Sie sind auf Seite 1von 114

PERPETUATE

PERformance-based aPproach to Earthquake proTection of cUlturAl


heriTage in European and mediterranean countries
FP7 - Theme ENV.2009.3.2.1.1 ENVIRONMENT
Grant agreement n: 244229

DELIVERABLE D6
Review of innovative techniques for the knowledge of
cultural assets

Date of preparation:
Delivery date:

10/2010
12/2010

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

AUTHORS:
Bosiljkov V., V. Bokan-Bosiljkov, B. Strah, J. Velkavrh, P. Coti (UL)

CONTRIBUTORS:
Cattari S., Lagomarsino S. (UNIGE)
Ginanni Corradini R., Piovanello, V. (CENACOLO)

Lead Beneficiary:

UL

Reviewer in charge:

Stylianidis Kosmas C. (AUTH)

WP:
Task:

4
4.1 Definition of the complete records (sets of information) for the
seismic assessment of cultural assets.
R
PU

Nature:
Dissemination Level:

SUMMARY
The document presented herein contains review of innovative techniques for the knowledge of
cultural assets and sets of information related to definition of the complete records for the seismic
assessment of cultural assets. In the first part review of different methodologies (Italian guidelines
for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage, ICOMOS, European Council) for
collecting data regarding the knowledge of cultural heritage assets are summarized and
presented. On the basis of these reviews, sets of information related to particular architectonic or
cultural asset are proposed in the form of tables. Following this, review of different
methodologies/techniques for in-situ testing of masonry structures are presented, where for each
method scope of testing, principle of test, figure of test set-up, test procedure and measurements,
results, notes for the interpretation of results together with code provisions and references are
presented. Particular attention is focused to the application of NDT/MDT and DT methodologies
regarding their intrusiveness and effectiveness for the assessment of both AA (architectonic
asset) and CA (cultural or artistic asset). In the last chapter guidelines for the design of
interventions are given with attention on planning in-situ investigation, applicability of different
testing technique as well as their cost.

2/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

INDEX
1

Recording, documentation and information management of cultural heritage ................ 5

State-of-art of international recommendations on recording of monuments ................... 5

2.1

ICOMOS charters [14, 15] ................................................................................................... 6

2.1.1 Principles for the recording of monuments, groups of buildings and sites [14] ................. 6
2.1.1.1 The Reasons for Recording ..................................................................................... 6
2.1.1.2 Responsibility for Recording .................................................................................... 7
2.1.1.3 Planning for Recording ............................................................................................ 7
2.1.1.4 Content of Records .................................................................................................. 8
2.1.1.5 Management, Dissemination and Sharing of Records.............................................. 9
2.1.2 Recommendations for the analysis, conservation and structural restoration of
architectural heritage [15] .......................................................................................................... 10
2.1.2.1 General criteria ...................................................................................................... 10
2.1.2.2 Acquisition of data: information and investigation ................................................... 11
2.1.2.3 Structural behaviour ............................................................................................... 13
2.1.2.4 Diagnosis and safety evaluation............................................................................. 16
2.2

Core data index to historic buildings and monuments of the architectural heritage [12] ..... 20

2.2.1

Names and references .................................................................................................. 20

2.2.2

Location ......................................................................................................................... 21

2.2.3

Protection/legal status ................................................................................................... 21

2.2.4

Persons and organisations associated with the history of the building ........................... 21

2.2.5 Dating (allows for precise dating when it is known, or date ranges or periods when it is
imprecise) ................................................................................................................................. 21
2.3

Recording for conservation purposes [18] ......................................................................... 22

2.4
Recording according to Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural
heritage [13] .................................................................................................................................. 24
3
Set of information necessary for the application of the PERPETUATE methodology for
the seismic assessment ............................................................................................................. 26
4
State-of-the-art of techniques for survey and investigation of architectonic and artistic
assets .......................................................................................................................................... 36
4.1

Metric surveying and recording.......................................................................................... 37

4.1.1 Manual Survey Techniques ........................................................................................... 37


4.1.1.1 Hand Survey .......................................................................................................... 37
4.1.1.2 Sketch Diagram ..................................................................................................... 37
4.1.2 Instrument Survey Tools ................................................................................................ 37
4.1.2.1 Total Station Theodolite ......................................................................................... 38
4.1.2.2 Laser Scanning ...................................................................................................... 38
4.1.2.3 Global Positioning System (GPS) .......................................................................... 38
4.1.3 Image-Based Documentation Methods .......................................................................... 39
4.1.3.1 Pictorial Imagery .................................................................................................... 39
4.1.3.2 Rectified Photography............................................................................................ 39
4.1.3.3 Photogrammetry .................................................................................................... 40

3/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.1.4 Data Management ......................................................................................................... 40


4.1.4.1 Computer-Aided Design and Drafting (CAD) .......................................................... 41
4.1.4.2 Computer Modelling ............................................................................................... 41
4.1.4.3 Databases ............................................................................................................. 41
4.1.4.4 Geographic Information System (GIS) ................................................................... 41
4.2

Diagnostic Surveying and Recording. ................................................................................ 42

4.2.1

Basic principles of planning an NDT/MDT/DT investigation ........................................... 43

4.2.2

General classification and description of the methods ................................................... 44

4.2.3 Description of the methods for the evaluation of architectonic assets ............................ 47
4.2.3.1 Active Thermography (N1) ..................................................................................... 48
4.2.3.2 Geoelectrical Tomographies (N2) .......................................................................... 52
4.2.3.3 Impact-echo (N3) ................................................................................................... 55
4.2.3.4 Pachometer (Magnetometry) (N4).......................................................................... 58
4.2.3.5 Pulse Sonic Test (N5) ............................................................................................ 59
4.2.3.6 Radar (echo method) (N6) ..................................................................................... 62
4.2.3.7 Ultrasonics (echo and through transmission) (N7) ................................................. 67
4.2.3.8 Hardness test (N8) ................................................................................................. 71
4.2.3.9 Transducer Movement Sensing (N9) ..................................................................... 72
4.2.3.10 Coring and sampling (including local in depth inspection) (M1) .............................. 75
4.2.3.11 Hole Drilling Method (M2) ...................................................................................... 77
4.2.3.12 Optical and Digital Endoscopy/Boroscopy (M3) ..................................................... 78
4.2.3.13 PNT-G method (M4) .............................................................................................. 79
4.2.3.14 Single Flat Jack Test (M5) ..................................................................................... 81
4.2.3.15 Double Flat Jack Test (M6) .................................................................................... 84
4.2.3.16 In-situ compressive tests (D1)................................................................................ 87
4.2.3.17 In-situ shear tests (D2)........................................................................................... 89
4.2.3.18 In-situ diagonal tests (D3) ...................................................................................... 92
4.2.3.19 In-situ shear test with Flat Jack (D4) ...................................................................... 94
4.2.3.20 In-situ shear test Shove test (D5) ........................................................................ 96
5

Guidelines for the design of investigations ...................................................................... 98

5.1

Planning diagnostic in-situ investigation ............................................................................ 98

5.2

Applicability of different testing technique depending on the mechanical model .............. 100

5.3
Use of different testing technique depending on the classification of architectonic and
artistic assets .............................................................................................................................. 102
5.4

Cost of different testing tecniques ................................................................................... 103

5.5

Definition of confidence factors (according to [13]) .......................................................... 105

References ......................................................................................................................... 107

APPENDIX: Collection of data according to Italian guidelines ...................................... 110

4/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Recording, documentation and information management of cultural heritage

Heritage records must clearly and accurately identify and locate the heritage places and their
setting, and note the sources of all related information. They must also include metric, quantitative,
and qualitative information about the assets, their values and significance, their management, their
condition, their maintenance and repairs, and the threats and risks to their safekeeping. Recording
and other heritage information activities should be undertaken to an appropriate level of detail to
provide information for sensitive and cost-effective planning and development; for efficient
research, seismic assessment, conservation work, site management, and maintenance; and for
creating permanent records. The selection of the appropriate scope, level, and methods of
recording requires that the methods of recording and type of documentation produced are
appropriate to the type of architectonic asset, importance of the heritage place, applied model of
analysis and the resources available. Regarding the seismic assessment of architectonic assets,
the sets of information may depends regarding the scale of the numerical analysis (territorial or
particular object) and should encompass wide range of data related to geometry of the asset,
technological detail, historical information, material properties, typology of the foundation system,
topographic relief characteristics, etc. For each sets of information methodology for its evaluation
differs. However, due to the nature and sensitivity of architectonic and cultural assets, particular
attention is focused to the application of NDT methodologies and to the complementary use of
different techniques depending from their intrusiveness.
2

State-of-art of international recommendations on recording of monuments

The topic of investigation of monumental buildings is handled by different documents, that state the
importance of a deep knowledge with proper techniques, taking into account the conservation of
the cultural heritage asset.
General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings can be followed through the codes issued by
the European Technical Committee CEN TC 250 Structural Eurocodes [10]. Hence, seismic
assessment of existing buildings made of the more commonly used structural materials: concrete,
steel, and masonry is regulated in more details by Eurocode 8-3 [11]. However, in the same
document CEN TC 250 clearly stated that although the provisions of this Standard are applicable
to all categories of buildings, the seismic assessment and retrofitting of monuments and historical
buildings often requires different types of provisions and approaches, depending on the nature of
the monuments.
The European Technical Committee - CEN TC 346 - Conservation of Cultural Property is preparing
a set of standards on the survey and visual inspection of movable and immovable heritage, as well
as on terminology and definitions in the field of conservation of cultural property. These standards
are still under development..
There is no standardized method for the collection of data needed for the seismic assessment of
architectonic and artistic assets. Apart from the methodology developed through Guidelines for
evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage [12], among other documents that that
may be directly related to PERPETUATE methodology in the following also principles and
guidelines according to ICOMOS (International Scientific Committee for Analysis and Restoration

5/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

of Structures of Architectural Heritage) [14,15], Council of Europe [12] and Getty Conservation
Institute [8] are summarized and presented.
In this chapter documents from four main sources are briefly summarized and presented:

2.1

The document Principles for the recording of monuments, groups of buildings and sites
ratified by the 11thICOMOS General Assembly in Sofia, October 1996 [14] as well as
Recommendations for the analysis, conservation and structural restoration of architectural
heritage ((Part I- Principles according to the document ratified by the ICOMOS General
Assembly in Zimbabwe, October 2003; Part II-Guidelines approved in the meeting held by
the committee at Barcelona,2005). ) [15];

Guidance on Inventory and Documentation of the Cultural Heritage , Council of Europe


Publishing, Strasbourg, 2001 [12];

Recording, Documentation, and Information Management for the Conservation of Heritage


Places Guiding Principles, The Getty Conservation Institute, 2007 [18] and

Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage (Italian Ministry
of Cultural Heritage, 2008) [13]
ICOMOS charters [14, 15]

2.1.1 Principles for the recording of monuments, groups of buildings and sites [14]
2.1.1.1 The Reasons for Recording
The recording of the cultural heritage is essential:
a) to acquire knowledge in order to advance the understanding of cultural heritage, its values
and its evolution;
b) to promote the interest and involvement of the people in the preservation of the heritage
through the dissemination of recorded information;
c) to permit informed management and control of construction works and of all change to the
cultural heritage;
d) to ensure that the maintenance and conservation of the heritage is sensitive to its physical
form, its materials, construction, and its historical and cultural significance.
Recording should be undertaken to an appropriate level of detail in order to:
a) provide information for the process of identification, understanding, interpretation and
presentation of the heritage, and to promote the involvement of the public;
b) provide a permanent record of all monuments, groups of buildings and sites that are to be
destroyed or altered in any way, or where at risk from natural events or human activities;
c) provide information for administrators and planners at national, regional or local levels to
make sensitive planning and development control policies and decisions;

6/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

d) provide information upon which appropriate and sustainable use may be identified, and the
effective research, management, maintenance programs and construction works may be
planned.
Recording of the cultural heritage should be seen as a priority, and should be undertaken
especially:
a) when compiling a national, regional, or local inventory;
b) as a fully integrated part of research and conservation activity;
c) before, during and after any works of repair, alteration, or other intervention, and when
evidence of its history is revealed during such works;
d) when total or partial demolition, destruction, abandonment or relocation is contemplated, or
where the heritage is at risk of damage from human or natural external forces;
e) during or following accidental or unforeseen disturbance which damages the cultural
heritage;
f) when change of use or responsibility for management or control occurs.
2.1.1.2 Responsibility for Recording
1. The commitment at the national level to conserve the heritage requires an equal
commitment towards the recording process.
2. The complexity of the recording and interpretation processes requires the deployment of
individuals with adequate skill, knowledge and awareness for the associated tasks. It may
be necessary to initiate training programs to achieve this.
3. Typically the recording process may involve skilled individuals working in collaboration,
such as specialist heritage recorders, surveyors, conservators, architects, engineers,
researchers, architectural historians, archaeologists above and below ground, and other
specialist advisors.
4. All managers of cultural heritage are responsible for ensuring the adequate recording,
quality and updating of the records.

2.1.1.3 Planning for Recording


Before new records are prepared, existing sources of information should be found and examined
for their adequacy.
a) The type of records containing such information should be searched for in surveys,
drawings, photographs, published and unpublished accounts and descriptions, and related
documents pertaining to the origins and history of the building, group of buildings or site. It
is important to search out recent as well as old records;
b) Existing records should be searched for in locations such as national and local public
archives, in professional, institutional or private archives, inventories and collections, in
libraries or museums;

7/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

c) Records should be searched for through consultation with individuals and organizations
who have owned, occupied, recorded, constructed, conserved, or carried out research into
or who have knowledge of the building, group of buildings or site.
Arising out of the analysis above, selection of the appropriate scope, level and methods of
recording requires that:
a) The methods of recording and type of documentation produced should be appropriate to
the nature of the heritage, the purposes of the record, the cultural context, and the funding
or other resources available. Limitations of such resources may require a phased approach
to recording. Such methods might include written descriptions and analyses, photographs
(aerial or terrestrial), rectified photography, photogrammetry, geophysical survey, maps,
measured plans, drawings and sketches, replicas or other traditional and modern
technologies;
b) Recording methodologies should, wherever possible, use non-intrusive techniques, and
should not cause damage to the object being recorded;
c) The rationale for the intended scope and the recording method should be clearly stated;
d) The materials used for compiling the finished record must be archivally stable.
2.1.1.4 Content of Records
Any record should be identified by:
a) the name of the building, group of buildings or site;
b) a unique reference number;
c) the date of compilation of the record;
d) the name of the recording organization;
e) cross-references to related building records and reports, photographic, graphic, textual or
bibliographic documentation, archaeological and environmental records.
The location and extent of the monument, group of buildings or site must be given accurately. This
may be achieved by description, maps, plans or aerial photographs. In rural areas a map reference
or triangulation to known points may be the only methods available. In urban areas an address or
street reference may be sufficient.
1. New records should note the sources of all information not obtained directly from the
monument, group of buildings or site itself.
2. Records should include some or all of the following information:
a) the type, form and dimensions of the building, monument or site;
b) the interior and exterior characteristics, as appropriate, of the monument, group of buildings
or site;
c) the nature, quality, cultural, artistic and scientific significance of the heritage and its
components and the cultural, artistic and scientific significance of:

8/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

the materials, constituent parts and construction, decoration, ornament or


inscriptions,

services, fittings and machinery,

ancillary structures, the gardens, landscape and the cultural, topographical and
natural features of the site;

d) the traditional and modern technology and skills used in construction and maintenance;
e) evidence to establish the date of origin, authorship, ownership, the original design, extent,
use and decoration;
f) evidence to establish the subsequent history of its uses, associated events, structural or
decorative alterations, and the impact of human or natural external forces;
g) the history of management, maintenance and repairs;
h) representative elements or samples of construction or site materials;
i)

an assessment of the current condition of the heritage;

j)

an assessment of the visual and functional relationship between the heritage and its setting;

k) an assessment of the conflicts and risks from human or natural causes, and from
environmental pollution or adjacent land uses.
3. In considering the different reasons for recording different levels of detail will be required.
All the above information, even if briefly stated, provides important data for local planning and
building control and management. Information in greater detail is generally required for the site or
building owners, managers or users purposes for conservation, maintenance and use.
2.1.1.5 Management, Dissemination and Sharing of Records
1. The original records should be preserved in a safe archive, and the archives environment
must ensure permanence of the information and freedom from decay to recognized
international standards.
2. A complete back-up copy of such records should be stored in a separate safe location.
3. Copies of such records should be accessible to the statutory authorities, to concerned
professionals and to the public, where appropriate, for the purposes of research,
development controls and other administrative and legal processes.
4. Up-dated records should be readily available, if possible on the site, for the purposes of
research on the heritage, management, maintenance and disaster relief.
5. The format of the records should be standardized, and records should be indexed wherever
possible to facilitate the exchange and retrieval of information at a local, national or
international level.
6. The effective assembly, management and distribution of recorded information requires,
wherever possible, the understanding and the appropriate use of up-to date information
technology.

9/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

7. The location of the records should be made public.


8. A report of the main results of any recording should be disseminated and published, when
appropriate.
2.1.2 Recommendations for the analysis, conservation and structural restoration of architectural
heritage [15]
The Recommendations are in two sections: Principles, where the basic concepts of conservation
are presented, and Guidelines, where the rules and methodology that a designer and others
should follow are discussed. Only the Principles have the status of an approved/ratified ICOMOS
document. Guidelines are divided in sub-chapters:
1. General criteria,
2. Acquisition of data (information and investigation),
3. Structural behaviour,
4. Diagnosis and safety evaluation and
5. Decisions on interventions.
Apart from these sub-chapters additional Annex related to the structural damage, material decay
and remedial measures depending from the type of material is provided.
Since the 5th sub-chapter is out of scope of this deliverable, in the following only first four subchapters are presented.
2.1.2.1 General criteria
A combination of both scientific and cultural knowledge and experience among those involved is
indispensable for the study and care of architectural heritage. Only in this context can these
guidelines help towards better conservation, strengthening and restoration of buildings and other
structures.* The purpose of all studies, research and interventions is to safeguard the cultural and
historical value of the building as a whole. Structural engineering involves the scientific support
necessary to obtain this result. These guidelines have been prepared to assist this work and
facilitate communication between those involved.
Any planning for structural conservation requires both qualitative data, based on the direct
observation of material decay and structural damage, historical research etc., and quantitative data
based on specific tests and mathematical models of the kind used in modern engineering. This
combination of approaches makes it very difficult to establish rules and codes. While the lack of
clear guidelines can easily lead to ambiguities and arbitrary decisions, codes prepared for the
design of modern structures are often inappropriately applied to historic structures. For example,
the rigid application of seismic and geotechnical codes can lead to drastic and often unnecessary
measures that fail to take account of real structural behaviour. Engineering judgement is an
essential element in this work imposing a responsibility on those making such judgements.
The subjective aspects in the study and the safety assessment of an historic building, the
uncertainties in the data assumed and the difficulties of precise evaluation of phenomena, may
lead to conclusions of uncertain reliability. It is important, therefore, to show all these aspects
clearly, noting particularly in an EXPLANATORY REPORT the care taken in the development of
10/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

the study and the reliability of the results. This report requires a careful and critical analysis of the
safety of the structure in order to justify any intervention measures. It will facilitate the decisions to
be taken and the final judgement on the safety of the structure.
The evaluation of a building requires a holistic approach considering the building as a whole rather
than just the assessment of individual elements.
2.1.2.2 Acquisition of data: information and investigation
The investigation of the structure requires an interdisciplinary approach that goes beyond simple
technical considerations because historical research may explain aspects of structural behaviour
while structural behaviour may answer some historical questions. Therefore it is important that an
investigating team be formed that incorporates a range of skills appropriate to the characteristics of
the building and which is directed by someone with adequate experience.
Knowledge of the structure requires information on its conception, on its constructional techniques,
on the processes of decay and damage, on changes that have been made and finally on its
present state. This knowledge can usually be reached by the following steps:

a description of the structures geometry and construction;

definition, description and understanding of the buildings historic and cultural

significance;

a description of the original building materials and construction techniques;

historical research covering the entire life of the structure including both changes to

its form and any previous structural interventions;

description of the structure in its present state including identification of damage,

decay and possible progressive phenomena, using appropriate types of test;

description of the actions involved, structural behaviour and types of materials;

a survey of the site, soil conditions and environment of the building.

A pre-survey of both the site and the building should guide these studies.
Because these can all be carried out at different levels of detail, it is important to establish a costeffective plan of activities proportional to the structures complexity and architectural value, which
takes into account the benefit to be obtained from the knowledge gained. In most cases it is
appropriate to undertake these studies in stages beginning with the simplest and broadest, moving
on to the more detailed.
Historical and architectural investigations
The purpose of the historical investigation is to understand the conception and the significance of
the building, the techniques and the skills used in its construction, the subsequent changes in both
the structure and its environment and any events that may have caused damage. Such events
include and additions or changes of use, failures, reconstructions and restoration work or structural
modifications that might have been recorded.

11/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Documents used for this should be noted and the sources assessed for their reliability as a means
of reconstructing the history of construction. Their careful interpretation is essential if they are to
produce reliable information about the structural history of a building. It should be remembered that
documents that might be available were usually prepared for purposes other than structural
engineering and may therefore include technical information which is incorrect and/or may omit or
misrepresent key facts or events which are structurally significant. Assumptions made in the
interpretation of historical material should be made clear.
Investigation of the structure
Direct observation of the structure is an essential phase of the study, usually carried out by a
qualified team to provide an initial understanding of the structure and to give an appropriate
direction to the subsequent investigations. The main objectives include:

identifying decay and damage,

determining whether or not the phenomena have stabilised,

deciding whether or not there are immediate risks and therefore urgent measures to be
undertaken,

identifying any ongoing environmental effects on the building.

