When conducting a seismic risk analysis of buildings in earthquake-prone areas, it is important to consider the structural characteristics that affect their seismic performance. These are dependent on construction and design practices. This paper aims to incorporate such features in the assessment of confined masonry dwellings located in Guatemala City. These buildings are often non-engineered and built with artisanal materials whose quality is uncertified. Also, building regulations are frequently disregarded in Guatemalan housing construction. The goal of this study is to evaluate the possible consequences of earthquakes on confined masonry dwellings in Guatemala City by computing their seismic vulnerability, in the form of fragility curves; and seismic risk, measured as the annual collapse rate. The results were then contrasted with Guatemalan regulatory standards, to provide a better understanding of the current situation of this type of building. To this end, the study collected data on 28 one- and two-story dwellings located in different areas of Guatemala City. With the data obtained, the open-source software Vulnerability Modelers Toolkit (VMTK), developed by the Global Earthquake Model Foundation, GEM, was employed to compute fragility curves of the buildings. Subsequently, the annual collapse rate was calculated as the convolution of the collapse fragility curve with the seismic hazard curve of Guatemala City. The study highlights the importance of selecting seismic records that reflect the seismic environment of the region when assessing seismic vulnerability, as well as capacity and structural modeling parameters. It also shows how much the seismic risk of the types of buildings assessed could be reduced considerably if the regulatory standards currently in force in Guatemala were applied.
AGIES (2018) NSE 2: Demandas Estructurales Y Condiciones De Sitio. Asociación Guatemalteca De Ingeniería Estructural Y Sísmica. Guatemala City, Guatemala: AGIES.
2.
AGIES (2018) NSE 7.4: Diseño De Mampostería Reforzada. Asociación Guatemalteca De Ingeniería Estructural Y Sísmica. Guatemala City, Guatemala: AGIES.
3.
AlcocerSMuriáDPeñaJ (1999) Comportamiento Dinámico De Muros De Mampostería Confinada. Mexico City, Mexico: Instituto de Ingeniería UNAM, Serie Investigación y Desarrollo (SID 616).
4.
Applied Technology Council (2012) Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings, Volume 1 – Methodology (FEMA P-58). Redwood City, California: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
5.
BakerJWBradleyBAStaffordPJ (2021) Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
6.
BenedettiDPetriniV (1984) Sulla Vulnerabilitá Sismica di Edifici in Muratura: proposte di un Metodo di Valutazione. L’industria delle Costruzioni149: 66–74.
7.
BenitoMBLindholmCCamachoE, et al. (2012) A new evaluation of seismic hazard for the central America region. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America102(2): 504–523. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120110015
8.
BorahBKaushikHBVaibhavS (2022) Lateral load-deformation models for seismic analysis and performance-based design of confined masonry walls. Journal of Building Engineering48: 103978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103978
9.
BorziBPinhoRCrowleyH (2007) Simplified pushover-based vulnerability analysis for large-scale assessment of RC buildings. Engineering Structures30(3): 804–820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.05.021
10.
BorziBCrowleyHPinhoR (2008) Simplified pushover-based earthquake loss assessment (SP-BELA) method for masonry buildings. International Journal of Architecture Heritage2(4): 353–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583050701828178
11.
BorziBDi MeoAFaravelliM (2025) SP-BELA: a structural seismic vulnerability assessment methodology based on pushover curves In: Proceedings of the 3rd Croatian Conference on Earthquake Engineering (3Rdcrocee), Split, Croatia, 19–22 March 2025, University of Zagreb Faculty of Civil Engineering. https://doi.org/10.5592/CO/3CroCEE.2025.18
12.
BustosJLZabalaFMasanetA, et al. (2000) Estudio Del Comportamiento Dinámico de un Modelo de Mampostería Encadenada Mediante un Ensayo en Mesa Vibratoria In: XXIX Jornada Sudamericana De Ingeniería Estructural, Punta Del Este. Uruguay, November 13–17, 2000, IET.
13.
CaicedoDShaghayeghKBernardoV, et al. (2024) Selection and scaling approaches of earthquake time-series for structural engineering applications: a state-of-the-art review. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering31(31): 1475–1505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-023-10025-y
14.
CalderonASilvaV (2019) Probabilistic seismic vulnerability and loss assessment of the residential building stock in Costa Rica. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering17(2): 1257–1284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0499-1
15.
CalderónASilvaVAvilésM, et al. (2022) Toward a uniform earthquake loss model across central America. Earthquake Spectra38(1): 178–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930211043894
16.
CalviGM (1999) A displacement-based approach for vulnerability evaluation of classes of buildings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering3(3): 411–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469909350353
CastillaEMarinilliA (2003) Experiencias Recientes en Mampostería Confinada de Bloques de Concreto. Instituto de Materiales y Modelos Estructurales41(3): 28–39.
