561

RELIABILITY OF REINFORCED CONCRETE SHELL STRUCTURES

I. Bucur-Horvth, A. Hedes
Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, C. Daicoviciu Street 15, 400020 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
ilbucurro@yahoo.com, andruska1810@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
The paper is going to follow the shell structures evolution in a historical perspective, necessary to draw correct
conclusions on the present state of art concerning theoretical and practical aspects of using reinforced concrete
shell structures. Researches put into evidence the mechanical reasons of creating membranes. That is to induce
as much as possible a membrane state of stresses in the shell structure. The relation between form and
mechanical behaviour of the shell structures is emphasized in general and on some examples in particular as
well, in order to put in evidence the great possibility of influencing the reliability of shell structures by form and
constructive conceiving. Actual problems of the mechanical modeling and computing are discussed.
Considerations about reliability and the main fields of using reinforced concrete shell structures are related.
Keywords: Shell structures, history, structural forms and mechanical behaviour, reliability.
1. INTRODUCTION
The compressed curved structural forms are well known from ancient times. As well, vaulted and dome
structures made of compressive-resistant materials (stone, roman concrete, brick) are accompanying the whole
development of the architectural forms [1]. The revival of the resistant carcasses as shell structures coincides
with the epoch of the reinforced concrete affirmation in the second half of the 19
th
century. Due to its special
qualities, constructors and innovators were competed each other in finding rational fields of application of the
new material. Among the issues, one of the more important structural achievement was that of reinforced
concrete thin shells: recipients (reservoirs, water towers, silos), shell roofs and also hydro-constructions (dams).
An entire technical innovation movement and scientific emulation was created in connection with the reinforced
concrete objects generally and with the reinforced concrete shells especially at this time. The above mentioned
technical innovation and scientific development met some immediate needs dictated by the general social
development of the end of the 19
th
century in Europe. Thus, a large urban developing was accompanied by
infrastructure constructions (water supply and sewing systems) requiring tanks and water towers of great
capacity and good quality. The process has continued during the first decades of the 20
th
century. At the same
time, an important industrial as well as social -cultural development took place, requiring new establishments
associated with large covered spaces like industrial halls, market halls, theaters, exhibition halls, gymnasiums
etc. Studying the further development of the shell structures during the second half of the 20
th
century, especially
at fifties and sixties, one can find out an intense process of new form finding and researching of reinforced
concrete shells. This period is marched by great achievements (Torroja, Nervi, Esquillan and others). The last
few decades introduced the incisive concurrency of the lightweight structures in bridging large spans. Even so,
the numerous varieties of structural form and large functional offers make to go successfully on with the thin
shell structures.
2. HISTORICAL RETROSPECTIVE
The roots of the shell, respectively cupola building can be found in the ancient dwelling constructions. The
earliest ancient shell structures, dwellings and other buildings were put into evidence by archeological
discoveries. Examples are comprised in the Table 1.
The inhabitants of the oldest town of the world we know, Jericho (8
th
millenary BC), lived in houses of circular
form [2]. Over the circular plane a cupola-form covering of clay-bricks was erected. This kind of house can be
illustrated by a dwelling from Northern Cameroon. Remains of such constructions were discovered in many
points of the world (China, Egypt, Cyprus etc.). Architects of antique Egypt and Mesopotamia built dome and
vaulted masonry structures of stone or brick. There are also exemplified.
The cupola and vault building was improved by the Romans. Their domes and vaults were built of stone or/and
traditions another way of vaulting was developed in the New Persian Empire, the so-called Sassanide technique.
Examples of these technical improvements are presented in the Table 2.
Afterwards the vault and especially the cupola as structural form, accompanies the whole thread of architectural
development (Early Christian, Byzantine, Islamic, Roman, Gothic, Renaissance, Baroque and Eclectic
architecture). Along this well-known historical period characterized by many new formal and technical
IASS 2005
562
mechanical behaviour of the structure, to take over the tensions respectively. Let see some examples (Table 3).