The study of structural faults begins by mapping visible damage. During this process interpretation
of the findings should be used to guide the survey, and the expert already developing an idea of
the possible structural behaviour so that critical aspects of the structure may be examined in more
detail. Record drawings should map different kinds of materials, noting any decay and any
structural irregularities and damage, paying particular (but not exclusive) attention to crack patterns
and crushing phenomena.
Geometric irregularities can be the result of previous deformations, or can merely indicate the
junction between different building phases or alterations to the fabric.
It is important to discover how the environment may be damaging a building, since this can be
exacerbated by poor original design and/or workmanship (e.g. lack of drainage, condensation,
rising damp), the use of unsuitable materials, and/or inadequate (or nonexistent) maintenance. For
example, observation of areas where damage is concentrated as a result of high compression
(zones of crushing) or high tensions (zones of cracking or the separation of elements) and the
direction of the cracks, together with an investigation of soil conditions, may indicate the causes of
this damage. This may be supplemented by information acquired by specific tests.
Field research and laboratory testing
The schedule of tests should be based on a clear preliminary view of which phenomena are the
most important to understand. Tests usually aim to identify the various mechanical, physical and
chemical characteristics of the materials, the stresses and deformations of the structure and the
presence of any discontinuities within it. The first of these will include the materials strength and
elastic properties the second such characteristics as their porosity.
As a rule, the schedule of tests should be divided into stages, starting with the acquisition of basic
data, followed by a more detailed examination with tests based upon an assessment of the

12/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

implications of the initial data. However, testing should not be undertaken until its need has been
established.
Non-destructive tests should be preferred to those that involve alterations to a structure. If these
are not sufficient, it is necessary to assess the benefit to be obtained by opening up the structure in
terms of reduced structural intervention against the loss of culturally significant material (a costbenefit analysis).
Tests should always be carried out by skilled persons able to gauge their reliability correctly and
the implications of test data should be very carefully assessed. If possible different methods should
be used and the results compared. It may also be necessary to carry out tests on selected samples
taken from the structure.
Monitoring
Structural observation over a period of time may be necessary, not only to acquire useful
information when progressive phenomena is suspected, but also during a step-by- step procedure
of structural renovation. During the latter, the behaviour is monitored at each stage (observational
approach) and the acquired data used to provide the basis for any further action. A monitoring
system usually aims to record changes in deformations, cracks, temperatures, etc. Dynamic
monitoring is used to record accelerations, such as those in seismic areas. Monitoring can also act
as an alarm bell.
As a general rule, the proposed adoption of a monitoring system should be subjected to a costbenefit analysis so that only data strictly necessary to reveal progressive phenomena are gathered.
The simplest and cheapest way to monitor cracks is to place a tell-tale across them. Some cases
require the use of computerised monitoring systems to record the data in real time.
2.1.2.3 Structural behaviour
The behaviour of any structure is influenced by three main factors:
a) the construction, i.e. the structural form, its quality and the connections between structural
elements;
b) the construction materials and
c) both the mechanical actions (forces, accelerations and deformations) and the chemical and
biological actions.
The structural scheme and damage
The real behaviour of a building is usually too complex to fully model so that it is necessary to
represent it with a simplified 'structural scheme', i.e. an idealisation of the building, which shows, to
the required degree of precision, how it resists the various actions.
The structural scheme shows how the building transforms actions into stresses and deformations
and ensures stability. A building may be represented under varying actions by different schemes
with different complexity and different degrees of approximation to reality. The scheme used in the
structural analysis is usually a compromise between one close to reality but too complex for
calculation and one easy to calculate but too far from the reality of the building. Judgement is
essential in choosing an appropriate scheme.

13/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

The original structural behaviour may have changed as a result of damage (cracks, etc.),
reinforcements, or other modifications of the building. The scheme used has to take into account
any alterations and weakening, such as cracks, disconnections, crushing, leaning, etc., which may
significantly influence the structural behaviour. These alterations may be produced either by
natural phenomena or by human interventions. The latter includes the making of openings, niches,
etc.; the elimination of arches or other structural elements, which create unbalanced forces;
increases in height of the structure, which increase weights; excavations, galleries, nearby
buildings, etc., which reduce the soil bearing capacity and induce movements.
The scheme should consider to an appropriate degree the interaction of the structure with the soil,
except on those cases where it is judged to be irrelevant. Structural damage occurs when the
stresses produced by one or more action exceed the strength of the materials, either because the
actions themselves have increased or because strength has been reduced. Substantial changes in
the structure, such as partial demolition, may also be a source of damage. Manifestation of
damage is related to the kinds of actions and construction materials. Brittel materials will fail with
low deformations while ductile materials will exhibit considerable deformation before failure.
The appearance of damage, and in particular cracks, is not necessarily an indication of risk of
failure in a structure because cracks may relieve stresses that are not essential for stability and
may, through changes in the structural system, allow a beneficial redistribution of stresses.
Damage may also occur in non-structural elements, such as cladding or internal partitions, as a
result of stresses developed within those elements due to deformations or dimensional changes
within the structure.
Material characteristics and decay processes
Material characteristics (particularly strength and stiffness), which are the basic parameters for any
calculation, may be reduced by decay caused by chemical, physical or biological action. The rate
of decay depends upon the properties of the materials (such as porosity) and the protection
provided (roof overhangs, etc.) as well as maintenance. Although decay may manifest itself on the
surface, and so be immediately apparent from superficial inspection (efflorescence, increased
porosity, etc.), there are also decay processes that can only be detected by more sophisticated
tests (termite attack in timber, etc.).
Material decay is brought about by chemical, physical and biological actions and may be
accelerated when these actions are modified in an unfavourable way (e.g. by pollution). The main
consequences are the deterioration of surfaces, the loss of material and a reduction of strength.
Stabilisation of material characteristics is therefore an important task for the conservation of
historic buildings. A programme of maintenance is an essential activity because, while preventing
or reducing the rate of change may be possible, it is often difficult or even impossible to recover
lost material properties.
Actions on the structure and the materials
'Actions' are defined as any agent (forces, deformations, etc.) which produce stresses and strains
in the structure and any phenomenon (chemical, biological, etc.) which affects the materials,
usually reducing their strength. The original actions, which act from the beginning of construction
and the completion of the building (dead loads, for example), may be modified during its life, and it
is often these changes that produce damage and decay.

14/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Actions have very different natures with very different effects on both the structure and the
materials.
Often more than one action (or, change to the original actions), will have affected the structure and
these must clearly be identified before selecting the repair measures.
Actions may be divided into mechanical actions that affect the structure and chemical and
biological actions that affect the materials. Mechanical actions are either static or dynamic the
former being either direct or indirect.
Mechanical actions acting on the structure produce stresses and strains in the material possibly
resulting in visible cracking, crushing and movement. This can be static or dynamic.
i) Static actions can be of two kinds:
a) Direct actions i.e. applied loads such as dead loads (weight of the building, etc.) and live loads
(furniture, people, etc.). Changes in loads - mainly increases - are sources of increased
stresses and thus of damage to the structure. However reductions in load can also be a
source of damage to the structure.
b) Indirect actions are either deformations imposed on the boundaries of the structure, such as soil
settlements, or produced within the body of the materials, such as thermal movements,
creep in timber, shrinkage in mortar, etc. These actions, which may vary continuously or
cyclically, only produce forces if deformations are not free to develop. The most important
and often most dangerous of all indirect actions are soil settlements (produced by change
in the water table, excavations, etc.) which may create large cracks, leaning, etc.
A number of indirect actions are cyclic in nature. These include temperature changes and some
ground movements due to seasonal variation in ground water levels. The effects are usually cyclic
too, but it is possible for there to be progressive deformation or decay if each cycle produces some
small but permanent change within the structure.
The temperature gradient between external surfaces and the internal body may cause differential
strains in the material and therefore stresses and micro-cracks, which further accelerate decay.
Indirect actions can also be produced by the progressive reduction of the stiffness of elements of
an indeterminate (hyperstatic) structure resulting in a redistribution of stresses.
ii) Dynamic actions are produced when accelerations are transmitted to a structure, due to
earthquakes, wind, hurricanes, vibrating machinery, etc.
The most significant dynamic action is usually caused by earthquakes. The intensity of the forces
produced is related to both the magnitude of the acceleration and to the natural frequencies of the
structure and its capacity to dissipate energy. The effect of an earthquake is also related to the
history of previous earthquakes that may have progressively weakened the structure.
Physical, chemical, and biological actions are of a completely different nature from those
described above and act on the materials changing their nature, often resulting in decay and in
particular affecting their strength. These actions may be influenced and accelerated by the
presence of water (whether in the form of rain, humidity, ground water), by wetting and drying
cycles, organic growth, variations in temperature (causing expansion and contraction) frost action,

15/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

etc.). They may also be affected by microclimatic conditions (pollution, surface deposition, changes
in wind speeds due to adjacent structures, etc.).
Fire can be considered as an extreme change of temperature producing both rapid and permanent
changes in the materials. While this might not result in immediate structural distress it may leave
latent weaknesses.
Material properties may also change over time due to natural processes characteristic of the
material, such as slow hardening of lime mortar or slow internal decay. While chemical changes
may occur spontaneously because of the inherent characteristics of the material they may also be
produced as a result of external agents, such as the deposition of pollutants, or the migration of
water or other agents through the material.
A very common action is the oxidation of metals. This may be visible on the surface or may be
occurring to metal reinforcing placed inside another material (such as concrete) and therefore only
apparent through secondary effects, such as splitting and spalling of the other material. Biological
agents in timber, i.e. rot and insect attack, are often active in areas not easily inspected.
2.1.2.4 Diagnosis and safety evaluation
General principles
Diagnosis and safety evaluation of the structure are two consecutive and related stages
undertaken to determine the need for and extent of treatment measures. If these stages are
performed incorrectly, the resulting decisions will be arbitrary; poor judgement may result in either
conservative, and therefore heavy-handed conservation measures, or conversely, inadequate
safety levels.
Evaluation of the safety of the building should be based on both qualitative methods, based on
documentation and observation of the structure, and quantitative methods based on experimental
and mathematical techniques that take into account the effect of the various phenomena on
structural behaviour.
Any assessment of safety is influenced by two types of problem:

the uncertainty attached to data describing actions, resistance and deformations, and the
laws, models and assumptions used in the research;

the difficulty of representing real phenomena in a precise way with an adequate


mathematical model.

It therefore seems reasonable to try different approaches, each providing its own contribution, but
which when combined produce the best possible verdict based on the data at our disposal.
When assessing safety, it is necessary to include some indication, even if only qualitative, of the
reliability of the assumptions made, and hence of the results, and of the degree of caution implicit
in the proposed measures.
Modern legal codes and professional codes of practice adopt a conservative approach involving
the application of safety factors to take into account the various uncertainties. This is appropriate
for new structures where safety can be increased with modest increases in member size and cost.
However, such an approach is not appropriate in historic structures where requirements to improve

16/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

the strength may lead to the loss of historic fabric or to changes in the original conception of the
structure. A more flexible and broader approach, where calculations are not the only means of
evaluation, needs to be adopted for historic structures to relate the remedial measures more
clearly to the actual structural behaviour and to retain the principle of minimum intervention while
avoiding risk to human life.
The verdict on a structure's safety is based on an evaluation of the results obtained from the three
diagnostic procedures that will be discussed below. This acknowledges that the qualitative
approach plays a role, which is as important as the quantitative approach.
It also has to be noted that the safety factors established for new buildings take into account the
uncertainties of construction. In existing buildings these uncertainties are often reduced because
the real behaviour of the structure can be observed and monitored. If more reliable data can be
obtained, theoretically reduced factors of safety do not necessarily correspond to a real reduced
safety. However there are cases where the contrary is true and data are more difficult to obtain for
historic structure.
Identification of the causes (diagnosis)
Diagnosis identifies the causes of damage and decay, on the basis of the acquired data. This
comes under three headings:
Historical analysis
Qualitative analysis
Quantitative analysis, which includes both mathematical modelling and testing.
Diagnosis is often a difficult phase, since the data available usually refer to the effects, while it is
the cause or, as it is more often the case, the several contributary causes that have to be
determined. This is why intuition and experience are essential components in the diagnostic
process. A correct diagnosis is indispensable for a proper evaluation of safety and a rational
decision on the treatment measures to be adopted.
Safety evaluation
The problem of safety evaluation
Safety evaluation is the next step towards completion of the diagnostic phase. Whilst the object of
diagnosis is to identify the causes of damage and decay, safety evaluation must determine
whether or not the safety levels are acceptable, by analysing the present condition of both
structure and materials. The safety evaluation is therefore an essential step in the project of
restoration because this is where decisions are taken on the need for and the extent of any
remedial measures.
However, safety evaluation is also a difficult task because methods of structural analysis used for
new construction may be neither accurate nor reliable for historic structures and may result in
inappropriate decisions. This is due to such factors as the difficulty in fully understanding the
complexity of an ancient building or monument, uncertainties regarding material characteristics, the
unknown influence of previous phenomena (for example soil settlements), and imperfect
knowledge of alterations and repairs carried out in the past. Therefore, a quantitative approach

17/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

based on mathematical models cannot be the only procedure to be followed. As with the diagnosis,
qualitative approaches based on historical research and on observation of the structure should
also be used. An approach based on specific tests may also be useful in some situations.
Each of these approaches, which are discussed below, can inform the safety evaluation, but it is
the combined analysis of the information obtained from each of them, which may lead to the 'best
judgement'. In forming this judgement both quantitative and qualitative aspects should be taken
into account having been weighed on the basis of the reliability of the data and the assumptions
made. All this needs to be set out in the EXPLANATORY REPORT already referred to.
It must be clear, therefore, that the architect or engineer charged with the safety evaluation of an
historic building should not be legally obliged to base his decisions solely on the results of
calculations because, as already noted, they can be unreliable and inappropriate. This is a matter
for building regulations and control and again highlights the need for experience and judgement.
Similar procedures have to be followed to evaluate the safety levels after the design of any
proposed interventions in order to assess their benefits and to ensure that their adoption is
appropriate, neither insufficient nor excessive.
Historical analysis
Knowledge of what has occurred in the past can help to forecast future behaviour and can be a
useful indication of the level of safety provided by the present state of the structure. History is the
most complete, life-size, experimental laboratory. It shows how the type of structure, building
materials, connections, joints, additions and human alterations have interacted with different
actions, such as overloads, earthquakes, landslides, temperature variations, atmospheric pollution,
etc., perhaps altering the structure's original behaviour by causing cracks, fissures, crushing,
movement out-of-plumb, decay, collapse, etc. The structural task is to discard superfluous
information and correctly interpret the data relevant to describing the static and dynamic behaviour
of the structure.
Although satisfactory behaviour shown in the past is an important factor for predicting the survival
of the building in the future, it is not always a reliable guide. This is particularly true where the
structure is working at the limit of its bearing capacity and brittle behaviour is involved (such as
high compression in columns), when there are significant changes in the structure or when
repeated actions are possible (such as earthquakes) that progressively weaken the structure.
Qualitative analysis
This approach is based on the comparison between the present condition of the structure and that
of other similar structures whose behaviour is already understood. Experience gained from
analysing and comparing the behaviour of different structures can enhance the possibility of
extrapolations and provide a basis for assessing safety.
This approach (known in philosophical terms as inductive procedure) is not entirely reliable
because it depends more upon personal judgement than on strictly scientific procedures.
Nonetheless, it can be the most rational approach where there are such uncertainties inherent in
the structure that other approaches only give the appearance of being more rigorous and reliable
but are not so in fact.

18/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Having observed the behaviour of different structural types in varying stages of damage and decay
caused by different actions (earthquakes, soil settlement, etc.), and having acquired experience of
their soundness and durability, it is possible to extrapolate this knowledge to predict the behaviour
of the structure under examination. The reliability of the evaluation will depend on the number of
structures observed and, therefore, on the experience and skills of the individuals concerned.
Reliability can be increased by an appropriate programme of investigation and monitoring of
progressive phenomena.
The quantitative analytical approach
This approach uses the methods of modern structural analysis which, on the basis of certain
hypotheses (theory of elasticity, theory of plasticity, frame models, etc.), draws conclusions based
on mathematical calculations. In philosophical terms it is a deductive procedure. However, the
uncertainties that can affect the representation of the material characteristics, and the imperfect
representation of the structural behaviour, together with the simplifications adopted may lead to
results that are not always reliable and may even be very different from the real situation. The
essence of the problem is the identification of meaningful models that adequately depict both the
structure and the associated phenomena with all their complexity, making it possible to apply the
theories at our disposal. Naturally the complexity of the model used is likely to depend upon the
scale and importance of the monument.
Structural analysis is an indispensable tool commonly using mathematical models. Models
describing the original structure, if appropriately calibrated, allow comparison of the theoretical
damage produced by different kinds of action with the damage actually surveyed, providing a
useful tool for identifying their causes. Mathematical models of the damaged, and the subsequently
reinforced structure, will help to evaluate present safety levels and to assess the benefits of
proposed interventions.
Even when the results of calculations and analysis cannot be precise, they can indicate the flow of
the stresses and possible critical areas. But mathematical models alone are usually not able to
provide a reliable safety evaluation. Grasping the key issues, and correctly setting the limits for the
use of mathematical techniques, depends upon the expert's use of his scientific knowledge. Any
mathematical model must take into account the three aspects described in section 3: the structural
scheme, the material characteristics and the actions to which the structure is subjected.
The experimental approach
Specific tests (such as test loading a floor, a beam, etc.) will provide a direct measure of safety
margins, even if they are applicable only to single elements rather than to the building as a whole.
However one, or even a few test may not necessarily be representative of the behaviour and
hence the adequacy of the overall building.
Judgement on safety
Judgements about a structure's safety are based on the results of the three (or four) main
approaches described above (the fourth having a limited application). If analysis shows inadequate
safety levels, it should be checked to see if it is based on either insufficiently accurate data or
excessively conservative assumptions. This might lead to the conclusion that more investigation is
necessary before an assessment can be made.

19/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

As safety is of a probabilistic nature, the greater the uncertainties the more severe will be the level
of intervention. As methods of investigation and structural analysis improve one would expect the
analytical approach to become more reliable and so play a more prominent part in safety
evaluation. Nevertheless, other methods will remain indispensable for a full understanding of the
structural behaviour of the monument.
Note that time factors may be an important aspect of safety and deadlines may have to be set for
decisions on interventions. The factors affecting any deadline will depend on three types of
phenomena:

2.2

continuous processes (for example decay, slow soil settlements, etc.) which will eventually
reduce safety levels to below acceptable limits. Measures must be taken before that
occurs;

phenomena of cyclical nature (variation in temperature, moisture content, etc.) that produce
increasing deterioration;

unpredictable events (such as earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.). The probability of these


occurring at any defined level increases with the passage of time, so that the required
degree of safety can theoretically be linked to the life expectancy of the structure. (That the
one hundred year storm is more severe than the fifty-year storm is true for other
phenomenon such as earthquakes and floods.)
Core data index to historic buildings and monuments of the architectural heritage [12]

In the document prepared by the ad hoc group for inventory and documentation within the
Technical Co-operation and consultancy Program published by Council of Europe Publishing,
Strasbourg [12] for the purpose of collecting data of cultural heritage asset at Republic of Kosovo,
a complete overview on principles and the state of the art in the field of inventory of built heritage is
presented. The volume is a compilation and an update of work carried under programs of the
Council of Europe since the 1990s. It is based on the Core Data Index adopted by the Committee
of Ministers of the Council of Europe in 1995. Herein, an extract regarding the data for the purpose
of PERPETUATE project are presented.
2.2.1 Names and references
a) Name of the building (a free-text field which record the name by which a building is
known)
b) Unique reference number (the number of charters, which uniquely identifies each
building by responsible organisation)
c) Cross-reference to related building records (this enables cross-referencing to related
record, enabling, for example, the relating of a building record to its wider complex
record)
d) Cross-reference to records of fixtures and fitting (the same related to stained glass,
wall paintings, sculptural decoration etc., which relate to the building)
e) Cross-reference to documentation (photographic, graphic, textual, bibliographic)
f)

Cross-reference to archaeological records

g) Cross-reference to environmental records

20/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

2.2.2 Location
a) Administrative location (State, Geo-political unit, State administrative division,
administrative sub-division etc.)
b) Address (postal name, number of the street/road, locality, town/city, postal code)
c) Cartographic reference
d) Cadastral reference/land unit (enables cross-reference to the land unit/parcel)
2.2.3 Protection/legal status
a) Type of protection
b) Grade of protection
c) Date at which protection was granted
2.2.4 Persons and organisations associated with the history of the building
a)

Person or organisation

b)

Role in the history of the building

2.2.5 Dating (allows for precise dating when it is known, or date ranges or periods when it is
imprecise)
a) Period
b) Century
c) Date range
d) Absolute date
1. History of building
a. Historical summary
b. Descriptive summary
2. Functional type
3. Illustrations
a. Extract from map
b. Ground plan
c. Photograph(s)
4. Building materials and techniques
a) Main materials and structural techniques (main walling materials, morphology etc.) A
controlled vocabulary is desirable.
b) Covering materials
5. Physical condition
a. Condition priority (related to the integrity of the building - demolished, ruined,
remodelled, restored)
b. Condition quality (related to its state good, fair, poor, or bad)

21/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

2.3

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Recording for conservation purposes [18]

In the document for Recording, Documentation, and Information Management for the Conservation
of Heritage Places produce under umbrella of the Getty Conservation Institute, is stated that the
conservation process of cultural heritage places cannot be expressed as yet in terms of an
international standard of practice. International heritage conservation organizations and institutions
have not come to an agreement on such a standard. A consensus has been reached among them,
however, concerning important steps, activities, and products or outputs of the conservation
process (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Diagram showing the phases and required outputs of the conservation process [18].
In the contemporary world of new-building construction, the project management process is well
understood. In the cultural heritage field, things are different. Conservation professionals have to
do all of the above, but because they deal with cultural heritage placesarchaeological sites,
buildings, and city neighbourhoods they need to spend more time and resources to understand
the site and to assess its physical condition.
Figure 2 illustrates the central role of heritage information and summarizes the types of records
and documents that are acquired or generated during each phase of the conservation process.

