential Buildings after the 2010 Kraljevo, Serbia Earthquake: A Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a significant building stock of post-WWII low- and mid-rise unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings in Serbia and the region (former Yugoslavia). Numerous buildings of this typology collapsed due to the devastating 1963 Skopje, Yugoslavia earthquake, causing fatalities, injuries, and property losses, as well as experienced damage in a few recent earthquakes in the region, including the 2010 Kraljevo, Serbia earthquake (MW 5.5) and the 2020 Petrinja, Croatia earthquake (M 6.4). These buildings are three- to five-stories high, have clay brick masonry walls, and rigid floor slabs, usually with an RC ring beam at each floor level. This paper presents a case study of a URM building which was damaged due to the 2010 Kraljevo earthquake and subsequently retrofitted. A comparison of seismic analysis results, including the capacity/demand ratio and displacement/drift values, for the original and retrofitted building according to the seismic design and retrofit codes which were followed in Serbia as well as some of the neighboring countries for several decades and Eurocode 8 has been presented. The results of this study show that the selected retrofit solution that satisfied the Yugoslav seismic code requirements is not adequate according to the Eurocode 8, primarily due to significantly higher seismic demand.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".