Table 1. Ancient dome and vaulted structures
CONSTRUCTION
DATE
REFERENCES
TECHNICAL
DATA
1. Type of ancient
dwelling
(North-
Cameroon)
[2]
Cupolas of clay-
bricks
2. Vault of stone
Dashur
Egypt
3504 BC
[3]
Simple vault of
stone
3. Forth of
Babylon
6
th
c. BC
[2]
Row of brick vaults
Table 2. Technical improvements on ancient domes and vaults
CONSTRUCTION
DATE
REFERENCES
TECHNICAL
PERFORMANCE
1. Theatre of Pompeius
Rome
63 BC
[4]
Vault of opus ceamentitium,
opus reticulatum wall
building technique
2. Tempio della
Tosse
Tivoli
115-125
[4]
Spherical dome of opus
ceamentitium caste on built in
stoneshutteringforerunner
of Pantheon
3. Reception hall
(Iwan) of Royal Palace
Ktesiphon (New Persian
Empire)
241-272
[5]
Cylindrical masonry vault of
brickandhighqualitymortar
Special technique of vaulting
with successively built
inclinedarches
L = 25 m
Giacomo della Porta, the last constructor of the cupola of Basilica S. Pietro in Rome, raised the profile of the
dome in comparison with that designed by Michelangelo in order to decrease the horizontal thrusts. At the same
time, the tambour was strengthened with an iron ring. Later on (1743-1744) Vanvitelli built in the basic tambour
another five metallic rings as a result of the mathematical analysis performed by three mathematicians,
-1710) is a
late Baroque building with Eclectic singes. Also in this case metallic bars were built into the basic ring of the
cupola. The pilgrimage church Vierzehnheiligen (1743-1774), masterpiece of the Middle-European Baroque is
covered by flat elliptic cupolas intersecting each other. The whole vaulted ensemble consists of tuff-stone laid on
a mortar bed with a regular steel reinforcement.
563
Table 3 Reinforced stone cupolas and vaults
CONSTRUCTION
DATE
AUTHOR(S)
REFERENCES
TECHNICAL
PERFORMANCE
1. Cupola of
Basilica S.
Pietro
Rome
1588-1593
D. Bramante
Michelangelo
G. della Porta
[1] [2] [6]
High cupola with basic
tambour
Caisson structure of
facedstone
The originally provided
profile was firstly
raised by Michelangelo
and farther on by G.
dellaPorta
Strengthening of the
tambour with iron rings
2. S. Paul
Cathedral
London
1675-1710
Sir Ch. Wren
[1] [2] [6]
High cupola with basic
tambour
Interior double cupola
of brick and mortar, an
external cupola of
timber
Strengthening of the
basic ring with iron
bars
3. Pilgrimage Church
Vierzehnheiligen
1743-1772
J. B. Neumann
[1] [2] [6]
Vaulted ensemble of
flat cupolas supported
by a system of spatial
archesBuiltintuff
stone and mortar with
regular steel
reinforcement
The new era of shell structures began with the appearance of reinforced concrete as new building material in the
second half of the 19
th
century. The main advantage of the new material is its possibility to be cast in any form
obtaining rigid and resistant carcasses. The presence of reinforcement assures the overtaking of the tensions.
Therefore, based really on an ancient experience, a great perspective was opened in designing more and more
rational, economic and esthetic structures. Besides the classical dome and vault a series of new forms appeared.
Some significant examples are presented in the Table 4. It is to be mentioned the apparition of the hyperbolic
shells never met before.
3. PRINCIPLE OF EQUILIBRIUM
It is well known that besides functional and aesthetical qualities the thin shells presents also advantageous
mechanical properties. They are mainly subjected by membrane forces. Bending moments are generally of small
account. So, like natural carcasses (shell, egg, nut), the mechanical equilibrium of a membrane structure means
the minimum of the st
stresses (membrane state) and those acted by two signed stresses (bending state) assuming an elastic behaviour
and a certain resistance of the material (Figure 1). The computing shows that the included internal energy is three
case of the membrane state of stresses. In other words the section is able to support more loading, it has a greater
loading capacity. Obviously it is advantageous to fulfill the main conditions of the membrane theory of the shell
structures.