22/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Figure 2: Diagram showing the conservation process and related project information activities [18].

Following the process for the conservation purposes, for the purpose of seismic assessment of AA
and following the proposed methodology of PERPETUATE project, this approach may be extended
as presented in Figure 3:

23/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Architecture ,
geometric
surveying

Engineering
(materials,
structural el.,
damage)

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Management
&
Mainentance
planning/
Monitoring

Geotechnical/
Geological/
Landscape

Identifying
structure

Seismic
assessment of
architectonic
assets

Archeological
Research

Scientific
research

Historical
Research

Seismic
hazard
Artistic Research

Figure 3: Chart showing different aspects regarding the evaluation of seismic assessment of
architectonic assets.
2.4

Recording according to Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural
heritage [13]

According to the proposed methodology formulated in document Guidelines for evaluation and
mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage [13], in the section Knowledge of the Building, the path
to knowledge is broken into following activities:

The identification of the building, its location in relation to particular risk areas, and the
rapport of the same within its surrounding urban context; the analysis consists in an initial
schematic survey of the building and in the identification of eventual noteworthy elements
(decorated fixed to the walls, antique furniture) that may condition the level of risk;

The geometric relief of the building in its actual state, intended as the complete stereo
metric description of the structure including eventual cracking and deforming phenomena;

The identification of the evolution of the building, intended as the sequence of the phases of
constructive transformation, from the hypothetical original configuration to the present state;

The identification of the elements which make up the resistance organisms, in the material
and constructive acceptance with particular attention turned to construction techniques to
construction details and their connections to the other elements;

24/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

The identification of material, their state of decay and their mechanical properties;

The knowledge of the foundation and its structures with reference to variations which
occurred over time and relative instability as well.

In order to acquire this knowledge integral approach is suggested through:


Identifying structures correct and complete identification of the structure, its localisation in
territorial scale and identification of the sensibility of the structure with respect to different risks.
Functional characteristics of the building information for understanding structural and geometric
modifications of the structure during its life time.
Geometric survey principles of geometric and crack pattern survey, identification of the source of
damage, identifying boundary conditions for numerical models, territorial and urban context of the
structure etc.
Historical analysis of earthquakes and of subsequent interventions on the building identification
of the entire history of construction and later modifications over its life time
Survey of construction materials and conservation states complete identification of resistance
mechanisms of the structure considering the quality and the state of preservation of the materials
and construction elements. The focus is on the evaluation of the quality of the masonry including
the geometric and material characteristics of each component, as well as masonry as assemblage
with accent on:
 The presence of transverse elements (stones or bricks) which connect the wall leaves; the
shape, type and size of the elements;
 The acknowledgement of the regular placement and practically horizontal courses (or,
alternatively, the presence of regularly stepped bordering);
 The good composition, obtained by way of the mesh of the elements (number and range of
contacts, presence of scales) and the regular staggering of the joints;
 The nature of the lime mortar and its state of preservation.
Considering the notable variety of materials and techniques, both on a geographic and historic
level, it is useful to define local rules of thumb for the quality judgement reference of a wall. The
recording of a scheme of structural functionality of the building necessitates knowledge of
constructive details and the characteristic of unions between the various elements:
 Typology of walls (in brick, squared-off stone, rough-hewn stone, split, pebbly or mixed,
unique parameter, or with two or more parameters) and constructive characteristics (regular
or irregular texture; with or without transverse joints, etc..);
 The quality of the unions between vertical walls (clamping in the corners and in the
hammers, tie rods, etc.);
 The quality of the lateral joints (ceilings, arches and roof coverings) and walls, with surveys
of the eventual presence of in-plane stringcourses or other connecting systems (tie rods,
etc.);

25/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

 Elements of discontinuity determined by cables, chimneys, etc.


 Typology of horizontal structures (ceilings, arches, roof coverings) with particular reference
to their in-plane stiffness;
 Typology and effectiveness of the architraves above openings;
 The presence of structurally efficient elements chosen to balance any eventual thrusts
present;
 The presence of highly vulnerable but not necessarily structural elements.
Mechanical properties of materials knowledge regarding resistance and deformation
characteristics of masonry gained through in-situ or laboratory testing of masonry assemblage and
its constituents as well as considering already available test results from different databanks.
Terrain and foundations apart from general knowledge of the type and dimensions of foundation
system including also the knowledge related to geotechnical characterisation of the foundations
and methods for their evaluation.
Monitoring related to state of preservation and planning of maintenance operations, including
monitoring program, visual and instrumental monitoring as well as dynamic characterisation of the
structure.
3

Set of information necessary for the application of the PERPETUATE methodology for
the seismic assessment

The PERPETUATE methodology is aimed to the preservation of cultural heritage assets, both
architectonic and artistic, in seismic areas. To this end different phase of investigation can be
considered: a) a first census of the cultural heritage assets in the Region (in order to know the
conscious of the consistency of the heritage); b) the evaluation of the vulnerability and risk at
territorial scale - WP6 (in order to single out the assets which are in worst safety conditions); c) the
detailed seismic assessment on each single building - WP5; d) the design of strengthening
interventions, in order to plan mitigation actions for the protection of the cultural heritage.
The aim of this chapter is to list the set of information required to the survey and investigation
techniques for the application of the methodology.
Following the synthesis of different methodologies for collecting data and building knowledge of
particular architectonic asset, set of information related to general knowledge and data regarding
seismic analysis is prepared according to methodology from Deliverable D4 [1]. The table is
organized into four main categories:

Category of data (including sub-categories).

What scope of collected data they are referring to.

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used.

Phase of assessment (set of data depending from the required knowledge)


o Identification of asset basic information regarding the asset and identification of
the type of the asset according to PERPETUATE methodology as proposed in D4

26/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

o Data for vulnerability evaluation collection of data aimed for simplified vulnerability
evaluation as proposed in D5 and D8.
o Data for safety verification collection of data for performance based assessment of
the asset according to the requirements from D7.
o Data for interventions (or mitigation interventions)
Depending from the phase of the assessment collection data are identified as:
Essential

Parameters are basic or indispensable for particular phase

Qualifying

Data are not indispensable for the phase of assessment, though improve final output
or are necessary but with a limited degree of accuracy

In the tables for the collection of data regarding general sets of information and information for the
assessment of seismic resistance according to PERPETUATE methodology, following
abbreviations were used:
AA Architectonic Asset;
CH Cultural Heritage;
D4 Delivery D4 of PERPETUATE project;
D5 Delivery D5 of PERPETUATE project.
DT Destructive Technique;
GIS - Geographic Information System;
HoME Horizontal Macroelements;
MDT Minor Destructive Technique;
NDT Non Destructive Technique;
SE Structural Element;
StME Staircases Macroelement;
VaME - Vaulted Macroelement;
VeME Vertical Macroelements;

27/114

Architectonic
asset

G
Artistic asset

Presence of valuable elements

Geographic
situation

Type of artistic asset according to PERPETUATE methodology

Presence of relevant valuable elements among those listed

Address location

Street, No., Town, Country

Land register identification

Plot No., Cadastral territory

Unique reference number

Reference number according to classification of national body responsible for the protection of
CH.

Planimetric extract

Extract of the cadastral map in 1:1000 or 1:2000 scale.

Adjacent properties

Indicate all elements adjacent to the landmark.

Georeferencing of situation plans

To define relation between raster or vector images and geographical coordinates using

Preventive intervention

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used

Safety verification

What

Vulnerability evaluation

Category of data

Identification of asset

Phase of assessment

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

3
reference points

GIS
Historical
research

Set of tools for the capturing, storing, analyzing, managing, and presenting data that are linked
to certain location

Archive searches

Searching on written and pictorial sources

Thematic researches

Important persons (architects), historic occasions and events

Historic Structure Reports

Reports following guidelines (mostly published by national heritage authorities)

Historical analysis of earthquakes and of


subsequent interventions on the building

Archaeological
research

Seismic action

Conservation activities - Archive search of


designs and projects

Standardized documentation

Aerial prospection

Photographs

Excavating

Reports in a standard format

Building archaeology

Recording and operative documentation guidelines

Geophysical methods

NDT methods like Georadar, Radio emission, Geoelectrical survey etc.

Dating methods - Dendrochronology

Reports in a standard format

Identification of ground types


Peak ground acceleration
Importance category

Depending from the level of exposure: Unused or rarely used, frequent, very frequent.

Earthquake hazard level

Occurrence probability of return period, to be used for the verification of target performance
level

Response spectrums
Site amplification effects soil amplification
Site amplification effects morphological
amplification

29/114

Preventive intervention

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used

Safety verification

What

Vulnerability evaluation

Category of data

Identification of asset

Phase of assessment

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Micro-zoning
Geotechnical
research

Orographic characteristics

If the building is located in-plane or near crests, precipices,. Indicate the slope of the terrain.

Geo-morphologic characteristics

If any other risk is also presented (mudslide).

Ground modifications

Changes to water tables, flooding, breaking of aqueducts, droughts, excavations, surveys etc.

Definition of the underground waterways

Positioning piezometers. Support by hydro geological studies.

Mechanical characteristics of the various


deposits

Dynamic interaction of terrain, foundation and structure (shear resistance in draining and nondraining conditions, shear deformity modules and damping coefficient etc.)
Susceptibility to liquefaction and the cyclic mobility
Verification of the stability of natural slopes.

Underground structures
Vulnerability
general

Configuration

Including data if the AA stands alone (urban context)

Geometric survey
Building height and number of stories

Included regularity in elevation.

Distribution of structural elements


Non-structural elements

Partition walls, balconies, overhangs

Codification of Macroelements
Vulnerability
construction
details

Connection between walls vertically


Connection between floors/ceilings and
supporting elements
Spandrel walls connection
Lintels above openings
Presence of thrust elements within masonry
elements

Usually wooden ties and pillars

30/114

Preventive intervention

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used

Safety verification

What

Vulnerability evaluation

Category of data

Identification of asset

Phase of assessment

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

VulnerabilityMain structural
elements

Vertical Macroelements (VeME) Piers,


Columns and Pilars

Codification,
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (inside and outside).

Vertical Macroelements (VeME) Spandrels,


Lintels, and Beams

Codification
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (inside and outside).

Vertical Macroelements (VeME) Arches

Codification
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (inside and outside).

Horizontal Macroelement - HoME (Roofs,


Floors) Rafters, Purlins, Struts, Wall Plates,
Tie-beams

Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,

Codification,

Horizontal Macroelement - HoME (Roofs,


Floors) Joists, Beams

Codification, morphology, typology, constructive techniques, typology of finishing elements (top


and bottom).

Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).

Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,


Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).
Horizontal Macroelement- HoME (Roofs, Floors)
Boarding, Slabs

Codification,
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).

Vaulted Macroelement- VaME (all types of


vaults and domes) Abutments, Buttresses,
Springing, Fill

Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,

Codification,

Vaulted Macroelement- VaME (all types of

Codification,

Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).

31/114

Preventive intervention

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used

Safety verification

What

Vulnerability evaluation

Category of data

Identification of asset

Phase of assessment

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Vaulted Macroelement- VaME (all types of


vaults and domes) Groins, Webs, Shells

3
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).
Codification,
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).

Vaulted Macroelement- VaME (all types of


vaults and domes) Tie Rods

Codification,
Typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (ends).

Vaulted Macroelement- VaME (all types of


vaults and domes) Boss

Morphology, typology, constructive techniques

Codification,.

Staircases Macroelement StME - Columns

Codification
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).

Staircases Macroelement StME - Beams

Codification,
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).

Staircases Macroelement StME Cantilever,


Steps

Codification,
Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,
Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).

Vulnerabilitymaterial
properties

Identification of masonry typology


Quality of unit and mortar

Type of stone, regularity, cut or not, dressed, solid), thickness of the joints, length of
overlapping of the units

Single or double leaf walls, with or without

32/114

Preventive intervention

2
vaults and domes) Arches, Transversal
Arches, Ribs

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used

Safety verification

What

Vulnerability evaluation

Category of data

Identification of asset

Phase of assessment

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

2
connections, the presence of transversal
connection elements, % of voids

Joints horizontality, regularity, staggering,


masonry bond
Joints filled or not, consistency of the mortar
Characterisation of the mortar (type of binder,
aggregate, level of carbonation) and unit
(physical and mechanical characteristics,
deterioration)
Quality of bonding

Presence of course or borders, transverse connections connecting elements between facing


walls

Vulnerabilitymechanical
parameters

fm compressive strength of masonry


0 average shear strength of masonry (or ft)

Vulnerabilityfoundations

Definition of a geotechnical model of the


foundation

In correspondence to a sufficient number of boreholes to elaborate profiles and stratigraphical


reference sections for the analysis.

Geometry, typology, modifications, pre-existing


and characteristics of foundations

Wells or ditches excavations along the perimeter of the building. NDT methods (georadar and
sonar, thermal and electric tomography).

Crack pattern survey of whole structure

Evaluation of possible macro elements. Necessary to distinguish structural from material


cracks.

Structural damage

Causes of damage according to the typology (detachment, rotation, creep, out-of-plane displ.)
and deformation (apparent out-of-plumb, bulging, sagging in vaults, etc.)

Material damage

Causes of damage

- friction
E modulus of elasticity
G- shear modulus
w specific weight of the masonry

Vulnerabilitystate of
preservation

33/114

Preventive intervention

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used

Safety verification

What

Vulnerability evaluation

Category of data

Identification of asset

Phase of assessment

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Analysis of structural details


Interactions between structural units
Macroelements

VeME identification of damage on SE of VeME (Arch, Pillars, Pier, Spandrel, Lintel or


Beams) types of local damage according D5 methodology (V, H, D, X, Sp and Cr)
VeME identification of out-of-plane mechanisms according to D5 methodology (A, B, C, D ,E,
F, G)
VeME identification of in-plane mechanisms acc. to D5 methodology (H, M)

Damage level

ME - Grade 1-4, according to methodology adopted from D5.


SE DL, SD, NC and C related displacements or rotations
CA little, evident, total movements and collapse or D-L, Sp, Cr, I-d, Ds, Dc and Ot according
to D5 classification

Structural Assessment Reports

In-situ tests

Survey of construction materials and


conservation states

Non-destructive testing, Sample testing

Vulnerabilitylevels of
knowledge

Confidence factors

Based on limited, extensive or exhaustive in-situ investigation.

State of
preservation of
Artistic assets

Artistic value that correspond to structural


element classification

For each structural element that correspond to artistic or historic value (decorated wall panels,
ancient construction techniques, built-in furnishings).

Cultural asset

Local damage types for cultural assets according to D5 methodology (Q, R)

Preservation plans- Analyses/maps of specific


values

Tools of urban planning/heritage preservation

Management &
Maintenance

34/114

Preventive intervention

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used

Safety verification

What

Vulnerability evaluation

Category of data

Identification of asset

Phase of assessment

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

planning

Safeguarding plans

Regulations/recommendations

Maintenance inspections - Regular inspections


Maintenance inspections - Condition
Assessment Reports
Surveying and
documentation

Sketches/Hand drawing

Simple, operative and cheap recording method

CAD drawing, incl. 3D modelling

Measured drawings in CAD format

Photography

Realistic two-dimensional images

Photogrammetry (also aerial)

Getting geometrical parameters of structures from photographic images

3D scanning

Collecting data about the shape and the appearance of a real-world object. The collected data
are used to construct digital 3D models.

Inspection reports

Reports following guidelines

Scientific reports

Scientific analyses and projects

35/114

Preventive intervention

Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is


used

Safety verification

What

Vulnerability evaluation

Category of data

Identification of asset

Phase of assessment

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

State-of-the-art of techniques for survey and investigation of architectonic and artistic


assets

In order to perform reliable seismic assessment of architectonic and artistic assets, it is necessary
to define the state of the asset and its load bearing capacity. In reference to architectonic asset is
needed to determine the parameters for the characterisation of the structural typology, the
geometry (external and internal) and the mechanical properties of their materials and further, if the
structure is damaged, the type, level and extension of the damages and its influence on the
mechanical behaviour of the structure. Regarding the artistic asset, set of needed parameters are
slightly different, however most of the techniques (NDT techniques) are similar as for the
architectonic assets. In conservation, there are two distinct areas of survey and recording, with a
degree of overlap between them:
Metric surveying and recording.
This area is used to establish the quantifiable physical disposition of form and space. Base
documentation can be employed in subsequent complementary phases of a conservation project
to map historical, technical, and other data for assessment, analysis, and synthesis of information
to create a plan, then inform, guide, and instruct others in taking conservation action.
This also so-called Base recording is a term often used for the gathering of measurements and
data to create a document, drawing, or photograph that will be used to make future conservation
decisions. This base record will be added to as conservators, engineers, or architects work with the
monument or site.
Diagnostic surveying and recording.
This area is used to locate, isolate, assess, or monitor physical phenomena affecting the heritage
asset. Additional documentation can overlay base documentation and further inform the
conservation projects development in relation to buried or concealed features, deforming or
moving components and providing indications about their condition and performance in time.
Many techniques are available and can be classified into: Non-Destructive (NDT), MinorDestructive testing methods (MDT) and Destructive testing (DT).
In particular diagnostic surveying is aimed to different aims:
-

survey of the constructive details of the building (thickness of structural elements,


connections, etc.)

measurement of mechanical properties of materials (deformability, strength, etc.).

presence of structural damage to masonry

Moreover, investigations can be addressed to:

control of effectiveness of intervention

structural health monitoring

36/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

4.1

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Metric surveying and recording.

4.1.1 Manual Survey Techniques


4.1.1.1 Hand Survey
Hand survey is defined as the process of measurement of architectural detail where physical
contact is made with the feature being measured. For example, to measure a window, a surveyor
most likely will use a tape measure or measuring rod, holding it against each feature and writing
down the measurement on a sketch. Right-angle square or diagonal measurements are introduced
to ensure accuracy at right angles, and a plumb bob or level is used to check verticality. There are
projects where hand survey is the most appropriate technique and projects where it is a necessary
adjunct to other methods of survey. Hand survey remains vital because it is usually a very rapid
method requiring few tools and minimal training, and often provides sufficient information with
which to carry out conservation. Hand survey also helps architects or conservators become
intimately familiar with an object by allowing the discovery of subtle aspects. In discussing hand
survey, it should be made clear that high-quality workmanship is necessary to produce accurate
drawings. The tools required may seem simple, but a well-done hand survey, efficient and
accurate, is highly skilled work.
Generally speaking, hand survey is best suited to small areas. In large areas it becomes very
difficult to maintain accuracies and can become too labour intensive. For example, a single bay of
a typical church can be measured with good accuracy. If that accuracy is extended across the
whole church, using the same methods of diagonal checks and triangulation, the survey most likely
will drift out of accuracy. It is also difficult to maintain accuracy when measuring high or vertical
elements from ladders or scaffolding. Today, the data collected from hand survey most likely will
be transcribed directly to computer as a Computer-Aided Design and Drafting (CAD) file.
4.1.1.2 Sketch Diagram
This is defined as a drawing, often assuming squareness of horizontals and verticals, of a historic
structure or site. Only a few measurements are taken, possibly just two or three of the width or
length, with a few diagonal checks. Details such as windows are sketched in without measurement,
and wall thickness would be assessed by the most rudimentary measurement through door
openings. This method is usually assisted by photography. Sometimes sketch diagrams may be
the only realistic way of obtaining any form of measured drawing, but users need to be aware of
the limitations and advantages of such surveys. Sketch diagrams, especially in the computer era,
have a habit of being drawn or transcribed until they become accepted as accurate. Such drawings
will always be needed in times of rapid assessment, but they should be clearly labelled, and the
temptation to refer to them as accurate must be firmly resisted.
4.1.2 Instrument Survey Tools
Years ago, instruments were introduced to improve the accuracy of drawings, primarily for
mapping or topographic surveys. Instrument survey is a technique whereby the results and
accuracy rely on measurement with a mechanical device and without direct contact with the object
being surveyed. The principal survey instrument is the theodolite. While modern theodolites look
quite similar to the older models, their operation and development have been transformed by
electronics.