DávilaLD (2023) Tradición y Modernidad: Vulnerabilidad Sísmica en Ciudad de Guatemala. In: Aplicación a Escenarios De Riesgo Sísmico En La Zona 10. PhD thesis, Pamplona, Spain: Universidad de Navarra. https://hdl.handle.net/10171/67840
21.
DávilaLDCabreroJMFloresO (2022) New seismic exposure modeling approach for Guatemala city. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering21: 739–766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01570-1
22.
DiazFDGonzálezMFloresDL, et al. (2023) Development of fragility and vulnerability functions for reinforced masonry structures in Mexico: a case study. Applied Sciences13(19): 10634. https://doi.org/10.3390/app131910634
23.
D’ayalaDMeslemAVamvatsikosD, et al. (2015) Guidelines for Analytical Vulnerability Assessment of Low/mid-rise Buildings, Vulnerability Global Component Project. Pavia, Italy: GEM Technical Report 2014-12. https://doi.org/10.13117/GEM.VULN-MOD.TR2014.12
24.
EERI and AGIES (2013) The November 7, 2012, M7.4 Guatemala Earthquake and Its Implications for Disaster Reduction and Mitigation. Oakland, California: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute and Asociación Guatemalteca de Ingeniería Estructural y Sísmica.
25.
EspinosaAF (ed) (1976) The Guatemalan Earthquake of February 4, 1976, a Preliminary Report. Washington, DC: Geological Survey Professional Paper 1002, United States Printing Office. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1002
26.
EspinozaE (2012) Guía Técnica con Lineamientos y Procedimientos Para la Correcta Elaboración de Blocks de Concreto Artesanal. Guatemala City, Guatemala: Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala. BSc Thesis.
27.
FarfánJDíazE (2009) Estudio De Vulnerabilidad Sísmica Estructural En Un Sector De La Zona 12 De La Ciudad De Guatemala. BSc thesis, Guatemala City, Guatemala: Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala.
28.
FEMA (2013) Hazus-MH 2.1 Technical Manual Multi-Hazard Loss Estimation Methodology, Earhquake Model. Washington, D.C: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
29.
FloresLAlcocerSM (2001) Estudio Analítico de Estructuras de Mampostería Confinada. Informe Técnico. Mexico City, Mexico: Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres.
30.
FreemanSA (2004) Review of the development of the capacity spectrum method. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology41(1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.63898/AYVK8385
31.
GamboaC (2021) Análisis De Las Vibraciones Dominantes En La Interacción Suelo-Estructura De La Facultad De Ingeniería De La Universidad De San Carlos De Guatemala, Ciudad De Guatemala, Guatemala. Madrid, Spain: Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. MSc thesis.
32.
GaoJDuKQiJ (2025) Quantifying the uncertainty of structural parameters using machine learning-based surrogate models. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering11(2): 04025023. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJRUA6.RUENG-1550
33.
GokkayaBUBakerJWDeierleinGG (2016) Quantifying the impacts of modeling uncertainties on the seismic drift demands and collapse risk of buildings with implications on seismic design checks. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics45(10): 1661–1683. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2740
34.
INE (2018) XII Censo Nacional De Población Y VII De Vivienda. Guatemala City, Guatemala: Instituto Nacional de Estadística. Retrieved from: https://censo2018.ine.gob.gt/ (Accessed 28 Mar 2024).
35.
JalayerFDe RisiRGaetanoM (2015) Bayesian cloud analysis: efficient structural fragility assessment using linear regression. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering13(4): 1183–1203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9692-z
36.
KayniaAIervolinoITaucerF, et al. (2013) Guidelines for Deriving Seismic Fragility Functions of Elements at Risk: Buildings, Lifelines, Transportation Networks and Critical Facilities. JRC Scientific and Policy Reports. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2788/19605
37.
KennedyRP (2011) Performance-goal based (risk informed) approach for establishing the SSE site specific response spectrum for future nuclear plants. Nuclear Engineering and Design241(3): 648–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2010.08.001
38.
LagomarsinoSGiovinazziS (2006) Macroseismic and mechanical models for the vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering4(4): 415–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-006-9024-z
39.
LovonHTarqueNSilvaV, et al. (2018) Development of fragility curves for confined masonry buildings in Lima, Peru. Earthquake Spectra34(3): 1339–1361. https://doi.org/10.1193/090517EQS174M
40.
MartinsLSilvaV (2021) Development of a fragility and vulnerability model for global seismic risk analyses. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering19: 6719–6745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00885-1
41.
MartinsLSilvaVCrowleyH, et al. (2021) Vulnerability modellers toolkit, an open-source platform for vulnerability analysis. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering19: 5691–5709. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-458348/v1
42.
McKennaFFenvesGLScottMH (2000) Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (Opensees). Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
43.
MeliRBrzevSAstrozaM, et al. (2011) Seismic design guide for low-rise confined masonry buildings. In: World Housing Encyclopedia. Oakland, California: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI) and International Association of Earthquake Engineering (IAEE).
44.
