Structural Assessment and Strengthening of a Historic Masonry Orthodox Church
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- In 1990, Professor A. Cișmigiu proposed the “framing system” method as a solution for strengthening masonry structures. This system involves enclosing the structural masonry components in a new reinforced concrete framework. Through mechanical means and bonded connections between the reinforced concrete system and masonry elements, the resultant framing system functions as a unified system when subjected to seismic actions [15,16].
- Strengthening using metallic elements can involve various methods, such as repairing specific degraded members, enhancing the overall horizontal load-carrying capacity by encasing the masonry in a spatial steel framework, adding steel plates on contour frames, or restraining the displacements by using horizontal tie-rods. Some of these methods were later reconfigured using fiber-reinforced polymer composite materials instead of steel elements [17].
- Mortar jacketing consists of the application of a self-supporting reinforced cement mortar matrix. This technique is suitable for both stone and brick masonry elements, but since the meshes are usually applied on both faces of the walls, its practical use is severely limited. In fact, when referring to the heritage masonry buildings in Romania, this kind of intervention works on both the inside and outside faces of the walls in only a small fraction.
- Structural repointing of the masonry elements consists of the embedment of steel bars (or composite bars/strips) within the horizontal mortar joints [18]. It usually contributes to the fast increase of the tensile strength of the masonry members, yet it is difficult to apply to stone masonry members due to the geometrical irregularities. It should also be noted that even in the case of brick masonry elements, the effectiveness of this method is particularly concentrated on the outer surfaces of the walls.
- The base isolation method consists of decoupling the masonry superstructure from the foundation and installing an isolating system that possesses high horizontal flexibility and sufficient vertical rigidity [19]. Although this method proved to be effective in protecting masonry structures from high seismic activity, there are some important drawbacks, including the risk of masonry alteration during the decoupling procedure, the need for regular maintenance of the isolation system, and the prohibitive costs.
- The installation of vertical steel rods (post-tensioned in some cases) in drilled galleries along the entire height of the masonry walls has the benefit of preventing local/general collapses of the masonry elements by enhancing the overall ductility of the structural system [20]. Additionally, it improves the in-plane cross-sectional strengths and post-elastic strain capacity. These features are advantageous in preventing the failure mechanisms induced by either the axial forces or the combined effects of bending moments and axial loads.
2. The Church of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Tazlău Monastery
3. Structural Assessment and Diagnosis
3.1. Visual Investigation
3.2. Structural Analysis
- Scap,i is the shear capacity of the structural wall “i”, determined based on the specific failure mechanism;
- ;
- —the shear force associated with the eccentric compression failure of an unreinforced masonry wall subjected to the design axial force;
- —the shape factor;
- —the height of the wall;
- —the length of the wall;
- —the coefficient that accounts for the bearing conditions (2 for cantilever wall, 1 for clamped wall)
- —the compressive stress corresponding to the design axial force;
- —the thickness of the wall;
- ;
- —the design compressive strength;
- —the shear capacity of the unreinforced masonry wall;
- —the design shear force corresponding to the failure by sliding in mortar joints;
- D’—the length of the compressed region of the wall;
- —the shear strength associated with failure by sliding in mortar joints;
- —the design shear force corresponding to failure by diagonal fracture;
- ;
- —the design tensile strength
- Fb,i is the shear load produced by the seismic action to the structural wall “i”;
- ;
- Gi is the mass of the structural wall “i”;
- ΣGi is the mass of the whole building.