37/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.1.2.1 Total Station Theodolite


A theodolite measures vertical and horizontal angles. Using basic trigonometry, when angles and
distances are known, positions or coordinates are calculated. This method was used for
generations, but not without some faults. Essentially, the techniques were slow and highly error
prone. Every reading had to be written down manually, then calculated in longhand and laboriously
hand drafted. The first great improvement came with the electronic theodolite. Manual recording of
horizontal and vertical angles was replaced with electronic reading and recording devices. The
theodolite was used just as before, but at the touch of a button the readings and measurements
were automatically recorded and stored in digital form. Concurrent with the invention of the
electronic theodolite, methods of electronic distance measurement (EDM) were also developed. In
simple terms, an infrared wavelength is transmitted to a prism or target or to the object (prismless),
and the time it takes for the light to bounce back is measured (because the speed of light is known)
and hence distance is calculated. The benefits are speed and reliability, and measurements can be
made over longer distances. By combining the electronic theodolite with EDM, the total station
theodolite was developed. This instrument has become the workhorse of modern surveying. It is
valuable in creating building floor plans and site surveys, though it still requires the use of a prism
reflector or target and usually two operators. The next development was the reflectorless EDM
(REDM) total station theodolite. This improvement has hugely enhanced the usefulness of the
theodolite for elevation surveys, as it can take distance measurements straight from a surface
without a reflector and requires only one setup, or operator. For surveying a fairly simple facade it
is an ideal tool, offering accuracy, speed, economy, and simplicity of operation.
4.1.2.2 Laser Scanning
At first sight, the latest manifestation of instrumentation survey may seem to have little to do with
the examples previously mentioned. In actuality, the time of flight laser scanner directly evolved
from the total station theodolite and EDM. This type of laser scanner works by sending out
thousands of pulses of light per second and, at great speed, calculates the three-dimensional
coordinates of points, thereby defining a surface. It is essentially carrying out a task very similar to
that of a reflector-less total station theodolite, only automatically at high speed. Horizontal and
vertical angles are being measured, REDMs are being made, and the data are converted into
coordinates. Two other types of laser scanners work on entirely different principles: phase
comparison and triangulation. In phase comparison laser scanners, the instrument emits light with
a known frequency and phase and compares the emitted phases to the returned phases; thus the
distance to the object can be determined. With triangulation laser scanners, a light emitter and a
receiver are separated by a known distance, and the angle of the reflected laser pulse is used to
determine the distance. The rapidity of data capture and the instant ability to input this to the
computer have made laser scanners an accepted tool in the field of survey. At the present time,
they are used for everything from buildings and bridges to tunnel designs, objects, and topography,
and provide a unique way of recording surface details. The only serious limitations are cost and the
overwhelming amount of data collected. Currently, both the hardware and software are expensive,
and the sheer amount of data gathered makes this tool not the best for every survey.
4.1.2.3 Global Positioning System (GPS)
The GPS method of locating positions on the Earths surface through radio signals emitted from
orbiting satellites, and sometimes ground-based transmitters, has been applied in many fields. It

38/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

has been particularly valuable in the area of land surveying and in surveying large, complex
archaeological sites. At first sight, the system seems to have little to do with conventional survey,
but in fact GPS follows a traditional method of survey or, more strictly, a principle of trigonometry: If
the lengths of the three sides of a triangle are known, the angles in between can be calculated.
This means that if two corners of the triangle are fixed or located, the position of the third can be
calculated. The satellites provide the known points and intersections for at least three satellites.
There are two general categories of GPS radio receivers: consumer handheld units, which range in
accuracy from 5 to 15 meters (and have contributed to the widespread use of GPS), and more
professional or survey-grade units. From professional instruments, astonishing accuracies are
possible down to 10 to 20 mm. This means that site surveys and external building profiles can be
surveyed directly with GPS instrumentation rather than having to set up theodolites and make
conventional measurements. A ground based system using the same triangulation principles as
GPS can also be used for surveying, but with transmitter base stations set up locallythat is,
without the use of satellites.
4.1.3 Image-Based Documentation Methods
The value of the photograph in all conservation work is inestimable, whether represented by
todays ongoing site-record photographs or early photographs consulted for historic information (it
is often forgotten that photographic technology is now more than 150 years old). Image-based
documentation can generally be classified into three types: pictorial imagery, rectified photography,
and photogrammetry.
4.1.3.1 Pictorial Imagery
Pictorial imagery constitutes the bulk of standard or ordinary photographs taken in conservation,
usually with the camera oblique to the subject and utilizing any of a wide range of everyday
cameras, from auto-focus to professional models. Although it is a primary form of documentation,
pictorial imagery is not generally meant to be used for measured survey purposes. Nevertheless, it
can be used for measurement with two methods. Every conservation professional will, from time to
time, take a photograph containing a scale against the object being photographed to gauge some
dimension. This is a very useful method, but it must be treated with caution as accurate scaling on
pictorial photographs is difficult to achieve. If at least two photographs of the same scene are
available, a second method can be applied to pictorial photographs to provide a source of
measurements. Technically, this process needs the services of a professional photogrammetrist,
although with some of the computer programs available today, some measurements may be
extracted by the photographer. Video photography can also be considered as part of pictorial
photography. An invaluable way of recording a great deal of information quickly, video not only
records a buildings features but can document its construction, use, and contextual significance as
well. Video has the added advantage of simultaneously documenting images and audio
commentary.
4.1.3.2 Rectified Photography
This is the first step up to a method that can provide reasonably accurate measurements from
photography. Rectified photography is the process of photographing a facade by aligning the
images to be as parallel as possible to the section of facade to be recorded. It includes the use of a
relational scale so that dimensions can be measured. The resulting scaled print provides a

39/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

reasonably true-to-scale image of the facade. Whereas the photography part of the process is
nowadays still quite straightforward, traditionally the printing and scaling were somewhat more
complicated. With advances in computers, however, this latter process has become simpler. The
photograph is now captured often obliquely to the facade and usually with a digital camera.
Through the computer, in a fraction of the time it used to take, the digital image can be
manipulated, a scale introduced, and tilts and distortion corrected. Rectification is done using a
variety of software and can be a useful, rapid, and inexpensive form of documentation, particularly
where the facade is made up of small components such as bricks, earth construction, or rubble
walling. Although its main use is in recording flat building facades, it is often used for features such
as floor surfaces, ceilings, and painted surfaces. If high accuracy is required for example, to
assess structural conditionsit is not appropriate. Rectified photography is generally provided by
specialists, but it can also be done by conservators, depending on the standards required,
availability of time, and resources.
4.1.3.3 Photogrammetry
Here the tools become more complex. As a source of measurement, photogrammetry still seems
to be regarded as something of a novelty, yet it was first applied to building surveying as early as
the 1870s. The modern use of photogrammetry for survey safely dates to the late 1930s through
the 1950s and has since been in continuous use in many countries around the world.
Photogrammetry is a much more complicated process than any other type of photography. It is the
science of obtaining detailed measurements from photographs, often for the purpose of creating
drawings, and encompasses both stereophotogrammetry and orthophotography.
Stereophotogrammetry involves taking stereo-pair photographs with calibrated cameras, then
using the resulting images in a photogrammetric plotting device or computer to extract accurate
measurements with which to produce drawings. This method is most appropriate in situations
where a high level of detail or a great deal of irregularity needs to be recorded.
Orthophotography is a true-to-scale process that combines the benefits of a photograph with its
wealth of detailed information and the geometric measurement accuracy of a survey with
instruments. This is a complicated process that actually builds on using stereo-pairs of
photographs. Very simply, a stereo-pair is captured and an entire series of corrections is made to
the positions of identical points in the two photographic images. The result is a true-to-scale
photographic image, or orthophotograph. With computerization, this process has become easier,
faster, of better quality, and much more inexpensive. It is suitable for the representation of some
types of features, such as drums or circular towers, and is also effective in representing irregular or
complex facades.
In relation to the quality and quantity of data provided, photogrammetry usually is not expensive;
however, a trained professional and special equipment are required. If only simple building outlines
are needed, it is unlikely that photogrammetry will be economically justified, but for the highestquality drawings of major facades, showing all stonework jointing and much architectural detail,
photogrammetry remains an important tool.
4.1.4 Data Management
All the methods mentioned above will provide surveys adequate for most conservation work. After
being collected, the data must be managed, an increasing role for both conservators and surveyors
40/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

involved in documentation and conservation. In the following section, related data management
techniques are introduced. As with data collection techniques, they may be stand-alone or used in
various combinations.
4.1.4.1 Computer-Aided Design and Drafting (CAD)
CAD for the preparation and subsequent presentation of survey data has become an increasingly
important tool in documentation. A CAD program allows the spatial data or drawingswhich have
been captured from many different sourcesto be displayed, edited, and presented on a
computer. CAD enables users to view drawings, zoom in and out, add and delete information,
prepare specifications, print, and transmit information over the Internet. It is an immensely powerful
tool now used in almost all aspects of documentation. Most of the illustrated examples in this book
utilize CAD in some way in preparing data.
4.1.4.2 Computer Modelling
Computer modelling takes CAD a dimension further. Utilizing the capabilities of 3 dimensional
modelling, the survey and image data for a historic structure can be viewed on screen. The model
can be scaled, rotated, and viewed in various ways. This enables a conservation team to assess
the effect of likely alterations to a historic building or site.
4.1.4.3 Databases
A database is a collection of data, usually text, which is separated and systematically stored in
tables with key identifiers. Records are often separated into sets, themes, and fields that allow for
easy retrieval and recombination, or queries of data. Databases can be as simple as a few lines
of data to keep track of the windows in a small historic building, or as complex as multiple tables
for keeping an inventory of all the historic buildings in a region. Other types of data such as
images, drawings, measurements, and videos are now stored in multimedia databases. A
database can be useful in conservation, not only to keep track of surveys and drawings but also to
inform the public or organize and plan a conservation project.
4.1.4.4 Geographic Information System (GIS)
The concept behind GIS is quite simple, whereas its application can be very complex. GIS is
similar to CAD in that it displays graphic information, and similar to databases in that it contains
tabular data. The advantage of GIS is that it combines both CAD and databases. Information about
a subject can be classified in two ways: first, the position or the spatial location (drawing) of a
feature, and second, the descriptive information (text or other form). If these two classes of
information are brought together with a computer program, then a GIS has been created. A floor
plan of a historic building provides a simple example. To each room in the plan, a set of attributes
such as size, function, and features can be ascribed in a text format. This plan can then be
combined with the text attributes in a GIS. With one click on the electronic drawing, the attributes
can be displayed or the database searched, and the appropriate portion of the drawing displayed.
This is useful in managing data for complex or large sites with numerous features or elements;
however, its usefulness is questionable for smaller sites or single structures.
A wide range of tools for documentation are available, and all professionals involved with
conservation should know their advantages and disadvantages. Architects certainly will be
involved, but engineers, archaeologists, and conservators must also be informed and concerned

41/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

regarding the processes of documentation. As mentioned earlier, others not directly involved with
conservation, such as land surveyors or professional photographers, may carry out surveys, and it
is important for conservators to understand the tools and processes involved in order to
communicate effectively and obtain the best results. In addition, the role of the amateur should not
be forgottenin many countries, and for many years, invaluable work has been done by
volunteers and students.
Thus, the documentation of our cultural heritage of historic buildings, structures, and sites is a vital
and ongoing process. Though not a new activity in the last half century, the importance and value
of documentation has been increasingly recognized within the conservation community. The value
of good documentation assists informed decision making and ongoing maintenance for
conservation. The wide range of examples in this publication illustrate the many methods and
standards that can assist the conservation professional in choosing and applying the most
appropriate technique or tool in any given circumstance.
4.2

Diagnostic Surveying and Recording.

Nowadays most of architectonic assets (historical buildings and monuments) suffer structural
problems. In order to assess their structural service life it is necessary to define the type, level and
extension of the damage and the load carrying capacity of these constructions. It is needed to
determine the parameters for the characterisation of the structural typology, the geometry (external
and internal) and the mechanical properties of their materials and further, if the structure is
damaged, the type, level and extension of the damages and its influence on the mechanical
behaviour of the structure. These parameters have to be measured using different techniques
(NDT, MDT or DT), in order to preserve the historic constructions without disturbing the state of
stress and strain and their external appearance. In the following, different testing objectives are
listed.
Table 1: Classes of problems depending from testing objectives
Morphology of masonry and
construction details

Mechanical properties

Structural damages to masonry

Control of effectiveness of
intervention
Structural monitoring

42/114

masonry thickness (walls, vaults, etc.)


presence of multiple leaves in masonry
non homogeneity of masonry
presence of inclusions
presence of different materials
presence of voids and chimney flues
state of stress
stress-strain behaviour
compressive and shear strength
evaluation of mortar characteristics
evaluation of stone and brick characteristics
presence of hidden crack patterns
detachment of external leaves in a multi-leaf masonry
detachment of plaster and rendering
penetration and diffusion of grout injections
effectiveness of re-pointing
bond of plasters and renderings
evolution of damage
influence of structure
physical control of presence of reinforcement

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

As it concern problems that might affect the performance of artistic assets, they are identified
according to UNI 11182 document (Italian Standards for Cultural heritage - Natural and artificial
stone materials - Description of the type of alteration: Terms and definitions) as:
Table 2: Reliability of particular method of testing
Pre-seismic decay

presence of openings
biological colonization
crust
irreversible deformation
differential degradation
disaggregation
detachment
efflorescence
exfoliation
crack
rising damp front
lacuna
stain
lack
presence of vegetation
swelling
chipping

Seismic damage

detachment
crack
irreversible deformations
dislocations (translation or
rotation)
unthreading
loss of stability
overturning
partial collapse
total collapse

4.2.1 Basic principles of planning an NDT/MDT/DT investigation


In the past, most of these investigations concerning the recording of damage and material
parameters were performed manually by optical inspection, laboratory tests on cored samples,
drilling tests and mechanical tests on site and load carrying tests. But the internal structures of
wall, columns, arches etc are often inhomogeneous and differ significantly at various positions.
Non-destructive (NDT) minor-destructive testing methods (MDT) and destructive testing (DT) are
tools of investigation, which can be applied without any or with only small interventions in the
object to be examined. These techniques can give hints to irregularities within the historic masonry
structure, which is often inhomogeneous. Irregularities may derive from differences in material or
microstructure, from voids or delaminations, cracks, salt or moisture influence or differences of
loading. Starting at the surface of the object NDT and MDT offer possibilities to border problem
areas, to detect structural differences and to amend the reliability of statistic evidence relative to or
in addition to selective material extractions and investigations.
Depending on the particular question and methodology NDT and MDT techniques are useful to get
a first survey of large areas at the beginning of building or restoration projects namely on structures
with defects or damages. It is then possible to investigate surfaces and parts of protected historic
constructions or areas, which are difficult to access, with higher precision. These techniques can
also be applied for long-running observations (monitoring) or be used as quality-assurance after
repair interventions and during historical building researches. Generally NDT and MDT applications
are a part of the global investigation of the building. They do not replace other investigation
techniques completely but in the case of artistic assets NDT should be preferred to traditional tests
on extracted samples when both types of techniques can solve the problem.

43/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

There are three forms of standards that have to be considered prior application of different
techniques:

Technical standards, which are the most exacting and when followed correctly yield
identical results;

Conventions, which are more flexible, accommodate local variations and produce similar
but not necessarily identical results;

Guidelines, which are a broad set of practice or service criteria against which products or
programmes can be measured.

The following general recommendations are based on the experiences gained through RILEM
SAM
(Structural
Assessment
of
Masonry)
committee
[19],
research
project
ONSITEFORMASONRY [2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 16, 17, 20, 21 ,22, 24, 25] and Italian National research
project ReLUIS [23].
4.2.2 General classification and description of the methods
Here, the methods of testing are classified into different classes depending from the level of
intrusiveness as:
Non-Destructive Techniques
Minor-Destructive Techniques
Destructive Techniques

Following the classification of damage classes and sub-classes for architectonic and artistic assets
from D4 Tables 4.2 and 5.2 [1], recommendation was given as:
Recommended
With limitations or in combination with other techniques
Not effective

For clarity, the following tables summarize the damage classes and sub-classes as proposed in
D4.

44/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Table 3: Damage classes for macroelements classes as proposed in D4


Damage class

Description

This class mainly collect the in-plane damage of vertical walls,


which progressively leads to the loss of their bearing capacity.
The most typical failure modes are a function of the type of
structural elements (typically piers and spandrels) in which
damage is concentrated. Damage in structural elements may
be ascribable to different types of cracks/prevailing behaviour:
diagonal cracking, bed joint sliding, rocking, cracks in
constructive joints.

Damage to in-plane loaded walls

Damage to out-of-plane loaded


walls

In this class, partial and global overturning of walls or masonry


elements are collected. Therefore the collapse occurs due to
loss of equilibrium.

Damage to monodimensional
masonry elements

This class collects macroelements (as an example system of


columns or pillars) or in some case whole architectonic assets
(like as the case of towers, bell-towers) characterized by a
prevailing behaviour which may be interpreted by referring to
the beam theory.

Damage to in-plane loaded arches


(or vaults)

In this class, arch structures loaded in their vertical plane are


considered. Damage usually involves the arch-and-piers
system and occurs by means of tensile cracks which tend to
turn the structure into mechanism.

Local damage of masonry

Rocking of single or multiple blocks

Damage considered in this class is localized in limited portions


of masonry continuum. Different types of damage are included:
cracks and spalling in massive masonry structures due to
hydrostatic thrust; detachment of external masonry leaf in multileaf walls, closure of openings; pounding of masonry due to
floor of roof beams.
In this class, damage to standing out elements is considered.
Usually, due to their dimensions and boundary conditions, such
elements are slightly compressed and tend to behave as single
or multiple rocking blocks.
In this class, damage to connections of timber beams and
wooden structures is considered. This type of damage tends to
produce failure of roofs and floors.

Damage to roofs and floors

Drift of vaults in their horizontal


plane

Damage to vaults subjected to in-plane movements of their


abutments are considered. These movements usually produce
shear cracking and local instability of vaults.

Damage to domes

Typical three-dimensional damage is produced on domes due


to their spatial configuration. Shear, out-of-plane and arch
behaviours may coexist, producing complex damage states.

45/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Table 4: Damage classes and sub-classes as proposed in D4


Damage class

Damage sub-class
A-a: generic cracking
A-b: cracks in piers

Damage to in-plane loaded walls


A-c: cracks in spandrels
A-d: cracks in structural gaps
B-a: single block overturning

Damage to out-of-plane loaded walls


B-b: multi-blocks overturning

Damage to monodimensional masonry elements

Damage to in-plane loaded arches (or vaults)


E-a: partial collapse of external leaf of masonry walls

E-b: damage to infill walls, cavities or structural gaps

Local damage of masonry

E-c: local damage to masonry due to impact of structural


elements of floors/roofs or bolts of tie-rods.
F

Rocking of single or multiple blocks


G-a: damage in correspondence of supports of wooden/steel
floors and roofs
Damage to roofs and floors

G-b: sliding of reinforced concrete beams in case of r.c. slab


G-c: damage to structural elements

Drift of vaults in their horizontal plane

Damage to domes

It should be noted that recommendations are made on the basis whether some method can
provide data which are directly applicable to characterize the mechanical properties which have to
be introduced in models. Others recommendations provide information which cannot be directly
introduced in models but which can address the choice on the proper modelling strategy to be
adopted (i.e. diagnostic techniques addressed to investigate the quality of connection between
different macroelements or that of multi-leaf panels).
Regarding the application on artistic assets, for each method, information whether the method
require contact with the surface or not is provided in the form of:
Contact to surface required with coupling agent
Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

In this SofArt some of laboratory techniques for the assessment of artistic assets such are
Macroscopic description, Cross section, Thin section, Ionic chromatography, Electric conductibility,
Water pondered content, SEM, X Ray Diffraction, Thermo analysis TG-DSC, Mercury porosimetry,

46/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Microbiologic analysis and Wooden essence identification are omitted. Applicability of these
methods for the evaluation of the state of artistic assets is presented in following table:

MACROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION
CROSS SECTION
THIN SECTION
IONIC CROMATOGRAPHY
ELECTRIC CONDUCTIBILITY
WATER PONDERAL CONTENT
SEM
X RAY DIFFRACTION
TERMIC ANALYSIS TG-DSC
MERCURY POROSIMETRY
MICROBIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
WOODEN ESSENCE IDENTIFICATION

4.2.3 Description of the methods for the evaluation of architectonic assets


In the following, each method has been described with the same structure:

Scope of testing;

Principle of test;

Figure of test set-up;

Test procedure and measurements;

Test results;

Correlation regarding damage classes for architectonic and artistic assets;

Notes for the interpretation of results, including reliability of data and safety issues;

Code/recommendation references;

References.

47/114

Exfoliation

presence of vegetation

rising damp front

crack

exfoliation

efflorescence

detachment

disgregation

differential degradation

irreversible deformation

crust

biological colonization

presence of openings

Table 5: Set of methods for the evaluation of artistic assets depending from the type of damage

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.1 Active Thermography (N1)


Scope of testing
Localisation of voids and other irregularities in the near surface region (up to 10 cm)
Localisation of plaster delaminations
Investigation of the masonry structure behind plaster
Detection of moisture in the near surface region
Principle of test
A thermal pulse is applied to a surface causing a non-stationary heat flow. The propagation of the heat into
the body depends on material properties like thermal conductivity, heat capacity and density of the inspected
specimen. If there are inhomogeneities in the near surface region of the structural element this will result in
measurable temperature differences in the local area of the surface.
Impulse thermography (IT) and pulse-phase thermography (PPT) are active approaches for a quantitative
thermal scanning of the surface of various structures and elements. The surface of the structure to be
investigated is heated by using a radiation source. After switching off the heating source, the cooling down
behaviour is recorded in real time with an infrared camera. While observing the temporal changes of the
surface temperature distribution with the infrared camera, near surface inhomogeneities will be detected if
they give rise to measurable temperature differences on the surface.
The main approach of IT in analysing the thermal data is to interpret the function of surface temperature
versus cooling time for selected areas with and without inhomogeneities. For solving the Inverse Problem, i. e.
to get information about the thermal and geometrical properties of the detected defect from the difference
curves, numerical simulations can be performed.
PPT is based on the application of the Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT) to all transient curves of each pixel.
Thus, one obtains amplitude and phase images for all frequencies. Amplitude images show the internal
structure of a specimen up to a maximum available depth depending on the frequency (low pass filter
behaviour). Phase images show the internal structure within a certain depth range depending on the
frequency (band pass filter behaviour).
Active methods have proven their usefulness for locating defects in the near surface region like voids and
honeycombing in concrete and delaminations of tiles, plaster and glued carbon fibre reinforced laminates.
Further developments and applications in civil engineering are using the sun as a natural heat source, e.g. for
the inspections of bridge decks and of paving in general.
Figure of test set-up
heating pulse
from radiator

specimen
d
d
cd

defect

... thermal conductivity


infrared
camera

... density
emitted
surface
radiation

c ... heat capacity

non stationary
heat flow

Test procedure and measurements


Preparation of testing campaign:
The preparation of the measurement campaign should be carried out in close contact to the owners or users
of the building and to architects, building researchers and restorers. At least the following steps should be
considered:
Study of plans and drawing of the structure under test
On-site inspection of the object under investigation
Fixing of the maximum temperature to which the surface can be heated
Selection of the surface to be investigated, levelling of the measurement area or of several areas
related to the coordinate system of the customer
For selecting the optimum measurement parameters or for checking the success of the application of

48/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

active thermography for solving the testing problem in advance, numerical simulation programs based
on Finite Differences are helpful.
Set-up of the equipment:
The selection of the equipment should be related to the requirements described above.
The heating source has to be placed close to the surface under investigation (distance 10 to 20 cm) and
should be moveable to obtain a homogeneous heating. A respective power supply must be available.
The camera should be positioned on a fixed tripod on a stable basement at a distance of 2 m or more,
depending on the size of the investigated area and on the spatial resolution of the camera/objective system.
The required objective has to be selected (wide angle, normal, tele). Before starting data acquisition, the
camera should be switched on for at least 30 min. An operational test should be performed measuring the
surface temperature of a known object (reference object).
Additional direct or indirect radiation should be avoided.
Environmental and material parameters:
The following environmental and material parameters have to be known and noted during the measurement
campaign:
Emissivity of the surface of the structure under investigation
Geometrical data of the investigated area
Distance camera object surface
Distance heating source object surface
Temperature of air
Humidity of air
Wind strength
Dust
The knowledge of the following material parameters is helpful, but not urgently required (only for quantitative
analysis):
Thermal properties of the bulk material (thermal conductivity, density, specific heat capacity)
Thermal properties of the inhomogeneity or defect
Data acquisition
Before the heating process is started, a first thermogram of the surface to be investigated should be recorded
to have a reference image in more or less thermal equilibrium. Also a photo from the area should be taken for
analysing surface inhomogeneities.
During the heating process, which can take several seconds up to one hour, the IR camera should be
switched on for immediately surface temperature recording after the heating source has been removed.
In most cases, the following measurement parameters have to be selected and can be adjusted directly at the
camera or in the acquisition software:
Focus
o
Temperature range (e. g. -20 to 50 C)
Image rate (e. g. 10 Hz)
Data storage depth (e. g. 12 bit)
Whole time range for data recording (e. g. 2 h)
During the whole time range of data recording, it should be ensured that nothing and nobody is passing the
area between camera and observed surface.
Test results
During data processing, information is extracted from the data enabling interpretation and visualisation of the
results and presenting these to the customers. If the testing problems are simple and the experimental data
are very clear, the processing and visualisation of the results can already be performed at the building site.
But in the case of more complex challenge and large amounts of data sets, it is required to perform data
processing and visualisation separately, after the measurement campaign.

