Unreinforced masonry (URM) structures are widely used in informal housing across Colombia, and they represent a significant portion of the country’s building stock. Despite their affordability and accessibility, these structures exhibit high-seismic vulnerability, underscoring the need for detailed risk assessment and mitigation strategies. This study presents the development of fragility and vulnerability functions tailored to the Colombian context, based on a comprehensive database of over 400 URM and semi-confined masonry (CM) buildings from diverse regions. The data set captures variations in story count, wall density, and masonry unit types, enabling the identification of regional construction trends. Advanced three-dimensional macro-element analyses were used in this study, allowing for a modeling approach that accounts for nonlinear effects and coupled failure modes while ensuring computational efficiency. The results from the analyses were found to favorably compare with previous studies, validating the applicability of the developed fragility and vulnerability curves to URM buildings in Colombia and highlighting improvements in the estimation of expected damage and losses. Notably, the curves are consistent with observed damage patterns from the 1999 Armenia and 2008 Quetame earthquakes, reinforcing their validity for seismic risk assessment in Colombian URM buildings. These findings contribute to the development of a robust framework for regional seismic risk assessment, supporting ongoing efforts to reduce disaster risks and improve the resilience of the built environment in Colombia.
AbucharVArtetaC (2024) V-FAST: An story-based vulnerability and fragility assessment toolkit for advancing PBEE. Earthquake Spectra.
2.
AcevedoABJaramilloJDYepesCSilvaVOsorioFAVillarM (2017) Evaluation of the seismic risk of the unreinforced masonry building stock in Antioquia, Colombia. Natural Hazards86: 31–54.
3.
AdhikariRKD’AyalaD (2020) 2015Nepal earthquake: Seismic performance and post-earthquake reconstruction of stone in mud mortar masonry buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering18(8): 3863–3896.
4.
AIS (2010) Reglamento Colombiano de Construcción Sismo Resistente NSR-10. Bogotá, Colombia: Asociación Colombiana de Ingeniería Sísmica. Includes Title C (Structural Concrete), Title D (Structural Masonry), and Title F (One- and Two-Story Dwellings).
5.
American Society of Civil Engineers (2017) ASCE/SEI 41-17: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
6.
ArchboldJCarrilloJOrjuelaJPiedrahitaJ (2025) Seismic fragility assessment of confined masonry houses in Colombia. Earthquake Spectra.
7.
ArtetaCAAbrahamsonNA (2019) Conditional Scenario Spectra (CSS) for hazard-consistent analysis of engineering systems. Earthquake Spectra35(2): 737–757.
8.
ArtetaCAPérezHReyesJCMoraMValcárcelJAbucharVClavijoADazaJEcheverryJGómezD (2021) Reporte MNRS 002-2021: Acuerdos de línea base y metodológica–Fragilidad y vulnerabilidad sísmica de edificaciones residenciales. Bogotá, Colombia: Preparado por la Asociación Colombiana de Facultades de Ingeniería yxs el Servicio Geológico Colombiano en el marco del proyecto Modelo Nacional de Riesgo Sísmico.
9.
BakerJW (2015) Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthquake Spectra31(1): 579–599.
10.
BarreraM (2017) Prácticas constructivas sostenibles en viviendas autoconstruidas para clima frío tropical: Guía a partir de tres casos de estudio [Tesis de Maestría]. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad Católica de Colombia.
11.
BastidasEDMolinaLF (2004) Muros de mampostería reforzados con láminas de fibra de vidrio sometidos a esfuerzos fuera del plano. MSc Thesis, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
12.
BernardoVKarimzadehSCaicedoDHussainiSMSLourençoPB (2024) Fragility-based seismic assessment of traditional masonry buildings on Azores (Portugal) using simulated ground-motion records. Earthquake Spectra40(4): 2836–2861.
13.
BruneauM (1994) State-of-the-art report on seismic performance of unreinforced masonry buildings. Journal of Structural Engineering120(1): 230–251.
14.
BuelvasJE (2004) Estudio analítico y experimental de alternativas para muros no estructurales en mampostería a la luz de la NSR-98. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes.
15.
BuildChange (2015) Manual de evaluación y reforzamiento sísmico para reducción de vulnerabilidad en viviendas. Available at: https://BuildChange.org
16.
Centro de Investigación MECA (2021) Ensayos de laboratorio para reforzamiento de viviendas informales en mampostería existentes en Bogotá. Bogotá, Colombia: AIS and IDIGER.
17.
Centro de Investigaciónen Materialesy Obras Civiles (2019) Estudio de riesgo sísmico del Valle de Aburrá. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes.
18.
Centro de Investigaciones de la Facultad de Ingeniería, Organización de los Estados Americanos and Ministerio de Transporte y Obras Públicas (1990) Bases regionales para elaborar códigos de vivienda sismorresistente de bajo costo. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes, OEA, Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transporte.
19.
Chávez-GarcíaFJMonsalve-JaramilloHVila-OrtegaJ (2021) Vulnerability and site effects in earthquake disasters in Armenia (Colombia)–part 2: Observed damage and vulnerability. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences21: 2345–2354.
20.
Computers & Structures INC (2024) Welcome to ETABS user manual. Available at: https://www.csiamerica.com/ (accessed 23 July 2025).
21.
CornellCAJalayerFHamburgerROFoutchDA (2002) Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC FEMA steel moment frame guidelines. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE128(4): 526–533.
22.