4. Strengthening System
5. Structural Analysis of the Strengthened Model
6. Discussions and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Andra-Topârceanu, A.; Verga, M.; Mafteiu, M.E.; Andra, M.-D.; Marin, M.; Pintilii, R.-D.; Mazza, G.; Carboni, D. Vulnerability Analysis of the Cultural Heritage Sites—The Roman Edifice with Mosaic, Constanța, Romania. Land 2023, 12, 385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piaia, E.; Maietti, F.; Di Giulio, R.; Schippers-Trifan, O.; Van Delft, A.; Bruinenberg, S.S.; Olivadese, R. BIM-based Cultural Heritage Asset Management Tool. Innovative Solution to Orient the Preservation and Valorization of Historic Buildings. Int. J. Archit. Herit. 2021, 15, 897–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Labadi, S.; Giliberto, F.; Rosetti, I.; Shetabi, L.; Yildirim, E. Heritage and the Sustainable Development Goals: Policy Guidance for Heritage and Development Actors. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2021. Available online: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/89231/1/ICOMOS_SDGs_Policy_Guidance_2021.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2023).
- Silva, H.E.; Henriques, F.M. The impact of tourism on the conservation and IAQ of cultural heritage: The case of the Monastery of Jerónimos (Portugal). Build. Environ. 2021, 190, 107536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: http://www.cultura.ro/culturaro (accessed on 1 March 2023).
- Lungu, D. Natural and anthropic risks for heritage buildings in Bucharest. International Day or Reducing the Risk of Natural Hazards, National Focal Centre—Hyogo Framework for Action; International Strategy for Disaster Reduction: Bucharest, Romania, 14 October 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Onutu, C.; Ungureanu, D.; Isopescu, D.N.; Vornicu, N.; Spiridon, I.A. Sourcing Limestone Masonry for the Restoration of Heritage Buildings: Frumoasa Monastery Case Study. Materials 2020, 15, 7178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Formisano, A.; Vaiano, G.; Fabbrocino, F.; Milani, G. Seismic vulnerability of Italian masonry churches: The case of the Nativity of Blessed Virgin Mary in Stellata of Bondeno. J. Build. Eng. 2018, 20, 179–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pirchio, D.; Walsh, K.Q.; Kerr, E.; Giongo, I.; Giaretton, M.; Weldon, B.D.; Ciocci, L.; Sorrentino, L. Seismic risk assessment and intervention prioritization for Italian medieval churches. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 43, 103061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martini, R.; Carvalho, J.; Arede, A.; Varum, H. Validation of nondestructive methods for assessing stone masonry using artificial neural networks. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 42, 102469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fortunato, G.; Funari, M.F.; Lonetti, P. Survey and seismic vulnerability assessment of the Baptistery of San Giovanni in Tumba (Italy). J. Cult. Herit. 2017, 26, 64–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castellazzi, G.; D’Altri, A.M.; de Miranda, S.; Ubertini, F. An innovative numerical modeling strategy for the structural analysis of historical monumental buildings. Eng. Sructures 2017, 132, 229–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ungureanu, D.; Taranu, N.; Ghiga, D.A.; Isopescu, D.N.; Mihai, P.; Cozmanciuc, V. Diagonal Tensile Test on Masonry Panels Strengthened with Textile-Reinforced Mortar. Materials 2021, 14, 7021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ghiga, D.A.; Taranu, N.; Ungureanu, D.; Isopescu, D.N.; Oprisan, G.; Hudisteanu, I. A detailed micro-modelling approach for the diagonal compression test of strengthened stone masonry walls. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 916, 012041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crișan, M. Structural Rehabilitation of Historic Heritage Orthodox Church Buildings in Moldova and Țara Românească Regions, 2nd ed.; Mincu University Publishing House: Bucharest, Romania, 2010. (In Romanian) [Google Scholar]
