»Magistrska naloga obravnava potresno odpornost in predlog sanacije Dijaškega doma v Celju. Objekt je bil sprojektiran leta 1977, ko so na slovenskem območju veljala pravila o dimenzioniranju in izvedbi gradbenih objektov v potresnih območjih, ki so bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Socialistične republike Slovenije leta 1963. S potresno analizo v programu Tower smo ugotovili, da objekt po trenutno veljavnem standardu Eurocode 8 ni potresno odporen. Zato smo v nalogi predlagali dve možnosti sanaciji. Prva vključuje spremembo konstrukcijskega sistema iz torzijsko podajnega v sistem nepovezanih (konzolnih) sten, s čimer smo povečali dejavnik obnašanja in zmanjšali potresno obtežbo na vpetju konstrukcije. V okviru predloga sanacije 2 smo upoštevali obstoječo arhitekturno zasnovo in dodali nove nosilne stene tako, da nismo vplivali na trenutno razporeditev dijaških sob in skupnih prostorov. Konstrukcijski sistem se v okviru predloga sanacije 2 ni spremenil od obstoječega. Potresna obtežba je bila večja kot v obstoječi konstrukciji, vendar so bile nove stene dovolj toge, da so prevzele več potresne obremenitve kot obstoječe.«
»This master’s thesis focuses on the seismic resistance of the dormitory in Celje, Slovenia, and presents two proposals for the rehabilitation of the building. The dormitory was designed in 1977, when the rules on the dimensioning and building structures in earthquake zones, published in 1963 in the Official Gazette of the Socialist Republic of Slovenia, were in force. The seismic analysis performed in the programme Tower shows that the building is not earthquake-resistant according to the current Eurocode 8 standard. For that reason, two possibilities for seismic retrofitting are proposed. The first proposal involves changing the structural system from a torsionally flexible system to a system of unconnected (cantilevered) walls, increasing the behaviour factor and reducing the seismic load at the support location of the structure. The second proposal, however, takes into account the existing architectural design. New load-bearing walls are added in order not to affect the existing layout of the student rooms and common areas. In this second proposal, the structural system stays the same. The seismic load is higher than in the existing structure, but the new walls are enough stiff to take more of the seismic load.«