49/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Tmax

30

reference point
defect
temperature difference

1.5

1.0

26
24

0.5

22

T in K

T in K

28

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

0.0

20
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

cooling time in s

Transient curves above a reference point and The palace ofthe Wartburg: Phase image at minimum frequency showing
above a defect and the respective difference the masonry structure aswell as the top arc of the walled up door behind
curve with a maximum temperature Tmax at a the plaster.
distinct time tmax.

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


In the laboratory and especially during on-site testing, direct and indirect reflections from heat sources can
generate artificial signals in the recorded thermograms, which are difficult to interpret. Therefore, before the
start of measurements, these reflections should be detected and avoided, if possible.
Due to long measurement times which are required for detecting deeper structures, a movement of sunlight
occurs in the surface under test, which is acting as an additional heat source and which cannot be removed
by PPT data analysis.
A high moisture content of porous building materials leads to an increased density, heat capacity and thermal
conductivity of the material and thus to an enhanced effusivity, which is a measure of the ability of the material
to increase its temperature as a response to a given heat input. Due to evaporation flux, the presence of water
at the surface reduces the surface temperature. Additionally, water at the surface changes the emissivity and
thus the absorption and reflection of radiation. For investigations with passive and active thermography under
unsteady environmental conditions, it has to be considered that all these effects superimpose each other,
which makes the analysis of moisture content and distribution a challenging task.
Usually, historic structures are inhomogeneous in structure and material composition. Also at the surface,
different kind of materials, remaining pigments, paintings but also moisture, efflorescence and biological
deposits yield to an inhomogeneous distribution of thermal properties and emissivity. In some cases, this
problem can be solved by using PPT data analysis. But this requires a distinct amount of heat to be inserted
and inhomogeneities have to be present only at the very near surface.
Very often, the temperature rise has to be limited to a few Kelvin avoiding any damage to paintings or plaster.
Due to the low diffusivity of building materials, in these cases only shallow structures can be detected.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
ASTM D4788-03 Standard Test Method for Detecting Delaminations in Bridge Decks Using Infrared
Thermography
References
1. Maierhofer, C., Brink, A., Rllig, M. and Wiggenhauser, H., Transient thermography for structural
investigation of Concrete and Composites in the Surface Near Region, Infrared Physics and
Technology 43, (2002), pp. 271 278.
2. Wedler, G., Brink, A., Rllig, M., Weritz, F. and Maierhofer, C., Active Infrared Thermography in Civil
Engineering - Quantitative Analysis by Numerical Simulation, in: DGZfP (Ed.); International
Symposium Non-Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering (NDT-CE) in Berlin, Germany, September
16-19, 2003, Proceedings on BB 85-CD, V80, 2003, Berlin.
3. Maldague, X., Theory and practice of infrared technology for non-destructive testing, (John Wiley and
Sons, Inc., 2001).
4. Maldague, X. and Marinetti, S., Pulse Phase Thermography, J. Appl. Phys. 79 (5), (1996), pp.
2694-2698

50/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

5. Busse, G., Wu, D. and Karpen, W., Thermal wave imaging with phase sensitive modulated
thermography, J. Appl. Phys. 71, (1992), p. 3962
6. Vavilov, V. and Marinetti, S., Thermal Methods Pulsed Phase Thermography and Fourier-Analysis
Thermal Tomography, Russian Journal of Nondestructive Testing, 35 (2), (1999), pp. 134 145.
7. Maldague, X. and Couturier, J.-P., Review of pulsed phase thermography, Invited Lecture, 15./16.
Sept. 1997, Florence, Italy, in: Abozzo, L. R., Carlomagno, G. M., Corsi, C., (eds)., Atti della Fondazi
one G. Ronchi, Firenze, 53, [1], 1997, pp. 271-286.
8. Maierhofer, Ch., Brink, A., Hillemeier, B., Rieck, C., Rllig, M. und Wiggenhauser, H., Struktur- und
Feuchteuntersuchung in Betonstrukturen mit der Impuls-Thermografie, Bauphysik 25 (2003) 1, S. 2226
9. Wedler, G., Brink, A., Maierhofer, Ch., Rllig, M., Weritz, F. and Wiggenhauser, H., Active Infrared
Thermography in Civil Engineering - Quantitative Analysis by Numerical Simulation, in: DGZfP (Ed.);
International Symposium Non-Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering (NDT-CE) in Berlin, Germany,
September 16-19, 2003, Proceedings on BB 85-CD, P24, Berlin (2003)

51/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.2 Geoelectrical Tomographies (N2)


Scope of testing
Characterisation of masonry structure behind plaster
Detection of voids and of empty joints
Map of different materials
Detection of moisture
Location of diffuse fracturing
Monitoring diffusion of consolidation materials
Principle of test
The geoelectrical tomography is the reconstruction of the distribution of the electrical resistivities in the body
of a structure obtained by current injections across many different couples of electrodes. Two different
methods can be used: transparency tomographies and inverted pseudo-sections or impedance
tomographies when only one side of the structure is accessible.
The transparency tomographies use an experimental disposition of the electrodes corresponding to the
"cross-hole tomography" in the subsoil: in this case 2 series of electrodes are fixed along 2 profiles on the
opposite faces of a masonry structure. The electrodes are connected in different combinations, performing a
high number of measurements (typically several hundreds). The cross-section covered by the ray paths is
ideally divided in a number of cells (pixels). Their resistivity is computed by means of complex iterative
routines. The numerical output (resistivity of each cell) must be converted in an image of the distribution of the
velocities in the cross-section to render it usable.
Another technique, the inverted pseudo-section, uses only one profile with many electrodes on one face of
the structure. Measurements are made with the technique of the so-called resistivity pseudo-sections by
connecting 4 electrodes at a time with one of the typical arrays used in geoelectrics. A high number of
measurements (several hundreds) are performed.
Multi-electrode (24, 48 or more) automatic switching geo-resistivity-meters are necessary. The measured
data, namely the apparent resistivities, can be directly plotted versus some kind of pseudo-depths to build the
so called pseudo-sections. These are purely qualitative images.
By means of a complex inversion process, the distribution of true resistivities versus true depth can be
obtained, that is, another kind of geo-electrical tomography. This is sometimes referred as the impedance
tomography.
This technique allows to individuate the presence of anomalies of the resistivity of the masonry structures,
due, for instance, to the presence of moisture or voids. The testing technique is based on the generation of
electrical current in two electrodes. An electrical field is generated and from other two electrodes, the
electrical potential is measured. From this information it is possible to get the resistivity of the indagated area.
Figure of test set-up

The electrodes array on a stone wall

The IRIS SYSCAL R1 PLUS: a geo-resistivity-meter

Test procedure and measurements


The measurements are made by means of a number of mini-electrodes (typically 24-48) placed along profiles
at the surface of the wall. A multi-electrode Georesistivitymeter connects, in sequence, 4 electrodes at a time
and measures the apparent resistivities. Different electrode arrays can be used: Wenner, Dipole-Dipole, PoleDipole, Pole-Pole, etc..By repeating the measurements with different electrode spacings, it is possible to build
up a qualitative image of the apparent resisitvities under the profile, that is a "Pseudosection"..
By means of an inversion software, it is possible to obtain a quantitative image of the true resistivities under

52/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

the surface, that is a Geo-electrical Tomography.


The main technical problem for this kind of measurements is due to the high contact resistances of the minielectrodes on a masonry surface. It is necessary to use georesistivitymeters with very high input impedance
(10 Mohm or more).
Test results

Cupola of Altes Museum (Berlin): The impedance


tomography point out the presence of an upper layer
relatively more conductive of the lower one. The white area
is the air under the cupola.

Walls of Vicopisano: The test was made with the electrodes


fixed along a horizontal profile on the external face
(impedance tomography) in correspondence of a niche on
the other side. The cavity is clearly spotted out.

VICOPISANO: two geoelectrical tomographies carried on the ground near the same wall helped to estimate the depth of
the foundations The first one was obtained with a profile near the wall (0.5 m); the second one, not be disturbed by it,
was made more than 5 m away; the third figure was obtained by subtracting, point by point, the "undisturbed" values from
the first one. The depth of the foundations can be estimated to about 2-2.5 m. The presence of subsurface anomalies is
put in evidence.

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


The limits of the application of the d.c. resistivity imaging method depend mainly on the type of the surfaces
where electrodes have to be laid on.
For a successful measurement campaign it should be assured that the surface of the object under
investigation is accessible and that electrodes can be fitted to the surface. Good ohmic contacts are
necessary both for current injection and potential measurement. This can be ensured by driving small steel
nails (4-5 cm long) into the body, to which the connecting cable will be attached by clips. In cases of precious
surfaces (mosaic or fresco), driving nails into the surface is simply impossible and attention should be paid on
the choice of the electrodes, using, for instance, ECG flexible, self-pasting and mono-use silver electrodes.
In cases of deteriorated frescoes, where removing this kind of electrodes entails the risk to remove the paint,
this drawback prevents the use of the d.c. resistivity technique.
The detectability of inhomogeneities depends firstly on the resistivity contrast: a factor of at least 1.5 should
exist between an object and the surrounding ones. Secondly, the detectability depends on the size of the
inhomogeneity. For one-side investigations, size of the inhomogeneity must increase with its depth to be
reliably detected. For two- or more sides investigations, the detectability of an inhomogeneity depends on the
thickness of the structure, so that the thicker the structure, the greater must be the inhomogeneity.

53/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Moisture condition of investigated media should be known in order to accurately assest collected data.

Reliability of data - High


Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
Ministre de lIndustrie Sous Direction Qualit-Normalisation, APPLIED GEOPHYSICS OF PRACTICE,
1992
References
1. Cardarelli, E., Godio, A., Morelli ,G., Sambuelli, L., Santarato, G. and Socco, L. V., Integrated
geophysical surveys to investigate the scarsella vault of St Johns Baptistery in Florence, The
Leading Edge, 21 (2002), pp. 467-470.
2. Polder, R.B., Test methods for on site measurement of resistivity of concrete - a RILEM TC-154
technical recommendation, Construction and Building Materials, 15, (2001), pp. 125-131.
3. Reynolds, J. M., An Introduction to Applied Geophysics, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, (1997), 806 pages.
4. Edwards, L. S., A modified pseudosection for resistivity and IP. Geophysics, 42 (1977), pp. 10201036.
5. SASAKI, Y., Resolution of resistivity tomography inferred from numerical simulation, Geophysical
Prospecting 40, (1992), pp. 453-463.
6. ONSITEFORMASONRY, Deliverable D11.1 (2004).
7. Cosentino, P., Fiandaca, G., Martorana, R. and Messina, P., New 3D electrical tomography technique
rd
for investigations on vulnerable surfaces, Proceedings of 3 International Study Meeting The
material and the signs of history. Palermo, October 18-21, 2007, Book of abstracts, p. 51.
8. Coggon, J. H., Electromagnetic and electrical modelling by the finite element method, Geophysics,
36 (1971), pp. 132-155.
9. Dey, A. and Morrison, H. F., Resistivity modelling for arbitrarily shaped three-dimensional structures,
Geophysics, 44 (1979), pp. 753-780.
10. Furman, A., T. P., Ferre, A., and Warrick, A. W.,A Sensitivity Analysis of Electrical Resistivity
Tomography Array Types Using Analytical Element Modeling, Vadose Zone Journal 2 (2003), pp.
416-423.
11. Hennig, T. and Weller, A., Two dimensional object orientated focussing of geoelectrical multielectrode
measurements, Proceedings of the 11th meeting of the EAGE Near Surface Geophysics Conference,
Palermo, Italy (2005).
12. Stummer, P., Maurer, H., and Green, A. G. Experimental design: Electrical resistivity data sets that
provide optimum subsurface information, Geophysics, 69 (2004) pp.120-139.
13. Wilkinson, P.B. Meldrum, P.I., Chambers, J.E, Kuras, O. and Ogilvy, R.D., Improved strategies for
the automatic selection of optimised sets of electrical resistivity tomography measurement
configurations, Geophysical Journal International, 167 (2006) pp. 1119-1126.
14. Athanasiou, E., Tsourlos, P., Papazachos, C. B. and Tsokas, G. N. Optimising resistivity array
configurations by using a non-homogeneous background model, Proceedings of the 12th meeting of
the EAGE Near Surface Geophysics Conference, Helsinki, Finland (2006).
15. Tikhonov A. N. and Arsenin V. Y., Solutions of ill posed problems, V. H. Winston and Sons (1977),
xiii + 258 pp.
16. Portniaguine, O., Zhdanov MS., Focusing geophysical inversion images, Geophysics, 64 (1999) pp.
874887.
17. Kumar, R. K., Potential Theory in Applied Geophysics (2008), XXIV, 652 p. ISBN: 978-3-540-720898, Springer.
18. Ref 18 Loke, M.H. and Barker, R.D., Practical techniques for 3D resistivity surveys and data
inversion, Geophysical Prospecting, 44 (1996), pp. 499-523.
19. Ref 19 LaBrecque, D. J., Morelli, G., Daily W., Ramirez, A., and Lundegard, P., 1999, Occam's
Inversion of 3D ERT data: in: Spies, B., (Ed.), Three-Dimensional Electromagnetics, SEG, Tulsa, 575590.
20. Ref 20 Schueremans, L., Van Rickstal, F., Verderickx, K. and Van Gemert, D., Evaluation of
masonry consolidation by geo-electrical relative difference resistivity mapping, RILEM Materials &
Structures, 36(1) (2003) pp. 46-50.

54/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.3 Impact-echo (N3)


Scope of testing
Determination of the thickness of walls and single leaves
Detection of detachment of leaves
Location of voids
Location of deteriorated area
Principle of test
In impact-echo a mechanical point impact is used to generate an acoustical impulse, which propagates into
the concrete. Multiple reflections of low frequency waves between the external surface and internal reflectors
(ducts, delaminations and defects) are used to measure transient resonance frequencies and to evaluate
structural integrity.
Impact-echo is a wave propagation-based technique which uses frequency domain analysis for data
interpretation. Frequency spectrum analysis is performed on the waveform obtained from a mechanical
impact applied on the surface of the concrete element. By applying a point impact on the surface of the test
object, a transient stress pulse is generated and propagates into the concrete as compressional, shear and
surface waves. The compressional and shear waves, which travel through the material, are partly reflected by
any internal interface or discontinuity such as reinforcements, ducts, defects, delaminations. These waves are
almost totally reflected if the second material is air, such as in the presence of a void or at the external
boundaries of the element under investigation. Therefore, the principle of Impact-echo testing is based on
multiple reflections of an acoustical wave impulse between the surface and any internal reflector.
Figure of test set-up

Multiple reflections and


display in time and
frequency domain.

Visualisation of impact-echo
data.

Test procedure and measurements


When data are collected in discrete steps along measurement lines they can be plotted as 2-dimensional
images such as frequency series and impact-echograms. These represent 2-D sections through the tested
element, plotting the frequency amplitude as wiggle plot or in grey scale. They have on one axis the position
of the testing unit on the concrete surface, and on the second axis the measured frequency (or calculated
depth). The experimental set-up consists of an impact-echo measuring head (including impactor/receiver), an
impact-echo-box cohntaining an amplifier and a controler and computer system.
The following environmental and material parameters have to be known and noted during the measurement
campaign:
Type of material (sandstone, brick etc.), type of mortar
In case of brickwork: how was the grouting of the bricks
Geometrical data of the investigated area, exact location of the measuring field in relation to well defined
points of origin
Thickness of the objects (walls)
Roughness of the surface
Velocity
The knowledge of the following material parameters is helpful, but not urgently required (only for quantitative
analysis):

55/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Velocity of propagation of acoustical waves


Moisture content of the test specimen
The data analysis is carried out in the frequency domain, for that purpose the data has to be transformed form
the time domain by using a Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT). The data processing described above makes it
possible to determine test object thickness or the depth of inhomogeneities by searching related maximums of
peaks in the frequency signal. The value of the frequency is related to a reflector depth (backside or
inhomogeneity). As mentioned above, the test object thickness and the depth of inhomogeneities can only be
determined if comprehensive pre-knowledge is available.
Test results

Line 166

V
Li
Line
ne 10
10

BS

Li
Line
ne 44

Example for the detection of voids in a masonry test specimen. Test specimen and Impact-echogram of line 4.

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


The values can not be generalised. Not applicable for heterogenous masonry.
The limits of the application of the impact-echo method depend on the testing problem, the object under
investigation und the equipment applied.
For a successful measurement campaign it should be assured that the surfaces of the object under
investigation have to be accessible and smooth and flat:
There should be no plaster on the surface, because the acoustic signal can not penetrate deep enough, due
to of the high attenuation of plaster
Accessibility of the testing area
Homogeneous regular masonry (brick- or stone-) wall
The penetration depth for the acoustic wave generated by impact-echo is between 0.6 and 1 m.
The minimal depth accessible in the plane parallel to the surface is given by the maximum frequency, which is
about 25 kHz. This is equivalent to 0.05 m considering a sound velocity of 2500 m/s.
For the investigation of masonry the applied impact-echo frequencies are in the range from 1 to 25 kHz
corresponding to a wavelength from 1.25 m to 0.05 m at a sound velocity of 2500 m/s.
The investigations in the laboratory have shown that the impact-echo method is applicable to single leaf and
multiple leaf regular brickwall masonry. It is possible to find voids with sharp interfaces and for thickness
determination up to 50 cm (see figure 4).
For investigations at historic structures the range of application is restricted to the following conditions:
Regular homogeneous brick- or stonework, smooth surfaces and thicknesses up to 1 m. It is possible to
detect irregularities but it is difficult to describe these irregularities quantitatively (see figure 4).
For scanning impact-echo the size of the area, which can be investigated, and the accuracy for positioning
depend on the applied scanning system.
The detectability of the inhomogeneities depends mainly on relationship between wavelength and the
dimension and depth of the discontinuity. In general compress waves will be reflected by discontinuities
having dimensions approximately equal to or greater than the wavelength, but will not see those that are
smaller.
The geometric resolution of the impact-echo method depends on the lateral dimension and the depth of the
flaw, as well as on the duration of the impact. If the lateral dimension, are at least 25 % of the depth, the
presence of the flaw can be detected. If they are greater than about 33 % of the depth, the depth of the flaw
can be determined easily.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

56/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Code/recommendation references
ASTM C 1383 98 Standard test method for measuring the p-wave speed and the thickness of concrete
plates using the impact-echo method
References
1. Sansalone, M.J. & Street, W.B.: Impact-Echo, Nondestructive Evaluation of Concrete and Masonry,
Bullbrier Press, Ithaca, N.Y., USA, 1997.
2. Wiggenhauser, H.: Homemade Datenanalyse und Visualisierung mit freier Software. In: iX Magazin
fr professionelle Informationstechnik, Vol. 12/2003, pp.96-99
3. Colla, C.: 2-Dimensional Impact-Echo for NDT testing of Masonry Bridges: in: Fairfield, C. (ed.);
Proceedings of ARCH`01 3rd International Conference on Arch Bridges, September 19-21, 2001,
Paris, Presses ENPC
4. Kompendium online presence: www.bam.de/zfpbau-kompendium.htm, BAM Berlin 2004
5. Schubert, F., Lausch, R., Wiggenhauser, H.: Geometrical Effects on Impact-Echo Testing of Finite
Concrete Specimens. In: DGZfP (Ed.); International Symposium Non-Destructive Testing in Civil
Engineering (NDT-CE) in Berlin, Germany, September 16-19, 2003, Proceedings on BB 85-CD, V39,
Berlin (2003)
6. Wiggenhauser, H.: Duct inspection using scanning impact-echo. In: DGZfP (Ed.); International
Symposium Non-Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering (NDT-CE) in Berlin, Germany, September
16-19, 2003, Proceedings on BB 85-CD, V101, Berlin (2003)
7. Petersen, C. G., Davis, A., Delahaza, A.: Impact-Echo testing of steel cable ducts for injection
grouting quality International. In: DGZfP (Ed.); Symposium Non-Destructive Testing in Civil
Engineering (NDT-CE) in Berlin, Germany, September 16-19, 2003, Proceedings on BB 85-CD,
V102, Berlin (2003)
8. Tinkey, DY, Olson, L. D., Bedon, R., Lieberle, C.: Impact Echo Scanning Technology for Internal
Grout Condition Evaluation in Post-Tensioned Bridge In: DGZfP (Ed.); International Symposium NonDestructive Testing in Civil Engineering (NDT-CE) in Berlin, Germany, September 16-19, 2003,
Proceedings on BB 85-CD, V041, Berlin (2003)

57/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.4 Pachometer (Magnetometry) (N4)


Scope of testing
Detection and sizing of steel reinforcing bars and anchors
To locate long-forgotten conduit systems, as well as pipes, cables, or remains buried in the ground.
Principle of test
Metal detectors are employed for pachymetry (e.g., thickness) measurement in masonry structures by utilizing
electromagnetic induction to detect underlying metalwork. They are used especially in the construction
industry to detect and size steel reinforcing bars buried in concrete, as well as pipes and wires buried in walls
and floors.In its simplest form, a metal detector consists of an oscillator, which generates a current that
passes through a coil, producing an alternating magnetic field. If a piece of metal, which is electrically
conductive, is close to the coil, eddy currents will be induced in the metal; this in turn produces an alternating
magnetic field of its own. If another coil is used to measure the magnetic field (acting as a magnetometer), the
change in the magnetic field due to the metallic object can then be detected.
Figure of test set-up

Pachometer
Test procedure and measurements
Depending from the type of pachometer the procedure of measurements may differ. More sophisticated
instruments are more data can be gained. For the purpose of PERPETUATE project simple location of
anchors or metal/iron ties, their length may be sufficient.
Test results
Location of anchors/ties, their length and position. In the case of more sophisticated pachometers diameter
of bars may be obtained.
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

Code/recommendation references
References
1.

