## 8 Conclusions  
This work was aimed at studying the seismic vulnerability and identifying the possible retrofitting interventions for the Day-Hospital Building of the cancer institute \"G. Pascale Foundation\" in Naples, which is one of the most important hospitals in South Italy. After a brief architectural and structural description, the vulnerability of the Day-Hospital Building was evaluated for different gravitational and seismic load combinations using static and dynamic linear analyses, respectively. As for most existing buildings, the verification of different gravitational load combinations did not exhibit high criticality. Conversely, the seismic analyses showed important structural criticalities. In particular, the concrete walls constituting the RC cores are subject to a shear failure mechanism with a seismic performance index of only about 10%, thus highlighting high vulnerability and an unacceptable seismic risk given the strategic function of the building in an emergency. Therefore, the analyses confirmed the criticalities already pointed out in [17] and the need to identify effective intervention strategies for the building's retrofitting. It is worth mentioning that the main structural criticalities are related to the shear failure of the RC walls, with a vulnerability index of 9%. This value is about 60% lower than that calculated in [17]. Figure 17: Summary of the comparison of the proposed interventions. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Intervention**} & **Structural** & **GWP** & **W** & **CO2** & \multirow{2}{*}{**Total CO2 [t]**} \\  & **Component** & **[t CO2/t]** & **[t]** & **[t]** & **[t]** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{I1-1} & \begin{tabular}{c} Timber \\ Concrete \\ Steel bars \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 1.11 [33] \\ 0.645 [34] \\ 0.527 [35] \\ \end{tabular} & 39.64 & 43.91 & \multirow{3}{*}{562.30} \\  & \begin{tabular}{c} Timber \\ Concrete \\ Steel bars \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 1.11 [33] \\ 0.527 [35] \\ \end{tabular} & 373.81 & 472.02 & \multirow{3}{*}{562.30} \\  & \begin{tabular}{c} Steel bathes and angles \\ Anchors bars \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 1.13 [36] \\ 1.13 [36] \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 96.91 \\ 4.01 \\ \end{tabular} & 109.51 & \multirow{3}{*}{114.04} \\  & \begin{tabular}{c} Timber \\ Concrete \\ Steel Bars \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 1.11 \\ 0.645 \\ 0.527 \\ \end{tabular} & 116.26 & 43.91 & \multirow{3}{*}{1050.30} \\  & \begin{tabular}{c} Timber \\ Concrete \\ Steel Bars \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 1.11 \\ 0.545 \\ \end{tabular} & 1395.07 & 899.82 & \multirow{3}{*}{1050.30} \\  & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Steel Bars \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} 0.527 \\ 126.47 \\ \end{tabular} & 66.65 & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 18: Values of GWP parameter for the product stages. This confirms that, in this specific case, as a result of neglecting the plasticization capacity of RC walls, the linear dynamic analysis produces more severe findings than the non-linear static analysis. Then, our attention was focused on the design of structural interventions to retrofit the whole building. In this case, the construction of new RC walls or steel bracing systems was neglected for two main reasons: (1) improvement of the stiffness would increase the seismic actions, and (2) these structural interventions would disrupt medical activities and affect their continuity. Instead, we suggest structural solutions to strengthen the reinforced concrete walls of the RC cores. Two types of intervention are proposed: (1) increasing the thickness of the cores' walls, and (2) strengthening the RC cores with steel jacketing. Such interventions have been selected as the most promising in view of the need to ensure the continuity of the medical activities during the retrofitting. Each solution has been developed according two different safety levels, corresponding to a performance index \(\zeta_{E}\) greater than or equal to 0.60 or 1.00.