564
Table 4. Shell structures of reinforced concrete
CONSTRUCTION
DATE, AUTHOR
REFERENCES
DESCRIPTION
1. Water reservoir
of 500 m
3
in Toulon
1898
E. Coignet
[4]
cylindrical tanks (Fontenaible
1870, Bougival
Svres
reservoir is an ensemble of
cylindrical, spherical and
conical thin shells.
2. Summer
Playhouse in Cluj-
Kolozsvr
(actually
Hungarian
Theatre)
1909-1910
F. Spiegel
G. Mrkus
[7]
The spherical dome with 28,50
m span and 5,00 m rise is the
very first reinforced concrete
cupola of large span, with basic
ring, supported by masonry
piles. The reinforced concrete
shell is two-layered.
3. Ball-playing hall
Madrid
1935
E. Torroja
[2]
Long cylindrical shell ensemble
withincludedlightening
Longitudinal span: 53m
Transversal span: 32 m
Thickness of the shell: 8 cm.
4. Restaurant
Los Manantiales
Xochimilco
Mexico
1958
F. Candela
[2]
Intersection o of hyperbolic
shells
Diagonalspan32,5m
Thickness of the shell: 4 cm.
5. Palazetto dello
Sport
Rome
1957
P. L. Nervi
[2]
Spherical dome of ribbed
reinforced concrete shell built
by assembly of precast
elements
Supportedbyinclinedcolumns
Span: 80 m.
Figure 1. Comparison of the potential strain energy in the case of membrane and bending state of stresses
565
4. RELATION BETWEEN FORM AND MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR
The theory of shell structures demonstrates that is a strong relation between differential geometrical properties of
second order (curvatures) of the middle surface of the shell and the mechanical behaviour, the state of stresses
when the normal plane is turning around the normal line to the surface. It divides the points on a surface,
respectively surfaces, in elliptic, hyperbolic and parabolic. Thus, a surface consisting of elliptic, hyperbolic or
parabolic points is an elliptic, hyperbolic, respectively parabolic surface. The corresponding resolving
differential equations in the membrane theory are of elliptic, hyperbolic and respectively parabolic type. The
characteristic mode of discharging of the before mentioned types of shell are presented in the Figure 3.
Figure 2.
The characteristic mode of discharging of the before mentioned types of shell are presented in the Figure 3.
Figure 3. Characteristic discharging of different types of shell
From very practical functional or/and technical reason in many cases higher as two degree surfaces are adopted.
In these situations the surfaces contains zones of both elliptic and hyperbolic type, separated each other by a
curve of parabolic points.
For example, in order to cover large square areas the velaroidal surface can be used (Figure 4). Described by a
forth degree equation it is generated by a variable curve (1) which is translated on another curve (2) degenerating
into straight lines on the boundaries. Thus, the edge elements become simpler, easy to prestressed if it is
necessary and certain structural arrangement (Figure 5) offers also a simple configuration for natural lightening.
In order to emphasize the influence of the geometry of the surface on the structural behaviour a comparative
566
study was made [8] for velaroidal surfaces with parabolic, circular and elliptic directrix having the same
height/span ratio (Figure 6). It put into evidence different trajectories of parabolic type of points (Figure 7). So,
from structural point of view for the velaroidal shell supported on four columns, the proper geometry will be that
of velaroid with elliptic directrix assuring a reduced zone of hyperbolic points.
Figure 4. Generating of velaroidal shell Figure 5. Universal hall with velariodal shells
Figure 6. Velaroid of different directrixes Figure 7. Lines of parabolic points
Until the sixties the form finding was limited on thin shells working in a merely compressive membrane state,
systems whose tensile element position are known or fixed. The spectacular hyperbolic paraboloid, or the
functionally useful conoidal shells accompanies these structures. The basic theories of thin shell structures were
elaborated (F. Dischinger, W. Flgge, K. Girkmann, S. Timoshenko, W. H. Wlassow etc.) at this time.
