**Author details**

*Green Energy Advances*

**Site Se,C**

**Table 5.**

**(g)**

*configurations evaluated for LS limit state.*

**Se,D (g)**

Y directions, respectively, while for DLLS, intensity values are 0.170 and 0.215 g for X and Y directions, respectively. Consequently, a full seismic rehabilitation (i.e., αLS ratio greater than 1) has been achieved also for Palermo, as reported in **Table 5**.

*C3 configuration: in plan layout of the retrofitted building (a) and 3D view of the model (b).*

**C1 ("as-built") C2 C3**

**Se,C (g)**

*Comparison between seismic capacity values and hazard demand relevant to as-built and postintervention* 

Milan 0.110 0.042 2.60 0.168 0.057 2.95 0.430 0.063 6.82 Palermo 0.135 0.81 0.180 0.93 0.200 2.15

**Se,D (g)**

**α = Se,C/ Se,C**

**Se,C (g)**

**Se,D (g)**

**α = Se,C/ Se,C**

**α = Se,C/ Se,D**

In the present work, an application of integrated rehabilitation intervention on reinforced concrete (RC) existing buildings has been presented. A case study located in two different cities, Milano and Palermo, having different climatic condi-

The building under study has been analyzed considering three different configurations, with different arrangement and features of the infill panels, in order to highlight their role on both thermal and seismic performances. Quasi-static and dynamic methodologies have been used for the calculation of the energy demand, highlighting the importance of accounting for thermal bridges in the investigations. As for seismic performance, the results of the incremental nonlinear dynamic analyses show that infill panels having greater thermal and mechanical properties increase the seismic capacity. Nevertheless, a full seismic rehabilitation for the site with the highest seismic hazard (i.e., Palermo) has been achieved only by strength-

Future work, besides including additional case studies (building types, different seismic and climate sites,…), will be devoted to set up and propose a methodology

tions and seismic hazard values, has been investigated.

ening the RC structure with additional RC frames.

**68**

**4. Conclusions**

**Figure 9.**

Antonio D'Angola\*, Vincenzo Manfredi, Angelo Masi and Marianna Mecca Scuola di Ingegneria, Università della Basilicata, Potenza, Italy

\*Address all correspondence to: antonio.dangola@unibas.it

© 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