- Cișmigiu, A. Monography; CDCAS-MLPTL: Bucharest, Romania, 2002. (In Romanian) [Google Scholar]
- Oprișan, G.; Țăranu, N.; Budescu, M.; Ențuc, I. Structural behaviour of reinforced concrete beams strengthened by CFRP plate bonding. Rom. J. Mater. 2012, 42, 387–398. [Google Scholar]
- Salvalaggio, M.; Valluzzi, M.R. Optimization of Intervention Strategies for Masonry Buildings Based on CLT Components. Heritage 2022, 5, 2142–2160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pauletta, M.; Di Luca, D.; Russo, E.; Fumo, C. Seismic rehabilitation of cultural heritage masonry buildings with unbonded fiber reinforced elastomeric isolators (U-FREIs)—A case study. J. Cult. Herit. 2018, 32, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soveja., L. Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Masonry Historic Heritage Buildings. Ph.D. Thesis, Gheorghe Asachi Technical University of Iași, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Building Services, Iași, Romania, 2015. (In Romanian). [Google Scholar]
- Boca, A.; Toader, T.P.; Mircea, C. Romanesque Historical Monuments Reconstruction by Using Original Materials and Recycling of Those that Have Lost Their Historical Value. Proceedings 2020, 63, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lupasteanu, V.; Soveja, L.; Lupasteanu, R.; Chingalata, C. Installation of a base isolation system made of friction pendulum sliding isolators in a historic masonry orthodox church. Eng. Struct. 2019, 188, 369–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Musilek, J.; Podolka, L.; Karkova, M. The unique construction of the church of Hagia Irene in Istanbul for the teaching of Byzantine architecture. Procedia Eng. 2016, 161, 1745–1750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Timagenis, I.; Timagenis, T.; Timagenis, A. Resolving the acoustics of contemporary Byzantine churches. The new orthodox cathedral of Tirana in Albania as the first scientific paradigm. Appl. Acoust. 2022, 198, 108990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: https://tazlau.mmb.ro/ (accessed on 21 December 2022).
- Ardeleanu, C. Fortified Churches of Transylvania: A Guidebook; Mega Publishing House: Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Enciclopedia României. Arhitectură Religioasă. 2011. Available online: http://enciclopediaromaniei.ro/wiki/Arhitectur%C4%83_religioas%C4%83 (accessed on 1 March 2023).
- Ghilezan, S. Constructii Traditionale Romanesti: Materiale, Tehnici si Elemente de Arhitectura; Editura Risoprint: Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 2007. (In Romanian) [Google Scholar]
- Negru, M.; Mihut, F.B.; Savulescu, I.; Poll, I.; Litu, A.; Bottez, V. Considerații Privind Producția de Cărămizi Romane la Romula. Procese Tehnologice și Produse. 2017. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347653430_CONSIDERATII_PRIVIND_PRODUCTIA_DE_CARAMIZI_ROMANE_LA_ROMULA_PROCESE_TEHNOLOGICE_SI_PRODUSECONSIDERATIONS_CONERNING_TO_ROMAN_BRICKS_PRODUCTION_IN_ROMULA_TECHNOLOGICAL_PROCESSES_AND_PRODUCTS#fullTextFileContent (accessed on 1 March 2023).
- Consideraţii cu Privire la Cronologia Arheologică şi la Datarea Aşezărilor Medieval-Timpurii din Câmpia Bărăganului (Secolele VIII-XI d. Hr.). Available online: https://emiliacorbu.ro/tag/evul-mediu-timpuriu/ (accessed on 1 March 2023).
- Andrasanu, A.; Gamet, J.; Dupuy, O. Memoria: Dialogul Omului cu Pamantul. 2009. Available online: http://www.hateggeoparc.ro/new/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Dialogul-Omului-cu-Pamantul.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2023).