The last decades of the 20
th
century is characterized by searching for new forms and technologies. There are to
be mentioned the free forms. Some researchers instead rigorous calculus prefer experimentation like H. Isler who
works on funicular forms, by the use of physical modeling leading to unique funicular equilibrium shape. In
other cases the form finding process was focused on tensioned elements when the position of every compressive
element is known, fixed or prescribed by the designer. There are structures, including merely tensioned elements
comprises cable nets, fabric membranes, also funicular cables or thin steel sheets [9]. Finally, many researches
were carried out on form finding of mixed systems. In other words, this problem consists in determining a stable
equilibrated prestressed system. That is to say its geometry and stress distribution, while evaluating a possible
instability because of compressive element presence. Such a system is the tensegrity system made up of cable
and struts covered with plane panels (for instance, glass panel fixed on a prestressed bar-cable skeleton). Also
cabledomes are mixed systems composed generally of non-curved fabric strips. All these researches are
accompanied with different strategies in order to calculate the coupled parameter shape/stress (Force Density
method developed by K. Linkwitz during the Munich Olympic Roof project, different stress control methods,
traditional Finite Elements method).
567
5. CONCLUSIONS
Any prognosis in this domain should start from the retrospective analysis and a careful examination of the
present tendencies. We should also take into account series of factors. The difficulty of this purpose consists in
the fact that these factors are changeable whereas their evolution lies under the sign of uncertainty and
probability. However, we may establish some criteria of influence based both on general or individual
determinations. Then, knowing the evolution of the tendencies in time (experiment) and estimating the present
tendencies, considering also the phenomena that guide these criteria, we may appreciate the future of reinforced
concrete shells. Thus, based on the criteria systematized in Table 5, one could appreciate that the area of using of
reinforced concrete shells will cover the domains foreseen in Table 6.
Table 5. Factors of influence on reliability of reinforced concrete shells
GENERAL FACTORS DETERMINE REAL CRITERIA
Social
command
Social-economical
development
Spiritual and
material
resources
necessity
possibility
Urban development
- space covering
- public works
Energetic development (conventional and
unconventional)
- deposits of energy-bearing materials
- art works
- protection works
Building materials development
- special concrete and reinforcement
- appearance of new materials
Development of execution technology
Science development
- structural mechanics
- calculation means (methods, software)
Table 6. Prospect of using reinforced concrete shells
DOMAIN OBJECTS
Roofs
Optimized forms
Sculptural forms
Secondary roof elements
Tanks, vessels, deposits
Water tanks and towers
Settling tanks, methane-tanks
Bunkers and silos
Art works
Dams
Tunnels and pipes
Protective shells
Reservoirs for oil products
Reactor envelopes
Screens
It could be estimated that there will not take place a narrowing of the domai n but a better adequacy of using of
reinforced concrete shells in accordance with their specific qualities.
REFERENCES
[1] Bucur-Horvth, I., Retrospect and Prospect of Reinforced Concrete Thin Shells. In: International Symposium
luj-Napoca, 15-16 Oct. 1993, Proceedings, vol.4, pp. 1414-1431.
[2] Hart, F., Kunst und Technik der Wlbung. Verlag Georg D. W. Vallwey, Mnchen, 1965.
[3] Heinle, E., Schlaich, J., Kuppeln aller Zeiten aller Kulturen, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Stuttgart, 1996.
[4] Haegermann, G., Huberti, G., Mll, H., Von Caementum zum Spannbeton, Band I, Bauverlag GmbH,
Wiesbaden-Berlin, 1964.
[5] Bucur-Horvth, I., ptszet mrnkszemmel. Kriterion Knyvkiad, Bukarest, 1995.
[6] Kollr, L., Vmossy, F., Mrnki alkotsok eszttikja, Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest, 1996.
[7] Bucur-Horvth, I., Bacs, ., Popa, I., An Early Reinforced Concrete Cupola in the Context of Thin Shells
Evolution. In: Proceedings of the IASS
Istanbul Turkey, May 29 June 2, 2000, pp.417-426.
[8] Mihailescu, M., I. Bucur-Horvath, Velaroidal Shells for Covering Universal Industrial Halls. In: Acta
568
Technica Academiae Scientiarum Humgaricae, Tomus 85 (1-2), 1977, pp. 135 145.
[9] M. Ren, M. Bernard, The Development of Form: from Concrete Shells to Contemporary Lightweight
Structures. In: 40
th
Anniversary Congress of the International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures
(IASS), Madrid, 20-24 September 1999, Vol. II, pp.F51-F58.