58/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.5 Pulse Sonic Test (N5)


Scope of testing
Study of the masonry quality;
Detection of both damaged portions and crack pattern;
Detection of voids within a structural element;
Detection of hidden elements;
Detection of multiple leaves and quantification of their thickness;
Principle of test
The testing technique is based on the generation of elastic waves in the frequency range of sound (20 Hz-20
kHz), by means of mechanical impulses at a point of the structure. The pulse velocity is related in a
homogeneous and isotropic solid to the modulus of elasticity and density. The relationship is independent of
the frequency of the vibrations. In the case of masonry, due to its heterogeneity, the pulse velocity
qualitatively represents the characteristic of the masonry.
A signal is generated by percussion with an instrumented hammer or by an electrodynamics or pneumatic
device (transmitter) and is received by means of an accelerometer (receiver), which can be placed in various
positions. The data processing consists in measuring the transit time between the transmitter and the receiver
and in calculating the pulse velocity dividing the distance between the devices by the transit time. Signals are
stored by a waveform analyser coupled with a computer for further processing. Three types of tests can be
carried out: (1) direct (or through-wall) tests in which hammer and accelerometers are placed in line on
opposite sides of the masonry element, (2) semi-direct tests in which hammer and accelerometers are placed
at a certain angle to each other, and (3) indirect tests in which hammer and accelerometer are both located on
the same face of the wall in a vertical or horizontal line. Generally a grid of acquisition points is investigated.
Figure of test set-up

Scheme of sonic pulse velocity test with direct (left), semi-direct (middle) and
indirect (right) transmission method.

Test procedure and measurements


Sonic tests can be used on masonry walls with direct (Dt), semi-direct (St), indirect (It) transmission method,
or with tomographic (To) mode, depending on the objective of the investigation. Problems that can be
analyzed with sonic tests are listed below with the indication of the most appropriate acquisition mode:
detection of non homogeneous masonry areas (e.g., variation of masonry texture, repair
interventions, presence of different materials ...) (Dt, To);
detection of multiple leaves and measurement of the thickness of each leaf (To);
detection of detached external leaves (Dt, To);
detection of voids or chimney flues (Dt, To);
evaluation of effectiveness of repair interventions (e.g., grout injections, repointing, etc) (Dt, To, St);
detection of damaged portions of masonry or of crack patterns (Dt, It, To).
Test results
Data processing must be performed by a sonic test processing expert using dedicated software products. It
consists in evaluating the pulse transit time by measuring the elapsed time of the recorded waveforms, that is
to say, by picking in an amplitude versus time diagram the starting point of the hammer pulse and the first
arrival recorded by the accelerometer. In case that time picking is performed with automated procedures, by
using a threshold value to find the wave onset, the reliability of the procedure and the appropriateness of the
threshold value should be checked. After evaluating all the transit times for each path (normally 3 records),
one should consider the average value tm among these. As a consequence, the pulse velocity is calculated

59/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

as v=l/tm where: v is the pulse velocity, [m/s]; l is the distance between transducer, [m]; tm is the transit
time, [s].
Date: 18/07/03

10

11

12

Sonic Velocity
(m/sec)

380
360

13

14

15

16

17

18

340
320
300
280

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

260
240
220
200
180

a)

b)
Results of direct sonic test carried on Piece
Castle /Slovenia: a) Low velocity contour map
revealed former fireplace behind the layer of
masonry; b) fireplace examined with
videoboroscopy

Results of direct sonic tests carried out on the Cittadella Town Walls
(Italy): a) velocity contour map before injection; b) velocity contour map
after injection using the same colour scale; c) contour map of percentage
difference of pulse velocity before and after intervention; d) histogram
with sonic pulse velocity before and after injection.

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
RILEM Recommendation TC 127-MS, MS.D.1 Measurement of mechanical pulse velocity for masonry,
(published in Materials and Structures, Vol. 30, July 1997 pp. 463-466)
NORMAL 22/86, Misura in laboratorio e in sito della velocit apparente (o virtuale) di propagazione del suono
(onde longitudinali) nel materiali porosi da costruzione
ASTM C597-83 Standard test method for pulse velocity through concrete
References
1. Abbaneo, S., Berra, M., Binda, L. (1996) Pulse velocity test to qualify existing masonry walls:
usefulness of waveform analyses. Proc. 3rd Conference: Non destructive evaluation of civil
structures and materials; Boulder, Colorado, September 1996; pp. 81-95.
2. Berra, M., Binda, L., Anti, L., Fatticcioni, A. (1992) Non destructive evaluation of the efficacy of
masonry strengthening by grouting techniques. Proc. International workshop: Effectiveness of
injection techniques for retrofitting of stone and brick masonry walls in seismic areas; Polytechnic of
Milan, March 1992; pp. 63-70.
3. Binda, L., Modena, C., Baronio, G., Anzani, A. (1998) Tecniche di indagine e di consolidamento per
le murature in pietra, in Ambiente costruito, aprile-giugno, pp. 39-47.
4. Binda, L., Saisi, A., Zanzi, L. (2003) Sonic tomography and flat jack tests as complementary
investigation procedures for the stone pillars of the temple of S.Nicol LArena (Italy), NDT&E
International Journal, 36, pp. 215-227.
5. Bongiovanni, G., Celebi, M., Clemente, P., (1990) The Flaminio obelisk in Rome: vibrational
characteristics as part of preservation efforts, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol.
19, pp.107-118.
6. da Porto ,F. (2000). Indagini sperimentali sullefficacia di tecniche di consolidamento di murature
storiche in pietra. Graduation thesis (in Italian), Tutor Prof. C. Modena, University of Padua.
7. Epperson, G. S., Abrams, D. P. (1989) Non destructive evaluation of masonry buildings, Advanced

60/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Construction Technology Center, Doc. N. 89-26-03, Urbana Illinois, October 1989, 208 pages.
8. Forde, M. C., Birjandi, K. F., Batchelor, A. J. (1985) Fault detection in stone masonry bridges by nondestructive testing, Proc. 2nd International Conference Structural Faults & Repair, Engineering
Technics Press, Edinburgh, pp. 373-379.
9. Loeffelstiel, E. D. (2004) Metodologie non distruttive per la diagnosi delle strutture murarie:
applicazione di prove soniche e confronto con procedure di maggiore invasivit, Graduation thesis (in
Italian), University of Padua, Italy.
10. Modena, C. (1997) Criteria for cautious repair of historic buildings, , Evaluation and Strengthening
of Existing Masonry Structures, L. Binda & C. Modena Ed., RILEM, pp 25-42.
11. Modena, C. (2002) Sistema fortificato di Cittadella. Intervento di consolidamento statico su un tratto
di cinta compreso tra Porta Treviso e Porta Bassano, in Lavori in corso, nuovi progetti a Cittadella,
edited by Associazione Architettando, Stampa Grafiche Antiga, Aprile 2002.
12. Monteforte, N. (1998) Applicazione della tomografia sonica nei problemi di diagnosi strutturale.
Graduation Thesis (in Italian), Tutor C. Modena. University of Padua, 1997-1998.
13. Riva, G., Bettio, C., Modena, C. (1997) The use of sonic wave technique for estimating the efficiency
of masonry consolidation by injection, Proc. 11th International Brick/Block Masonry Conference,
Shangai, China, October 1997, pp. 28-39.
14. Riva, G., Bettio, C., Modena, C. (1998) Valutazioni quantitative di caratteristiche meccaniche di
muratura in pietra esistenti mediante prove non distruttive, Materiali e Strutture, L'ERMA di
Bretschneider Ed., n 1.
15. Rossi, P. P. (1990) Non destructive evaluation of the mechanical characteristics of masonry
structures, in Quaderni dellISMES, n. 278.
16. Schuller, M., Berra, M., Fatticcioni, A., Atkinson, R., Binda, L. (1994) Use of tomography for diagnosis
and control of masonry repairs Proc. 10th International Brick/Block Masonry Conference, Calgary,
Canada, July 1994, pp. 438-447.
17. Valle, S., Zanzi, L., Binda, L., Saisi, A., Lenzi, G. (1998) Tomography for NDT applied to masonry
structures: Sonic and/or EM methods In Arch bridges, A. Sinopoli Editor, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp.
243-252.
18. Valluzzi, M. R., da Porto, F., Casarin, F., Monteforte, N., Modena, C (2009) A contribution to the
characterization of masonry typologies by using sonic waves investigations, Proc. of the NonDestructive Testing in Civil Engineering, July 2009.
19. Valluzzi, M. R, Mazzon, N., Munari, M., Casarin, F., Modena, C. (2009). Effectiveness of injections
evaluated by sonic tests on reduced scale multi-leaf masonry building subjected to seismic actions.
In: Proceedings of 7th International Symposium on Non Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering.
Nantes (Francia), June 30th - July 3rd, 2009.

61/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.6 Radar (echo method) (N6)


Scope of testing
- to detect and localise inhomogeneities (voids, metal or wood inclusion)
- to determine thickness of structures which are only accessible from one side
- to localise detachments of walls with multiple leave stucture (limited)
- to determine the internal structure of complex elements (i.e. pillar)
- to determine the moisture content and its distribution
Principle of test
The method is based on the radiation of very short single sinusoidal cycle electromagnetic impulses (< 1 ns)
generated by a transmitting antenna, which are reflected at interfaces of materials with different dielectric
properties. The reflections are recorded with the receiving antenna by moving both transmitter and receiver
along a profile on the surface of the tested element under test.
Impulse radar can be used on masonries in reflection (Rf), transmission (Tr) or tomographic (Tm) mode
depending on the objective of the investigation. Problems that can be analyzed with radar are listed below
with the indication of the most appropriate acquisition mode:
- evaluation of the masonry thickness (e.g., foundation, underground walls, vaults) (Rf);
- detection of multiple leaves and measurement of the thickness of each leaf (Rf, Tm);
- detection of inclusions (e.g., metal or timber elements) (Rf);
- detection of masonry inhomogeneities (e.g., variation of masonry texture, repair interventions,...) (Rf, Tm);
- detection of detached external leaves (Rf);
- detection of voids or chimney flues (Rf, Tm);
- detection of different materials (e.g., use of different construction materials in plastered walls) (Rf, Tm);
- mapping of crack depth and pattern (Rf);
Figure of test set-up

The radar equipment normally consists of a radar unit,


a shielded antenna box containing both the
transmitter and the receiver elements, a triggering tool
(odometric wheel, hip-chain, ), connection cables
(coaxial or fiber optic cables), batteries.
Test procedure and measurements
The successful application of radar to any of the above listed problems depends on the appropriate
application of the method but there also exist unfavourable conditions where the application for some of these
problems might fail. Thus, the decision whether and how a specific problem can be addressed with radar is
always a critical issue that must be evaluated by a radar expert on the basis of a careful analysis of the local
conditions but also with the guidance of available a-priori information from the designer (see also section 5).
Some of the listed applications are conditioned by the signal penetration (e.g., the evaluation of the masonry
thickness). Penetration is strongly limited by moisture. Thus, it might happen that the backside reflection of a
very thick masonry or a very moist masonry is not received and the application fails.
Other applications are conditioned by the achievable resolution (e.g., the detection of multiple leaves, of
inclusions, of detached external leaves, of cracks). The resolution depends on the antenna frequency and the
material permittivity. Higher frequencies are needed to improve the resolution but penetration is inversely

62/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

affected by frequency so that the depth range of the detectable targets will decrease as we move to higher
frequency antennas.
Some applications are conditioned by the existence of a sufficient permittivity or conductivity contrast between
different materials that is essential to generate a radar return in a reflection experiment or a velocity anomaly
in a tomographic reconstruction (e.g., detection of multiple leaves, of masonry inhomogeneities, of detached
external leaves, of different materials).
The detection of an hidden crack pattern is also conditioned by the prevalent orientation of the cracks. The
most favourable situation is when the cracks are oriented parallel to the investigation surface so that a 3D
reflection experiment can succesfully map the presence, the position and the extension of the cracks. On the
opposite, when the cracks are orthogonal to the investigation surface they become invisible to the radar
unless they are so large (e.g., some millimeters or more) to create a radar diffraction.
Since the radar signal is totally reflected by a metal plate, radar profiles over metal plates covering cavities or
infrastructure boxes in a floor or in a wall are useless. Although the high frequency antennas are normally
shielded, external metal structures like scaffoldings, reinforcement rings or other elements might severely
affect the radar data so that the location of radar profiles should be planned sufficiently far from these
elements.
The radar method is totally non invasive and thus does not present any risk of damage for the building.
Nevertheless, care might be needed when the antenna must be moved on a precious surface decorated with
frescos or with delicate bas-reliefs. For these cases, a good practice consists of protecting the delicate
surface with a cardboard or a plastic sheet.
For application in civil engineering, different antennas emitting at nominal frequencies from 500 MHz to 2.5
GHz are used. The impulses/waves are radiated by an antenna (transmitter) which is generally very close
(few cm) to or in contact with the structure under investigation and which is moved along the surface. The
antenna can either be moved manually recording the traces with a survey wheel or using an automated
scanning system, which assures an enhanced lateral resolution and reproducibility. The transmitting impulses
are reflected at interfaces of materials with different dielectric properties, i.e. at surfaces, rebars, tendon ducts,
voids, interfaces of multi-layers and at the backside of the structure under investigation. The reflected
impulses are detected by a second antenna (receiver), which is also positioned on the same surface. In most
of the cases both antennas are close to each other, in the same housing (bistatic antenna).
The echoes are processed in order to extract signals from clutter and the travel time is restituted as distance
of the transmitter from the target, having fixed the propagation velocity. Due to the movement of the antenna,
concentred targets are viewed as hyperboles and due to the radiation pattern all the targets in a volume are
represented in a single section. These two characteristics make necessary to explore a surface along an
hortogonal grid.
It is also possible to work with arrays of multiple antennas, also at different frequencies, even in bistatic
configuration, with transmission at a frequency and reception at another, with advantages in terms of
resolution and false alarm/detection probability. Also the travel time and thus the propagation velocity
depends on the dielectric properties, i.e. the travel times (and attenuation) increase with increasingmoisture
content of the same structure. Therefore, radar can also be used for moisture detection and quantification.
Other interesting information can be extracted from the analysis of the velocities when it is possible to perform
speed calibration on masonry.
Test results

Standard representation of a 2D radar section. Data Parallel sections of unmigrated data. 3D investigation on the
collected on a stone wall of a castle affected by several floor of a church. A cavity is intersected by the four sections on
large cracks that reflect the radar wave.
the left.

63/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Crossing sections of migrated data. 3D investigation over a


porch of a XIV century palace. The shape of the vault and two
tie rods are clearly observed.

Vertical profile on a column covered with a special plaster


to simulate a marble column. The radar section is rotated
and superimposed on the column. Diffractions from metal
elements are very clear and demonstrate that the column
actually consists of reinforced concrete.

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


The interpretation of the results is a fundamental and critical step. In many cases, radar measurements alone
cannot resolve all the ambiguities and some additional information or calibrations (from complementary
investigations, from local invasive measurement, from a priori knowledge of the building, from expertise on
construction techniques, etc.) is required.
Inclusions (e.g., beams, tie-rods, voids, chimney flues,..) can be detected and geometrically described quite
accurately (within the resolution limits discussed in section 5) but the determination of the nature and the
material can be only inferred from assumptions or other information or directly checked with a local invasive
test.
Leaves generally appear as weak reflecting horizons. Leave detachments can be suspected on the basis of
more intense reflections but a local calibration with an invasive test or with a complementary method is
actually needed to validate the interpretation.
Cracks generally appear as irregular and discontinous reflections/diffractions but can be confused with
reflections and diffractions from stones in very irregular masonries. This is the reason why non-visible cracks
can be seldom distinguished from other voids. Complementary methods could help to reduce the ambiguity.
Lateral variations of masonry type or materials can be detected observing lateral variations in radar
parameters such as velocity or penetration. Similarly, internal variation of masonry type or materials can be
detected from tomographic maps (velocity and/or attenuation). However, the interpretation in terms of what is
actually changing (e.g., the masonry type or the construction material or the moisture level .) is a critical
issue that needs complementary information/calibration.
More specifically, variations in moisture levels can be indicated by a decrease of radar velocity and a
simultaneous decrease of radar penetration. Thus, a combined analysis of velocity and attenuation
measurements on reflection or transmission or tomographic experiments is important to validate the
interpretation. For a quantitative calibration, local measurements of moisture level with other methods are
needed. Rough quantitative calibrations can be also obtained on the basis of available statistical data
collected on similar masonry typologies.
As a result, for a correct interpretation a team of experts is needed including the radar experts involved in the
specific acquisitions and data processing, the experts of the specific building, the structural engineer, the
experts of the other complementary techniques that can be compared with radar results, etc..
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

64/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Code/recommendation references
DGZfP, Merkblatt ber das Radarverfahren zur Zerstrungsfreien Prfung im Bauwesen (B10), Deutsche
Gesellschaft fr Zerstrungsfreie Prfung e.V., Berlin (2001)
ONSITEFORMASONRY project, Deliverable D11.3 Page 37, 2004
ASTM D 4748 98, Standard Test Method for Determining the Thickness of Bound Pavements Layers Using
Short-Pulse Radar , ASTM International
The concrete Society: Guidance on Radar testing of Concrete Structures
Slough: Concrete Society Technical report 48 (1997) 88 p.
RILEM Committee TC127MS-D.3: Radar Investigation of masonry
RILEM Committee MDT/99/06: Determination of moisture content and distribution in masonry with radar
References
1. Daniels, D.: Surface-Penetrating Radar, London: The Institution of Electrical Engineers, 1996.
2. Binda, L., Colla, C., Forde, M.C. (1994) Identification of moisture capillarity in masonry using digital
impulse radar, J. Construction & Building Materials, 1994, 8 N.2, 101-107.
3. Binda, L., Saisi, A., Zanzi, L., 2003a, Sonic tomography and flat jack tests as complementary
investigation procedures for the stone pillars of the temple of S.Nicolo LArena (Italy), NDT&E
International Journal, 36, 215-227.
4. Binda, L., Zanzi, L., Lualdi, M., Condoleo, P., 2003b, Complementarity of ND techniques in the
diagnosis of damaged historic structures, Proceedings of the Int. Conf. on Structural Faults and
Repair 2003, July 1-3, London, pp.9.
5. Binda, L., Lualdi, M., Saisi, A., Zanzi, L., Gianinetto, M., Roche, G., 2003c, NDT applied to the
diagnosis of historic buildings: a case history, Proceedings of the Int. Conf. on Structural Faults and
Repair 2003, July 1-3, London, pp.10.
6. Binda, L., Cantini, L., Fernandes, F., Saisi, A., Tedeschi, C., Zanzi, L., 2004, Diagnostic investigation
on the historical masonry structures of a Castle by the complementary use of non destructive
techniques, Proceedings 13th International Brick and Block Masonry Conference, July 4-7,
Amsterdam, pp.10.
7. Colla, C., Forde, M.C., McCann, D.M., & Das, P.C. (1995) Investigation of masonry arch bridges using
non-contacting NDT, Proc. 6th Int. Conf. Structural Faults & Repair-95, London, July 1995, Vol. I,
Engineering Technics Press, 235-239.
8. Colla, C., Das, P.C., McCann, D.M., Forde, M.C. (1995) Investigation of stone masonry bridges using
sonics, electromagnetics & impulse radar, Proc. Int. Symp. Non-Destructive Testing in Civil
Engineering (NDT-CE), BAM, Berlin, Germany, September 1995, Vol I, 629- 636.
9. Colla, C., Forde, M.C., Das, P.C., McCann, D.M.: Radar imaging in composite masonry structures,
Proc. 7th Int. Conf. Structural Faults & Repair-95, Edinburgh, July 8-10, 1997, Vol. 3, Engineering
Technics Press, 493-504.
10. Colla, C., Forde, M.C., Das, P.C., McCann, D.M., Batchelor, A.J.: Radar tomography of masonry arch
bridges, Proc. 7th Int. Conf. Structural Faults & Repair-95, Edinburgh, July 8-10, 1997, Vol. 1,
Engineering Technics Press, 143-151.
11. Daniels, D.: Surface-Penetrating Radar, London: The Institution of Electrical Engineers, 1996.
12. Lualdi, M., Zanzi, L., 2002, GPR investigations to reconstruct the geometry of the wooden structures
in historical buildings, Proceedings 9th Int. Conf. on Ground Penetrating Radar GPR2002, April 29 May 2, Santa Barbara (CA), USA, 63-67.
13. Lualdi, M., Zanzi, L., Binda, L., 2003, Acquisition and processing requirements for high quality 3D
reconstructions from GPR investigations, Proceedings of the International Symposium Non
Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering NDT-CE 2003, September 16-19, Berlin, pp.13.
14. Maierhofer, C. and J. Wstmann: Investigation of dielectric properties of brick materials as a function
of moisture and salt content using a microwave impulse technique at very high frequencies, in:
NDT&E International, Vol.31 (1998a), 259-263.
15. Maierhofer, C., Leipold, S., Wiggenhauser, H.: Investigation of the influence of moisture and salt
content on the dielectric properties of brick materials using radar, Proc. 7th International Conference
on Ground Penetrating Radar, May 27-30, 1998b, Lawrence, Kansas, USA, Vol.2, 477-484.
16. Maierhofer, C., Leipold, S., Schaurich, D., Binda, L., Saisi, A.: Determination of the moisture
distribution in the outside walls of the S.Maria Rossa using radar, Proc. 7th International Conference
on Ground Penetrating Radar, May 27-30, 1998c, Lawrence, Kansas, USA,
17. Vol.2, 509-514.
18. Maierhofer, C., Wstmann, J., Schaurich, D. and M. Krause: Radar Investigation of Historical
Structures, in: Uomoto, T. (Ed.); Seiken Symposium No. 26, "Non-Destructive Testing in Civil

65/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

19.
20.
21.
22.
23.