- Corradi, M.; Borri, A. A database of the structural behaviour of masonry in shear. Bull. Earth. Eng. 2018, 16, 3905–3930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giersini, L. Energy-based method for identifying vulnerable macro-elements in historic masonry churches. Bull. Earth. Eng. 2016, 14, 919–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Castory, G.; Borri, A.; De Maria, A.; Sisti, R. Seismic vulnerability assessment of a monument masonry building. Eng. Struct. 2017, 136, 454–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rinaldin, G.; Amadio, C. Effects of seismic sequence on masonry structures. Eng. Struct. 2018, 166, 227–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soveja, L.; Budescu, M. Failure mechanisms for orthodox churches in Romanian seismic area. Bul. Inst. Politeh. Din Lasi. Sect. Constr. Arhit. 2014, 60, 173–183. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, Z. A Review of Rising Damp in Masonry Buildings. Adv. Polym. Compos. Res. 2010, 618, 619. [Google Scholar]
- Frazoni, E.; Berk, B.; Bassi, M.; Marrone, C. An integrated approach to the monitoring of rising damp in historic brick masonry. Constr. Build. Mater. 2023, 370, 130631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vos, B.H. Suction of groundwater. Stud. Conserv. 1971, 16, 129–144. [Google Scholar]
- Frazoni, E.; Gentilini, C.; Santandrea, M.; Carloni, C. Effects of rising damp and salt crystallization cycles in FRCM-masonry interfacial debonding: Towards an accelerated laboratory test method. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 175, 225–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soveja, L.; Gosav, I. Lateral Stiffness Evaluation of Masonry Vaulted Churches. In Proceedings of the C60 International Conference, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 7–9 November 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Soveja, L.; Budescu, M.; Gosav, I. Modelling methods for unreinforced masonry structures. Bul. Inst. Politeh. Din Lasi. Sect. Constr. Arhit. 2013, 59, 19–31. [Google Scholar]
- EN 1926:2006; Natural Stone Test Methods—Determination of Uniaxial Compressive Strength. European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2006.
- ASTM C67/C67M-21; Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Brick and Structural Clay Tile. ASTM: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2021.
- SREN 1015-11:2002; Metode de Încercare a Mortarelor Pentru Zidărie. Partea 11: Determinarea Rezistenţei la Încovoiere a Mortarului Întărit. Organismul Național de Standardizare din România: Bucharest, Romania, 2002. (In Romanian)
- CR 1–1–3/2012; Cod de Proiectare. Evaluarea Acţiunii Zăpezii asupra Construcțiilor. Emitent Ministerul Dezvoltării Regionale Și Turismului: Bucureşti, Romania, 2012. (In Romanian)
- SR EN 1991–1–1/2004; Eurocod 1: Acţiuni asupra Structurilor Partea 1-1: Acţiuni Generale-Greutăţi Specifice, Greutăţi Proprii, Încărcări Utile pentru Clădiri. Organismul Național de Standardizare din România: Bucharest, Romania, 2004. (In Romanian)
- P100/3-2019; Cod de Proiectare Seismică. Partea A III-A. Prevederi pentru Evaluarea Seismică a Clădirilor Existente. Ministerul Dezvoltării Regionale și Administrației Publice—MDRAP: Bucharest, Romania, 2019. (In Romanian)
- P100/1/2013; Cod de Proiectare Seismică. Partea I. Prevederi de Proiectare pentru Clădiri. Ministerul Dezvoltării Regionale și Administrației Publice—MDRAP: Bucharest, Romania, 2013. (In Romanian)
- Vintzileou, E.; Miltiadou-Fezas, A. Mechanical properties of three-leaf stone masonry grouted with ternary or hydraulic lime-based fluids. Eng. Struct. 2008, 30, 2265–2276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paillere, A.-M.; Guinez, R. Recherche d’une formulation de coulis à base de liants hydrauliques pour l’injection dans les fines fissures et les cavités. Bull. Liaison Lab. Ponts Chauss. 1984, 130, 51–57. [Google Scholar]
- Paillere, A.-M.; Buil, M.; Miltiadou, A.-E.; Guinez, R.; Serrano, J.-J. Use of silica fume and superplasticizers in cement grouts for injection of fine cracks. Spec. Publ. 1989, 114, 1131–1157. [Google Scholar]
- Miltiadou, A. Etude des Coulis Hydrauliques Pour la Réparation et le Renforcement des Structures et des Monuments Historiques en Maçonnerie. Ph.D. Thesis, Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussees, Paris, France, 1991. Published in 1991 by LCPC in Collection Etudes et Recherches des Laboratoires des Ponts et Chaussees, Série Ouvrages d’art, Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
- Vintzileou, E.; Tassios, T.P. Three leaf stone masonry strengthened by injecting cement grouts. J. Struct. Eng. 1995, 121, 848–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: https://rou.sika.com/ro/solutii-pentru-constructii/protejeaza/impermeabilizare/aditivi/sika-1.htm (accessed on 1 March 2023).