Miyamoto International (2021) Evaluación Probabilística De Riesgo Sísmico En El Área Metropolitana De La Ciudad De Guatemala. Report Prepared for USAID/BHA. Guatemala City, Guatemala: Miyamoto International, Inc.
45.
MonzónE (1995) Control de la Calidad del Concreto en Guatemala. Guatemala City, Guatemala, BSc thesis, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala.
46.
MonzónH (2015) Manual de Diseño Sismo-Resistente Simplificado de Mampostería de Block de Concreto para Guatemala. In: Documento AGIES DSE 4.1 2015. Guatemala City, Guatemala: Asociación Guatemalteca De Ingeniería Estructural Y Sísmica.
47.
MonzónH (2019) Los Terremotos de 1917 y 1918 en el Valle de Guatemala y Otros Sismos Superficiales de la Época. Implicaciones Para La Amenaza Sísmica en Guatemala In: Memorias Del Primer Congreso Nacional De Ingeniería Sísmica Y Geotécnica. Guatemala City, Guatemala: ICCG.
48.
Pérez GavilánJBrzevSEspinosaEF, et al. (2023) Experimental research studies on seismic behaviour of confined masonry structures: current status and future needs. Buildings13(7): 1776. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13071776
Quiñónez de la CruzFJ (1996) Vulnerabilidad de Viviendas de Mampostería Reforzada en Guatemala. In: Centro de Investigaciones de Ingeniería, Guatemala City, Guatemala: Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala.
52.
RanjbaranFHosseiniM (2014) Seismic vulnerability assessment of confined masory wall buildings. Earthquakes and Structures7(2): 201–216. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2014.7.2.201
53.
Restrepo-VélezLF (2003) A Simplified Mechanics-based Procedure for the Seismic Risk Assessment of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings. Pavia, Italy: ROSE School, Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia and University of Pavia. PhD thesis.
54.
RiahiZElwoodKAlcocerS (2009) Backbone model for confined masonry walls for performance-based seismic design. Journal of Structural Engineering135(6): 644–654. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000012
55.
RivasCVásquezE (2008) Estudio De Vulnerabilidad Sísmica Estructural En Un Sector De La Zona 7 De La Ciudad De Guatemala. Guatemala City, Guatemala: Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala. BSc thesis.
56.
RodasJMonzónHCallejasF (2021) Análisis de Riesgo Sísmico Para la República de Guatemala. In: Artículo Técnico, Asociación Guatemalteca De Ingeniería Estructural Y Sísmica (AGIES). Guatemala City, Guatemala: AGIES.
57.
Ruiz-GarcíaJNegreteM (2009) Drift-based fragility assessment of confined masonry walls in seismic zones. Engineering Structures31(1): 170–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.08.010
58.
SaltelliATarantolaSCampolongoF, et al. (2004) Sensitivity Analysis in Practice: A Guide to Assessing Scientific Models. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
59.
SavilleMH (1918) The Guatemala earthquake of December 1917, and January 1918. Geographical Review5(6): 459–469. https://doi.org/10.2307/207805
60.
SilvaV (2019) Uncertainty and correlation in seismic vulnerability functions of building classes. Earthquake Spectra35(4): 1515–1539. https://doi.org/10.1193/013018EQS031M
61.
SilvaVVarumHCrowleyH, et al. (2013) Extending displacement-based earthquake loss assessment (DBELA) for the computation of fragility curves. Engineering Structures56: 343–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.04.023
62.
SMIE (2019) Edificaciones de mampostería. Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniería Estructural A.C. Mexico City, Mexico: Editorial Limusa.
63.
SobolIM (2001) Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their monte carlo estimates. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation55(1-3): 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4754(00)00270-6
64.
StoneH (2017) Exposure and Vulnerability for Seismic Risk Evaluations. University College London. PhD thesis.
65.
StoneHD’AyalaDGunasekeraR, et al. (2015) A review of seismic vulnerability assessments in central America. In: SECED 2015 Conference: Earthquake Risk and Engineering Towards a Resilient World. Cambridge, UK, 9–10 July 2015. SECED.
66.
TobarCLópezLPérezC, et al. (1993) Evaluación De La Amenaza Sísmica Para La Ciudad De Guatemala. Guatemala City, Guatemala: Centro de Estudios Superiores de Energía y Minas (CESEM). Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala.
TreviñoEAlcocerSFloresL, et al. (2004) Investigación Experimental Del Comportamiento de Muros de Mampostería Confinada de Bloques de Concreto Sometidos a Cargas Laterales Cíclicas Reversibles Reforzados Con Acero de Grados 60 y 42. In: XIV Congreso Nacional De Ingeniería Estructural. Mexico: Acapulco.
69.
VillagránJ (2008) Riesgo Sísmico En El Sector Vivienda En Guatemala: Un Análisis De Tendencias. Guatemala City, Guatemala: CIMDEM-VILLATEK.
70.
YongCLingCGüendelF, et al. (2002) Seismic hazard and loss estimation for central America. Natural Hazards25: 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013722926563