24.

66/114

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Engineering 2000" in Tokyo, Japan, 25.-27. April 2000, Amsterdam-Lausanne-New York- OxfordShannon-Singapore-Tokyo: Elsevier 2000, pp. 529-537
Maierhofer, C.: Radar investigation of masonry structures, NDT&E International 34 (2001) 9, pp. 139147
The Concrete Society: Guidance on Radar Testing of Concrete Structures, Slough: Concrete Society
Technical Report 48 (1997) 88 p.
Valle, S., Zanzi, L., 1998, Traveltime radar tomography for NDT on masonry and concrete structures,
European Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, Vol.2, N.3, 229-246.
Valle, S., Zanzi, L., Rocca, F., 1999, Radar tomography for NDT: comparison of techniques, Journal
of Applied Geophysics, 41, 259-269.
Valle S., Zanzi, L., Sgheiz, M., Lenzi, G., Friborg, J., 2000, Ground Penetrating Radar antennas:
theoretical and experimental directivity functions, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote
Sensing, Vol.39, N.4, 749-759.
Zanzi, L., Lualdi, M., Saisi, A., 2003, Sonic and radar tomography on masonry structures,
Proceedings RILEM 177-MDT Workshop on On-Site Control and Non-Destructive Evaluation of
Masonry Structures, November 12-14, 2001, Mantova, 239-250.

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.7 Ultrasonics (echo and through transmission) (N7)


Scope of testing
Determination of the thickness of walls and single leaves
Location of voids having sizes in the order of the wavelength of the ultrasonic waves (20 to 100 mm)
depending on frequency of the emitted pulses
Detection of inclusions with different ultrasonic velocities (natural stone, steel, wood)
Characterisation of cracks (limited)
Correlation of ultrasonic velocity to compressive strength (limited)
Principle of test
The method is based on the transmission and/or reflection of ultrasonic waves generated by an ultrasonic
transducer or transducer array. Longitudinal as well as transversal waves can be generated. The velocity of
propagation depends on mechanical parameters of the structure, the reflection on the contrast of the acoustic
impedances at the interface.
The ultrasonic through transmission method is applied for measuring the transit time of ultrasonic pulses in
masonry structures. This transit time and the calculated ultrasonic velocity results in basic information about
the integral homogeneity and integrity of the building element under investigation. The velocity is influenced
by the composition of the masonry as well as by inhomogeneities, voids and deteriorated areas. By measuring
the distribution of the velocity such areas can be localized and classified. There are several possibilities of
evaluating through transmission experiments. The simplest one is measuring the direct transit time with
ultrasonic transducers positioned directly opposite to another. Other methods are adapted from the cross hole
sonic logging method, where two transducers are positioned step by step along lines at both sides of the
building element. From this, the velocity distribution in the wall can be roughly deduced. These methods are
restricted for the application of coplanar surfaces.
The principle of the ultrasonic echo technique with separated transmitter and receiver is based on the
emission and reflection of impulses generated by a transducer. Inner voids in a specimen can be regarded as
an interface between two different materials (brick/air) for the propagation of sound and lead to total
reflectance of the ultrasound waves. The propagation time of the reflection echo is proportional to the depth of
the reflector (assuming a constant velocity of propagation). For several test problems it is advantageous to
use transducer arrays and/or to combine it with a 3D reconstruction calculation (3D-SAFT, Synthetic Aperture
Focusing Technique).
For tomographic application the transit time has to be measured in different directions relative to the surface.
The inner structure of the building element will influence this transit time. In order to measure the transit time
most accurately, the first arriving point has to be detected.
Figure of test set-up

67/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Test procedure and measurements


The following environmental and material parameters have to be known and noted during the measurement
campaign:
Type of material (sandstone, brick etc.), type of mortar
In case of brickwork: how was the grouting of the bricks
Geometrical data of the investigated area, exact location of the measuring area in relation to well defined
points of origin
Thickness of the objects (walls)
Distance of transmitter and receiver locations (increment)
Roughness of the surface
Surface condition, is it possible to use coupling.
The knowledge of the following material parameters is helpful, but not urgently required (only for quantitative
analysis):
Velocity of propagation of acoustical waves
Moisture content of the test specimen
The researching surface must be without plaster to use for ultrasonic measurement method.
For evaluation of the transit time the onset of the ultrasonic pulse has to be measured as accurately as
possible (time picking). This can be done manually or with an automated time picking routine. There are two
possibilities: measuring the first arrival or the first apparent maximum of the signal. The achieved transit times
of each travel path will be reconstructed by using tomographic algorithms. The result is a distribution of
ultrasonic velocity inside of the investigated cross section.
The following steps describe the procedure to achieve a tomographic result:
Preliminary considerations, simulation (What kind of result is possible to gain for an ideal case)
11
Pre-investigation of data sets to prove the data reliability
First tomographic calculation with homogeneous starting model and different meshes
Selection of the most capable mesh (suitable element size)
11
Checking of the stability of the tomographic calculation (residuals / artefacts)
12
Second tomographic calculation using data subsets
Choice of the most reliable starting model
Third tomographic calculation with adapted starting model.
Ultrasonic echo measurements consist of a single point measurement or the combination of several point
measurements to lines or surface series. Generally, in civil engineering from a single point measurement only
little information can be read, because several wave types are emitted in different directions. When a reflector
is indicated after a certain transit time, a localisation of the reflector generally is not possible. The only results
to be deduced from single point measurements under optimum conditions are the thickness of a building
element or the depth of a layer, when it is known, that the building element has coplanar surfaces.
Generally many ultrasonic point measurements are registered stepwise, each step represents the ultrasonic
intensity vs. time at the measured point (A-scan). These points usually are measured in lines; sometimes
several lines are combined to a surface area. There are two possibilities of visualising the data: B-scans and
C-scans (see figure). The B-scan represents the depth distribution of the reflected and backscattered
ultrasonic waves versus a linear axis on the surface. In this way the depth profile of the reflection is imaged.
(Such diagrams correspond to radargrams in the radar measuring technique.)
The results of an acoustical experiment indicate areas
of different acoustic velocities as well as acoustic
reflectors. The interpretation, whether the reflection is
related to a back wall, an interface, a joint, an in
homogeneity or a construction element, respectively,
cannot be directly deduced from the results. The
translation of the results into a statement about the
object of interest has to be verified through additional
MDT or DT technique.

Sketch for the orientation of sections and projections for


visualizing the ultrasonic echo results (B-scan, C-scan)

68/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Test results
Test results are presented in either in transit time measurement for singular signal or in tomographic mode.

Transit time measurement of a brick wall in


through transmission (thickness: 0.5 m,
centre frequency of transducers 25 kHz)

Left: Plan view with the measuring line. Middle: Cross section. Right:
Tomographic reconstruction, measured with an ultrasonic frequency of 25
kHz

Structural investigation of an outside stone wall: Left: outside trace, propagation velocity 3108 m/s, middle: inside trace,
propagation velocity 3304 m/s, right: Cross section of the thickness of the inner filling of the wall

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


The limits of the application of ultrasonic methods (through transmission and echo measurement) depend on
the testing problem, the object under investigation und the equipment applied. For a successful measurement
campaign the surfaces of the object under investigation have to be accessible and the roughness of the
surface should not be larger than 3 to 5 mm. The smother the surfaces, the better ultrasonic waves can
penetrate into the object.
In most cases plaster layers on masonry hinder ultrasonic experiments. Masonry constructed from several
layers leads to high attenuation of the ultrasonic waves. This is much more important for echo measurements
than for through transmission experiments. But the number of layers, which can be scanned by sound, cannot
be generalised. It depends mainly on the way, whether the masonry has continues joints or what is the whole
amount of discontinuous joints with how many trapped air in the wall. As a general rule it can be stated, that
the ultrasonic waves will not pass through air inclusions, which have a dimension of several wavelengths. The
wavelength is typically 150 mm to 30 mm (for f = 20 kHz to 100 kHz). This does not depend on the thickness
of the air inclusion: even a delaminations or an air layer of several micrometers can stop the ultrasound
propagation (total reflectance). This is important also for two leaf masonry.
For echo measurement, in most cases the testing area is limited to the top layer.
The detectability of the inhomogeneities depends mainly on two characteristic measurement categories. For
echo experiments, objects can be detected, which have a diameter of half of the ultrasonic wavelength or
even smaller. For through transmission measurements the inhomogeneity in some cases extends the sound
path. This increases the transit time compared to the straight sound path and has to result in at least 2 to 4
microseconds. To give a practical example it means, that the diameter of an inhomogeneity which can be
detected has to measure of about 100 mm for a wall thickness of about 500 mm.
The geometric resolution of the ultrasonic methods can be estimated by the half of the wavelength of the
ultrasonic waves in the masonry.
The wavelength determined by the formula = c / f with the frequency f and the velocity c. With a used
frequency f = 25 kHz and a velocity of c = 3200 m/s, the wavelength is = 128 mm. The geometric resolution,
equivalent to the half wavelength is 64 mm.

69/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Reliability of data - High


Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
Merkblatt fr Ultraschall-Impuls-Verfahren zur Zerstrungsfreien Prfung mineralischer Baustoffe und Bauteile
(B4), Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Zerstrungsfreie Prfung e.V., Berlin (1999)
ASTM C 597 83 (91) Standard test method for pulse velocity through concrete
DIN EN 13296 Bestimmung der Ultraschallgeschwindigkeit (1998)
References
1. Olson, Larry D., Hollema, David A. (2003): Crosshole Sonic Logging and Velocity Tomography
Imaging of Drilled Shaft Foundation, International Symposium, Non- Destructive Testing in Civil
Energeering (NDT- CE 2003)
2. Binda, L., Saisi, A. and Tiraboschi, C. (2001): Application of sonic tests to the diagnosis of damaged
and repaired structures, NDT&E International 34, pp.123- 138
3. Wstenberg., H., Erhard, A., Austel, W., Klanke, H. P. (1988): Ultrasonic echo tomography. A new
procedure for defect presentation. Ultraschall- Echo- Tomographie, ein neues Verfahren fr die
Darstellung von Fehlern. Konferenz- Einzelbericht: Pressure Vessel Technology. Sixth International
Conference page 1481 1492 (12 pages, 14 figures, 2 tables, 9 sources), Oxford: Pergamon Press
4. Schickert, M. (1996): The Use of Ultrasonic A-Scan and B-Scan and SAFT Techniques for Testing
Concrete Elements, Second International Conference on Nondestructive Testing of Concrete in the
Infrastructure, Nashville, Tennessee, Bethel, Connecticut: Society for Experimental Mechanics, pp.
135-142
5. Kroggel, O., Jahnson, R. and M. Ratmann (1995): Novel Ultrasound System to Detect Voids Ducts in
Posttensioned Bridges, Forde, M. C. (Ed.); Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on
Structural Faults and Repair, London, UK, Vol.1, pp. 203-208, Engineering Technics Press
6. Krause, M., Mller, W. and H. Wiggenhauser (1997): Ultrasonic Inspection of Tendon Ducts in
Concrete Slabs using 3D-SAFT, Acoustical Imaging Vol. 23 pp. 433-439
7. Schickert, M., Krause, M. and W. Mller (2003): Ultrasonic Imaging of Concrete Elements Using
Reconstruction by Synthetic Aperture Focusing Technique, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering
(JMCE), ASCE Vol. 15- 3, pp. 235-246
8. Krause, M., Mielentz, F., Milmann, B., Streicher, D., Mller, W. (2003): Ultrasonic imaging of concrete
elements: State of the art using 2D synthetic aperture, DGZfP (Ed.); International Symposium NonDestructive Testing in Civil Engineering (NDT-CE) in Berlin, Germany, September 16-19, Proceedings
on BB 85-CD, V51, Berlin
9. Kurz, J.H. (2002/03): Advances in automatic acoustic emission analysis. IWB Jahresbericht/Activities
10. Brauchler, R., Liedl, R., Dietrich, P. (2003):A travel time based hydraulic tomographic approach.
Water Resour. Res., 39(12), 1370-1380
11. Tronicke, J., Dietrich, P., Appel, E. (2002): Quality improvement of crosshole georadar tomography:
pre- and post-investigation data analysis strategies. European Journal of Environmental and
Engineering Geophysics, 7, 59-73
12. Becht, A., Tronicke, J., Appel, E., Dietrich, P.: Invesion strategy in crosshole radar tomography using
information of data subsets
13. Jackson, M., J., Tweeton, D., R.: MIGRATOM Geophysical Tomography Using Wavefront Migration
and Fuzzy Constraints, United States department of the interior, bureau of mines, report of
investigation 9497
14. Jackson, M., J., Tweeton, D., R.: MIGRATOM Geophysical Tomography Using Wavefront Migration
and Fuzzy Constraints, United States department of the interior, bureau of mines, report of
investigation 9497
15. Schickert, M., Krause, M. and W. Mller (2003): Ultrasonic Imaging of Concrete Elements Using
Reconstruction by Synthetic Aperture Focusing Technique. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering
(JMCE), ASCE Vol. 15 -3, pp. 235-246

70/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.8 Hardness test (N8)


Scope of testing
Determing hardness of testing material
Principle of test
The rebound of an elastic mass depends on the hardness of the surface against which its mass strikes. When
the plunger of the rebound hammer is pressed against the surface of tested material (unit or mortar), the
Spring-controlled mass rebounds and the extent of such a rebound depends upon the surface hardness of
tested surface. The surface hardness and therefore the rebound is taken to be related to the compressive
strength of the material. The rebound value is read from a graduated scale and is designated as the rebound
number or rebound index. The compressive strength can be read directly from the graph provided on the body
of the hammer. Pendulum hammer works on the same princip but instead of spring system - using the gravity
of the mass.
Figure of test set-up

Rebound (Schmidt) hammer


Pendulum hammer
Test procedure and measurements
The rebound reading on the indicator scale has been calibrated by the manufacturer of the rebound hammer
for horizontal impact, that is, on a vertical surface, to indicate the compressive strength. When used in any
other position, appropriate correction as given by the manufacturer is to be taken into account.
For the proper evaluation of the results sufficient number of repetition should be provided. Results are
interpreted regarding the obtained average index and coefficient of variation of the results.
For some materials (concrete), depending from the obtained COV, sufficient number of cored samples should
be tested under compression in laboratory, so that compressive strength obtained by rebound hammer should
be verified.
Before the application cover material (plaster, paint, loose particle etc) should be removed from the surface
prior testing.
Test results
Compressive strength of tested material (if the device is calibrated for this type of material). Otherwise,
qualitative result of the state of built material.
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Code/recommendation references
References
2.

71/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.9 Transducer Movement Sensing (N9)


There is a non-exhaustive list of measurable entities and corresponding available monitoring
techniques and instrument of interest for historical masonry structures. In the following table some
of them are presented in dependence of measurable entity, symptom/feature and possible
assessment technique.
Symptom or feature
Detection of damage or structural anomalies, repair intervention control (e.g. tensile stress control in steel
bars or FRPs strips/bars),
Measurable entitiy
Strain
Assessment Technique
Strain-gages (electrical resistance, fiber optic, vibrating wire),
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Symptom or feature
Damage detection (cracks), repair intervention control, foundation settlements
Measurable entitiy
Displacement
Assessment Technique
Linear Variable Differential Transformers (LVDT), cable extension transducers, linear potentiometers, laser
measurement sensors, mechanical rod extensometers (single or multiple base),
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Symptom or feature
Out-of-plumb detection (e.g. high rise masonry towers), indirect measurement of deflection, displacements,
settlements,
Measurable entitiy
Tilt measurements
Assessment Technique
Direct/inverse pendulum, laser measurement sensors + digital image acquisition systems, tiltmeter (vibrating
wire, electrolytic, ), inertial based inclinometers,
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

72/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Symptom or feature
Vibrations induced damage, seismic structural response
Measurable entitiy
Acceleration
Assessment Technique
Acceleration transducers (piezoelectric, capacitive, servo force balance),
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Contact to surface required with coupling agent
Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Reliability of data - High


Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Symptom or feature
Crack propagation,
Measurable entitiy
Acoustic emission or attenuation
Assessment Technique
Acoustic emission monitoring systems based on pressure sensors, piezoelectric sensors,
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Symptom or feature
Changes in the load pattern (e.g. tensile force in tie-beams, compressive force in the foundation piles) due
to several reasons (settlements, viscous effects, tilting.),
Measurable entitiy
Force
Assessment Technique
Load cells (vibrating wire, electrical resistance strain gages), strain gages
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

73/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Symptom or feature
Changes in the stress pattern (e.g. stress in masonry elements) due to several reasons (settlements, tilting),
Measurable entitiy
Pressure
Assessment Technique
Pressurized jacks connected to pressure sensors (piezorestitive pressure sensors, electrical resistance straingages, )
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Contact to surface required with coupling agent
Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Reliability of data - High


Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Symptom or feature
Water table level, soil-structure interaction
Measurable entitiy
Water level
Assessment Technique
Piezometers (vibrating wire),
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

74/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.10 Coring and sampling (including local in depth inspection) (M1)


Scope of testing
Mortar composition, type, compressive strength
Stone/Brick unit modulus of elasticity, compressive, tensile strength
Masonry compressive, splitting tensile strength
Principle of test
The most important parameter in the evaluation of the masonry quality is the cross section morphology. A
regular surface texture can hide a weak masonry structure as often happens in rubble masonry where the
external leaf is often regular. Although the results of coring method for the evaluation of the morphology of the
tested masonry may represent local state of the morphology of the masonry, extracted specimens of stone
and mortar can be precious for the further laboratory testing and evaluation of their mechanical properties and
compositions.
Figure of test set-up

Pos Va - Sampled stone specimens

Sampling brick units


Carthusian Monastery at ie (Slovenia) Positions of coring

Test procedure and measurements


The technique of sampling is very important, since samples must be as undamaged as possible in order to be
representative of the material in situ.
Sampling of bricks, stones and mortars: the method of sampling depends on the characteristics of the
materials in situ. Some simple principles have to be applied:
sampling must be carried out respecting the existing building
the quantity of sampled material must be consistent with the scope and the requirements of the test
procedures;
if determination of the type and the extent of damage is involved, sampling must be carried out on
different portions of the building in order to study all the types of degradation;
sampling has to be carried out dry in those portions of the building not subjected to the action of rain
or by a previous repair, especially when mortar binder and aggregate characteristics are needed;
the number of samples should be quite high, in order to represent statistically the situation of the
existing masonry.
At present there are no standardised tests to define the composition and the chemical-physical and
mechanical characteristics of mortars sampled from an existing building. Chemical and mineralogicalpetrography analyses are useful to determine: the type of binder and of aggregate, the binder/aggregate ratio,
the extent of carbonation, the presence of chemical reaction, which produced new formations (pozzolanic
reactions, binder-aggregate reactions, alkali-aggregate reactions). The grain size distribution of the

75/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

aggregates can also be measured by separating the binder from the aggregates through chemical or thermal
treatments. The above-mentioned tests allow the determination of the composition of the existing mortars and
permit the reproduction of mortars and grouts for repairing the masonry.
When masonry is damaged by aggressive agents the decay is never uniform; if maintenance is needed and
only some bricks or stones or decorations are affected by the damage, the best remedy is frequently the
substitution of the most decayed elements. In this case, laboratory tests can give useful information for the
choice of the appropriate material for substitution. When substitution is not possible, a surface treatment may
be required. The tests have to be carried out on both deteriorated existing bricks (or stones) and on
undamaged as well. The following test are suggested: mechanical compressive and splitting tests, physical
tests to study the porosity of the material, chemical tests, optical and mineralogical analysis and durability
tests.
Test results
Test results may differ depending from the samples and purpose of investigation. For the purpose of
PERPETUATE methodology most important results are revealed morphology of walls, mechanical
properties of masonry and stone/brick units (elastic modulus, compressive and tensile strength, density) and
mortar (composition, type, compressive strength from extracted tablets from mortar joints).