D’AyalaDMeslemDVamvatsikosDPorterKRossettoTSilvaV (2015) Guidelines for Analytical Vulnerability Assessment of Low/Mid-Rise Buildings. Pavia: Fundación Global Earthquake Model.
23.
DazaCE (2004) Comportamiento de muros en mampostería reforzada con carga paralela al plano. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes.
24.
FEMA (2018) P58–Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
GalanisPHMoehleJP (2015) Development of collapse indicators for risk assessment of older type reinforced concrete buildings. Earthquake Spectra31(4): 1991–2006.
HumarJMLauDPierreJR (2001) Performance of buildings during the 2001 Bhuj earthquake. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering28(6): 979–991.
29.
INGEOMINAS (2008) El sismo de Quetame (Cundinamarca) del 24 de mayo de 2008: Informe preliminar. Bogotá, Colombia: Red Sismológica Nacional de Colombia, Instituto Colombiano de Geología y Minería.
30.
InghamJMGriffithMC (2011) The performance of unreinforced masonry buildings in the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquake swarm. Report to the Royal Commission of Inquiry, Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission, Wellington, August, pp. 1–139.
31.
KourisEGKourisLASKonstantinidisAAKarayannisCGAifantisEC (2021) Assessment and fragility of Byzantine unreinforced masonry towers. Infrastructures6(3): 40.
32.
LagomarsinoSGiovinazziS (2006) Macroseismic and mechanical models for the vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering4: 415–443.
33.
López RestrepoS (2012) Evaluación del comportamiento de muros de mampostería no reforzada recubiertos con mortero reforzado. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes.
34.
LucenaJA (2004) Comportamiento sísmico de muros de mampostería con refuerzo exterior estudiados en modelos a escala en la mesa vibratoria. MSc Thesis, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
MirandaEBerteroVV (1989) The Mexico earthquake of September 19, 1985, performance of low-rise buildings in Mexico City. Earthquake Spectra5(1): 121–143.
37.
MoehleJDeierleinGG (2004) A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228706335 (accessed 23 July 2025).
38.
PájaroCArtetaC (2022) Selección de acelerogramas: Reporte MNRS No. 004-2022. Bogotá, Colombia: Preparado por la Asociación Colombiana de Facultades de Ingeniería para el Servicio Geológico Colombiano.
39.
PEER (2005) PEER Ground Motion Database. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. Available at: https://ngawest2.berkeley.edu
40.
PorterKFarokhniaKVamvatsikosDChoIH (2014) Guidelines for Component-based Analytical Vulnerability Assessment of Buildings and Nonstructural Components. Pavia: Fundación Global Earthquake Model.
PortillaSReyesJCCarrilloJLassoJE (2025). Mechanical properties of masonry using artificial neural networks. Earthquake Spectra41(2): 1536–1564. doi:10.1177/87552930251316811
43.
QuirogaRJ (2013) Vulnerabilidad sísmica de viviendas de mampostería simple en estratos bajos de la ciudad de Bogotá. MSc Thesis, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
44.
RamírezCMMirandaE (2009) Building-specific Loss Estimation Methods & Tools for Simplified Performance-based Earthquake Engineering. Stanford, CA: The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University.
45.
ReyesJCCerónNMoraM (2025a) Exposure model of Colombian residential buildings. Earthquake Spectra.
46.
ReyesJCPeñarandaDACeronN, et al (2025b). A simplified replacement cost model for residential buildings located in developing countries: The case study of Colombia. Earthquake Spectra. doi:10.1177/87552930251346773
Universidad de los Andes (2019) Vulnerabilidad sísmica (Cap. 4). In: Estudio del riesgo sísmico del Valle de Aburrá. Bogotá, Colombia: Área Metropolitana del Valle de Aburrá.
54.
ValbuenaSGMenaMGarcíaCA (2013) Características típicas de la vivienda en sectores de población vulnerable en Bogotá. Tecnura17(2): 113–121. Available at: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=257059811011 (accessed 23 July 2025).
55.
VaninFPennaABeyerK (2020) A three-dimensional macroelement for modelling the in-plane and out-of-plane response of masonry walls. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics49(14): 1365–1387.
56.
VarónAForeroMCAycardiLGRuizD (2004) Refuerzo sísmico exterior para mampostería con malla electrosoldada. Revista de la Escuela Colombiana de Ingeniería14: 15–21.
57.
VásquezJHeresiP (2024) Seismic collapse risk assessment of T-shaped reinforced concrete shear walls in Chile. In: Proceedings of the 18th world conference on earthquake engineering. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381401410 (accessed 23 July 2025).
58.
VegaC (2015) Comportamiento dinámico de muros de mampostería no estructural reforzados mediante polímeros reforzados con fibra de carbono (CFRP). MSc Thesis, Escuela Colombiana de Ingeniería Julio Garavito, Bogotá, Colombia.
59.
VegaCTorresN (2018) External strengthening of unreinforced masonry walls with polymers reinforced with carbon fiber. Ingeniería e Investigación38(3): 15–23.
60.
YamínLE (2016) Riesgo sísmico de edificaciones en términos de pérdidas económicas mediante integración de costos de reparación de componentes [Tesis Doctoral]. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona.
61.
YamínLEHurtadoAIBarbatAHCardonaOD (2014) Seismic and wind vulnerability assessment for the GAR-13 global risk assessment. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction10: 452–460.
62.
YamínLEHurtadoAIRincónRDoradoJFReyesJC (2017) Probabilistic seismic vulnerability assessment of buildings in terms of economic losses. Engineering Structures138: 308–323.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