- Rinaldin, G.; Miniussi, C.; Amadio, C. Cyclic behavior of masonry walls strengthened by tie rods. Eng. Struct. 2019, 184, 287–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ungureanu, D.; Taranu, N.; Isopescu, D.N.; Lupasteanu, V.; Scutaru, M.C.; Hudisteanu, I. Failure particularities of adhesively bonded joints between pultruded GFRP composite profiles. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 400, 032011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lupasteanu, V.; Taranu, N.; Mihai, P.; Oprisan, G.; Lupasteanu, R.; Ungureanu, D. Behaviour of CFRP-to-steel interfaces in adhesively bonded joints. Rom. J. Mater. 2017, 46, 515–522. [Google Scholar]
- Oprisan, G.; Taranu, N.; Munteanu, V.; Budescu, M.; Cozmanciuc, C.; Olteanu, R. Improvement of concrete strength through confining with composite membranes. Rom. J. Mater. 2011, 41, 302–315. [Google Scholar]
Borehole No. 1 |
---|
0–0.25 m Vegetable soil with stone fragments |
0.25–2.1 m Brownish-red silty clay with fine sand and small gravel fragments |
2.1–2.8 m Sand and gravel in a clay matrix |
2.8–4.7 m Grey clay with brownish regions |
4.7–6 m Clayey sand with gravel fragments |
Borehole No. 2 |
---|
0–0.5 m Vegetable soil with brick fragments |
0.5–1.6 m Brownish-red silty clay with fine sand and small gravel fragments |
1.6–2.7 m Clayey sand with small gravel fragments |
2.7–4.5 m Brownish-red clay with sandy regions |
4.5–6 m Clayey sand with gravel fragments and brownish-red fine sand |
Brick Compressive Strength (Mean Value) [N/mm2] | Stone Compressive Strength (Mean Value) [N/mm2] | Mortar Compressive Strength (Mean Value) [N/mm2] |
---|---|---|
5.770 | 70.740 | 1.098 |
Dead Loads | Live Load [kN/m2] | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Roof System [kN/m2] | Stone Masonry Elements [kN/m3] | Plaster [kN/m3] | Reinforced Concrete Elements [kN/m3] | |
1.5 | 19.5 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 0.75 |
Natural Hydraulic Lime [kg/m3] | Cement I 52.5 R [kg/m3] | Water [L/m3] |
---|---|---|
650 | 130 | 715 |
Specimen dimensions | ||
L [mm] | L [mm] | h [mm] |
150 | 150 | 150 |
Specimen masses | ||
S1 [kg] | S2 [kg] | S3 [kg] |
7.070 | 7.110 | 7.220 |
Specimen apparent densities | ||
ρ1 [kg/m3] | ρ2 [kg/m3] | ρ3 [kg/m3] |
2095 | 2107 | 2139 |
Compression strengths | ||
R1 [N/mm2] | R2 [N/mm2] | R3 [N/mm2] |
5.46 | 5.99 | 5.36 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Spiridon, I.A.; Ungureanu, D.; Țăranu, N.; Onuțu, C.; Isopescu, D.N.; Șerbănoiu, A.A. Structural Assessment and Strengthening of a Historic Masonry Orthodox Church. Buildings 2023, 13, 835. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13030835
Spiridon IA, Ungureanu D, Țăranu N, Onuțu C, Isopescu DN, Șerbănoiu AA. Structural Assessment and Strengthening of a Historic Masonry Orthodox Church. Buildings. 2023; 13(3):835. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13030835
Chicago/Turabian StyleSpiridon, Ionuț Alexandru, Dragoș Ungureanu, Nicolae Țăranu, Cătălin Onuțu, Dorina Nicolina Isopescu, and Adrian Alexandru Șerbănoiu. 2023. "Structural Assessment and Strengthening of a Historic Masonry Orthodox Church" Buildings 13, no. 3: 835. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13030835