Stone sample from coring position Va

Masonry sample from coring position Vb

Mortar tablet sample

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

Code/recommendation references
References
10.

76/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.11 Hole Drilling Method (M2)


Scope of testing
Estimation of the stress field in the surface of stone masonry elements.
Principle of test
The principal stresses are obtained from the effective strains corresponding to the stresses released by
drilling a hole in the stone surface. Strains are recorded by three electrical resistance strain gages placed in a
circumference around the hole.
Figure of test set-up

Test procedure and measurements


A three strain gage scheme is placed in the selected point and strains are recorded during a certain period of
time before drilling, in order to obtain a good zero reference reading. After drilling a hole at the geometric
centre of the strain gages circumference, strains are measured again. The effective strains corresponding to
the stresses released by drilling are the difference between the two strain readings (after and before drilling).
Principal stresses are obtained, from the effective strains i corresponding to the stresses released by drilling,
and using two constants A and B, which depend on the material mechanical characteristics and on the
geometry of the test.
A and B are determined experimentally using a calibration test in which a prismatic block sample is subjected
to a uniform uni-axial compression stress. Tests are repeated twice, a first one before drilling a hole and the
second one after drilling it.
Test results

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


The method is a generalization of the test regulated by ASTM E 837-95 for steel structures. This method can
be applied essentially in regular masonries, provided that:
the three gauges are placed in the same stone block or ashlar
the diameters of the strain gauge circle (D) and of the drilled hole (d) as well as the depth of the latter are
0.3<d/D<0.5 and the depth of the hole should be at least 0.4D.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
ASTM E 837-95, Standard test method for determining residual stresses by the Hole-drilling strain gage
method.
ASTM E 1237-93 (2003), Standard guide for installing bonded resistance strain gages.
References
1.

77/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.12 Optical and Digital Endoscopy/Boroscopy (M3)


Scope of testing
Determination of morphology of walls
Location of voids
Location of deteriorated areas
Quantification of cracks
Principle of test
Endoscopy means looking inside and typically refers to looking inside the rigid body using an endoscope, an
instrument used to examine the interior of drilled hole or cavity of the rigid body.
Figure of test set-up

Endoscopy
Videoboroscopy
Drilling the hole of 10 cm diameter
Test procedure and measurements
This method involves the drilling of a small-diameter hole to reveal the interior of a structure. Depending from
the type of used endoscope or videoscope, the diameter of the hole could vary from 10 mm upward. The
examination can be recorded on videotape or photographically. it can reveal: morphological variations in the
masonry, the thickness of mortar layers and their state of conservation, the possible presence and shape of
cracks and internal cavities. If repeated in different sections of a structure, these examinations can also
provide information on the homogeneity of the masonry.
In the case of videoboroskoping, survey may be carried out with two different cameras:
a fix light model that can be managed by a stiff cable for the holes
a head-moving model that can be managed by a stiff cable for remarkable voids
Test results
Results of testing represent revealed morphology of masonry, position of layers, voids etc.

1 /1
25

1/2

1 /3

12

10

1/4
18

1/5

1 /6

14

1 /7 1 /8
15

17

158 cm

Cored sample of masonry

Location of voids and layers

Revealed morphology

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Results represent local state of masonry.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

Code/recommendation references
References

78/114

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.13 PNT-G method (M4)


Scope of testing
In-situ surface stregth of either pointing or fully bed mortar
Absolute values of mortar strength, provided a suitable calibration data-base is available.
Principle of test
In-situ method of testing or evaluating the performance of hydraulic cement mortars either (1) pointing mortar
(where between 100% and 25% of the depth will be sampled depending on the thickness of the pointing layer
or (2) full bed mortar (where only the surface layer (~5% of the depth) will be sampled. The method is indirect
as what is measured is the energy consumption to cause the abrasion / attrition of a set depth of mortar by a
rotating drill and this is correlated with other properties such as cube strength by means of empirical
calibration data.
Figure of test set-up
This instrument is based on a standard 9.6 volt battery-operated electric drill modified to give an alarm when a
set depth has been reached. A 4mm diameter drill is used. It has a convenient digital energy consumption
integrator which can screen out the idling (free running) energy consumption of the drill.
The basic principle is the measurement of the integral
energy consumed in drilling a set depth (5mm) into a
mortar layer using a normal commercially available
4mm, diameter carborundum-tipped masonry bit. This
varies with the hardness and strength of the mortar,
the sharpness of the bit and probably other factors
such as the moisture content, sand (aggregate) type
and mortar formulation. This principle allows direct
use for comparative tests between areas with differing
mortar specification and for estimates of strength if
relevant calibration data is available. The method will
be unreliable for mortars containing large proportions
of relatively coarse sand particles > 1mm diameter,
especially if the sand particles are of a very hard
material, (eg. flint aggregate) because of aggregate
interlock.
Test procedure and measurements
Selection of test area: Preferably measurements are performed mortar beds within areas or panels ranging
from 1x1 m up to 1x2 m but smaller areas may be used where appropriate for specific investigations. A clear
depth of 5mm is required for the standard determination. The strength at different depths can be tested by
drilling oversize access holes and then carrying out the standard procedure but this is likely to be impractical
without specially adapted test devices.
Joint width: The standard apparatus uses 4mm diameter bits. These clearly need a minimum joint thickness in
excess of the drill diameter. To avoid mechanical interaction between the drill and the masonry unit materials
the hole should be centred in the joint and have a clearance of more than twice the maximum common
particle size of the sand. Thus for a sand with a fair proportion of 1mm diameter particles, the joint width
should be 8mm or greater. (Note: 3mm diameter bits are now available and could be used in narrower joints
but no calibration data is available to date)
Specimen number: A minimum of ten replicate measurements, distributed randomly over the test area, is
recommended for each determination. If greater precision is required or the mortar is highly variable then
greater numbers may be necessary.
Condition of test area: Ideally measurements shall be made on air dry masonry. For the purposes of field test
this is defined as masonry which has not been wetted in the past 24 hours and which gives visually the
impression of being dry (ie has some suction). Pore moisture or free water is likely to have a significant effect
on the measurement and thus the moisture content should be measured in critical cases eg. using the drilling
technique RILEM MS-D.10.
Test results
Where the data is used to indicate/monitor quality variation, to follow changes due to hardening or cyclic

79/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

actions in durability testing it is sufficient to calculate the mean of the ten (or more) measurements. If absolute
indications of equivalent strength properties such as cube strength, flexural strength or tensile strength are
required the data must be transformed using a suitable calibration curve. Previous calibration trials indicate
that the relationship between drilling energy and strength properties is not linear thus each individual
measurement must be transformed before the mean is calculated. A calibration for cube strength is supplied
with the commercial system but other parameters would require further data.
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


It should be understood that the use of the test on weathered full-bed mortars may give only data about the
weathered layer and hence a false indication of the overall condition of the full bed. For this reason, the test is
not recommended for very old mortars. Tests on weathered pointing mortars can give reasonable data about
the overall quality if a significant proportion of the full thickness is sampled. Thus on building sites the method
has application both for quality control purposes and as a means for trouble shooting recently placed mortar.
In the laboratory it is useful for control of hardness development during curing and hardening, or as a
monitoring/control parameter for other tests such as acid rain and freeze-thaw tests. The method is not
suitable for mortar beds with a thickness less than around twice the diameter of the drill bit.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
1. RILEM MS-D.10: Measurement of moisture content by drilling, Materials and Structures, V30, pp
323-328, 1997.
References
1. F.Chagneau and M.Levasseur, Control des materiaux de construction par Dynamostratigraphie,
Materiaux et Constructions, 22, p231, 1989
2. de Vekey,R.C., In-situ tests for masonry, Proc. 9th Intl. Brick and block Mas. Conf., V1, p621-627,
1991
3. N Gucci, R Barsotti, Determination in-situ of mortar load capacity by a drilling technique Proc. 10th
IBMaC, page 1315-1324, Calgary, 1994.
4. N Gucci, M.Sassu, P.P.Rossi, A.Pulcini, Proc.STREMA 95, vol2, page , Chania, 1995
5. de Vekey,R.C. and Mauro Sassu, Comparison of non-destructive in-situ mechanical tests on masonry
mortars: The PNT-G method and the Helix method, Proc. 11th IBMAC, Shanghai, V.1, p376 - 384,
1997.
6. PNT-G Instructions manual

80/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.14 Single Flat Jack Test (M5)


Scope of testing
This recommendation specifies a method of determining the local compressive stress levels in built masonry
by monitoring the local state of strain.
Def.: The flat jack is a steel pad which is to be inflated with oil until the slot is tied positively, i.e. the original
situation is restored, the relative strength can be reconstructed.
Principle of test
The determination of the state of stress is based on the stress relaxation caused by a cut perpendicular to the
wall surface; the stress release is caused by a partial closing of the cut slot, i.e. the distance between the
edges of the slot after the cutting is lower than before. A thin flat-jack is placed inside the slot and the
pressure is gradually increased to restore the distance measured before the cut.
Figure of test set-up

Test procedure and measurements


1. Chose a representative piece of masonry then glue the metal reference points either side of the selected
cut line and equidistant from it. Four pairs of points are recommended. The recommended minimum gauge
length L shall be 0.3 times the length A, where A is the length of the jack as shown in fig. above. The
recommended maximum gauge length L shall be the length A of the flat jack. The first and last gages shall
be located not less than 1/8 of dimension A inward toward the centre of the slot from each end .
2. When the glue has set, a set of initial reference measurements are taken with the removable strain gauge.
3. The cut is then made taking care to disturb the surrounding masonry as little as possible.
4. After cutting and cleaning, a second set of measurements are taken with the removable strain gauge in
order to assess the closure of the cut.
5. The area of a perfect rectangular cut may be assessed by measuring the overall length and depth and
using their product. For non-rectangular slots the area is determined by measuring the surface width and
taking depth measurements every 10-20mm and summing the area of the strips.
6. The jack is then inserted and packed tightly in to the cut slot using shims (thin steel sheets) as necessary.
If the masonry has any internal voids over any part of the slot area, eg. caused by unfilled frogs,
perforations in the bricks, irregularity of stones or vertical joints in the slot area it is very important to use
an overwide slot and pack with shims to protect the jack membrane from local swelling.
7. Apply an initial pressure of half the estimated maximum pressure to seat the jack and shims then
depressurise.
th
8. The pressure is then increased in increments of about 1/8 of the expected maximum, but normally not
less than 0.5 bar and the strain is monitored after a short dwell at each increment.
9. The test is stopped when the strain is returned to the state measured before the cut was made with no
single deviation exceeding 10% of the other gauges. However, the reliability of glued reference points is
not 100% and it is acceptable to reject one gauge measurement out of the set of four if it is clearly no
longer functional and giving irrational readings. At this point the pressure value (p) required to restore the
original masonry conditions, is registered. The time taken for the pressurisation should be approximately
the same as the time required for making the cut and preparing the test after strain measurements are
stable. This means that the creep deformation will be symmetrical and balance itself out. Fig. 3 shows the
phases of the test.
10. Ideally a repetition of steps 8 and 9 should be carried out to verify the jack pressure but this may be
affected by the creep factor.
11. Depressurise and then remove the jack and repoint with a matching mortar if restoration is required. It may

81/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

be easier to remove the shims first to ease the jack especially where the stress measured was high (>
2
2N/mm ).
In a brick masonry, the cut can be easily made in the horizontal joints. For this type of masonry a rectangular
flat-jack is used (120*240*8mm / 400*200*8 mm).
The cut can also be made by a steel disk, with a diamond cutting edge. The flat-jack has the same shape of
the cut (350*250*4mm).
Potentiometric linear variable differential transducers or a mechanical meter are used with a sensitivity of
about 0.001mm.
Test results
Test results represent state of compressive stresses in investigated structural element. Note, that in the case
of large massive walls obtained result may represent local state of stresses.
The restoring stress value (Sr) at the testing point is given by the relation:
Sr = Ke . p . Aslot/Aje
Where: Ke is a dimensionless geometrical efficiency constant which takes into account the position of the slot
in relation to the mortar joints, the relative size of the jack and the units and the geometrical characteristics of
the jack. (This constant is determined by means of a calibration test on masonry subjected to a known stress
field within a compression testing machine); Aslot is the area of the slot; Aje is the effective area of the flat jack
and p is the pressure which restores the original strain condition.
Where calibration data is not available to determine Ke then it may be taken to be 1. In this case the stress
value will be overestimated but this will normally be on the safe side.
For typical European brick units with plan dimensions of around 200 - 300 mm by 75 - 125mm, where the jack
is the same dimension as the unit and is placed in a bed joint, the value of Ke is normally around 0.83. Values
for other situations are available from the bibliographical references.
Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Due to the inhomogeneity of the masonry and to the cutting operation, variation in the stress field is caused
during and after the cutting of the slot. Once the cut has been carried out, the values of the displacements
measured at the reference points are not constant; they tend to be greater in the centre of the cut due to the
new distribution of stresses.
1

a
b
c
1) Deformation of the edges of the cut

Therefore there will be a concentration of tensile stresses at the middle of the slot and highest values of
compressive stresses beyond its end. In the middle of the slot the situation of unloading by cutting and
successive loading by the flat jack is represented in Fig. 2. Obviously in the case of cracking due to the tensile
stresses born at the top of the slot (Fig. 1, c) or consequent rigid movements of the upper parts of the slot, the
situation of Fig. 3 can be obtained. On the contrary, the corners and the lateral parts of the cut are under
compression increasing after the cut has been made. Therefore the situation at the ends of the cut is such
that higher stresses have to be applied to recover the relaxation displacement and to oppose the compressive
stress. In any case the measurements carried out in the four chosen points will never give the same value
and, after the flat jack has been inflated, very seldom will the original distance will be attained in all the four
measuring points (Fig.4).

82/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Hypothetical stress-strain curve


Unload after cutting
Reload by flat-jack

Stress

Stress

l
Displacement

1000
Displacement [micron]

Hypothetical stress-strain curve


Unload after cutting
Reload by flat-jack

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

800

3
4

600

5
2

400

6
1

200
0

Displacement

0
5
10
15
20
25
2) Stress displacement in the 3) Stress-displacement in the
middle
of
the
slot
in
case
of
Pressure
[bar]
middle of the slot
hinge formation or rigid 4) Pressure in the jack against measured displacements
displacement

Reliability of data - High


Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
ASTM C 1196 (1991), Standard test method for in-situ compressive stress within solid unit masonry estimated
using the flat-jack method, Philadelphia, ASTM.
ASTM C 1197 (1991) - Standard test method for in-situ measurement of masonry deformability properties
using the flat jack methodRilem Lum 90/2 Lum D.2 (1990) In-situ stress based on the flat jack
RILEM Lum 90/2 Lum D.2 (1990) In-situ stress based on the flat jack RILEM Lum 90/2 Lum D3 (1990)- Insitu strength and elasticity tests based on the flat jack.
References
1. ASTM C 1196 (1991), Standard test method for in-situ compressive stress within solid unit masonry
estimated using the flat-jack method, , Philadelphia, ASTM.
2. Ronca, P.(1996), "New Developments on the Mechanical Interpretation of the In-Situ Flat jack Test",
National Congress 'La Meccanica delle Murature tra Teoria e Progetto', University of Messina, Italy18/20 Sept. 1996, pp. 135-143.
3. Ronca P., Tiraboschi C., Binda L. (1997), In-situ flat-jack tests matching new mechanical
interpretations, 11th Int. Brick/Block Masonry Conf. Shanghai, China, Vol. 1, 1997, pp. 357-366.
4. Rossi P.P., Analysis of mechanical characteristic of brick masonry tested by means of in-situ tests,
6th IBMaC, 1982, Rome, Italy
5. R.C.de Vekey, Measurement of load eccentricity using flat jacks, Proc.Brit.Mas.Soc (9) (Proc.6th IMC)
V1, pp79-85, 2002
6. R.C.de Vekey, Measurement of horizontal compressive stress in masonry using flat jacks, Acta
Polytechnica V36, No.2, pp 117-126, 1996.

83/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.15 Double Flat Jack Test (M6)


Scope of testing
Determination of the deformability characteristics of a masonry.
Study of the stress-strain behaviour of the masonry.
Estimation for the compressive strength of the masonry
Principle of test
Two parallel cuts are made in the masonry, at a distance of about 40 to 50 cm from each other.
The two jacks delimit a masonry sample of appreciable size to which a uni-axial compression stress can be
applied. Measurement bases for removable strain-gauge or LVDTs on the sample face provide information on
vertical and lateral displacements. In this way a compression test is carried out on an undisturbed sample of
large area. Several loading-unloading cycles may be performed at increasing stress levels in order to
determine the deformability modulus of the masonry during loading and unloading phases.
Figure of test set-up

Test procedure and measurements


The test sequence is as follows:
1. Chose a representative piece of masonry then glue the metal reference points at the correct gauge
length for the strain measuring instrument or attach LVDTs. The instrument should be selected to give
a measurement (Gauge length) over 75-90% of the distance between the two jack planes. A number
of replicate measuring positions (pairs of points or LVDTs) should be used and their results averaged.
2. The cuts are then made taking care to disturb the surrounding masonry as little as possible. Slots
shall be parallel, vertically aligned and separated by at least 5 courses of masonry in case of unit
height equal to or less than 100 mm (brick masonry) or 3 courses of masonry in case of unit height
equal to or greater than 100 mm (stone masonry). In any case the distance between the slots shall be
between the length A and 1.5 times the length A of the flatjack but also not less than 2.5 times the
average dimension B of the jack.
3. The area of the cuts is normally determined by measuring the surface width and taking depth
measurements every 10-20mm and summing the area of the strips.
4. The jacks are then inserted and packed tightly into the cut slots using shims (thin steel sheets) as
necessary. If the masonry has any internal voids over any part of the slot area, e.g. caused by
unfilled frogs, perforations in the bricks or vertical joints in the slot area it is very important to use an
overwide slot and pack with shims to protect the jack membrane from local swelling.
5. After the zero strain measurement has been taken, the pressure is then increased in increments of
about 10% or less of the expected maximum and the strain is monitored after a short dwell at each
increment. Both jack pressure and strain should be recorded at each increment. The ratio of the
increase of jack pressure (dp) to the strain increment dem should be monitored and the test should be
stopped when the ratio starts dropping rapidly to avoid damage to the masonry. Furthermore it should
be remembered that the measured stresses should not exceed the limit values of the carrying
capacity of the jack declared by the producer or experimentally measured.
6. Depressurise and remove the jacks and repoint with a matching mortar if restoration is required.

84/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Test results
The stress in the masonry between the jacks fm is given by the relation:
fm = Ke . p . Aslot/Aje
Where: Aslot is the average of the area of the two slots; Aje is the average of the effective area of the two flat
jacks and p is the hydraulic pressure in the jack lines. In absence of calibration data the default value of the
geometrical efficiency factor Ke should be taken as 1.
The tangent modulus of elasticity, Et, at any given level of stress is given by the relation:
Et = dfm/dem
Where dfm is the increment of stress and dem is the increment of strain at the chosen stress level.
The secant modulus of elasticity, Es, at any given level of stress is given by the relation:
Es = fm/em
Where fm is the cumulative stress and em is the cumulative strain increment.

a) Stress-strain diagram obtained from a irregular stone b) Stress-Strain diagram obtained from a double flat jack test.
block masonry.
The overcoming of thelinear-elastic range is evident.

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Difficulties or impossibility in applying the double flat jack test can be found in the case of low rise buildings
(one or two story high) due to the lack of stress restraint by the upper masonry caused by the low stresses
acting on it. Fig. 4 shows one of these cases: the continuation of the test was impossible due to the failure of
the upper part of the masonry. In these cases the double jack test must be either avoided or carried out up to
a low state of stress, in order to have information at least on the elastic parameters.
In the case of thick mortar joints (e.g. byzantine joints), the choice of the cutting position for both single and
double flat-jack is very difficult. When the joints are more than 2 cm thick, the best choice should be cutting
partly through a brick (or stone).
Care should be taken in cutting operations when the joints are particularly thin and/or the wall is of high
historic importance. When the thickness of the joint is less than 4 mm in order to avoid spoiling the stones, the
circular saw instead of the drill should be used for cutting. When the joint is not excessively thin, the test can
be carried out as for the brick masonry.
When a very irregular stone masonry has to be tested the cutting cannot be made only through the joints due
to their softness and irregularity, but must pass partly through the stones. In that case the choice of the test
position is very important, since the high inhomogeneity of the masonry can influence the results.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
ASTM C 1196 (1991), Standard test method for in-situ compressive stress within solid unit masonry estimated
using the flat-jack method, Philadelphia, ASTM.
ASTM C 1197 (1991) - Standard test method for in-situ measurement of masonry deformability properties
using the flat jack methodRilem Lum 90/2 Lum D.2 (1990) In-situ stress based on the flat jack

85/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

RILEM Lum 90/2 Lum D.2 (1990) In-situ stress based on the flat jack RILEM Lum 90/2 Lum D3 (1990)- Insitu strength and elasticity tests based on the flat jack.
References
1. Rossi, P. P., (1982), Analysis of mechanical characteristics of brick masonry tested by means of
non-destructive in-situ tests. Paper presented at the 6th International Brick Masonry Conference,
Rome.
2. Sacchi Landriani, G. and Taliercio, A. (1986), Numerical Analysis of the Flat Jack Test on Masonry
Walls, Journal of theoretical and applied mechanics. Vol.5 No.3,.
3. Noland, J. L., Atkinson, R. H. and Schuller, M. P., (1990), A Review of the Flat-jack Method for
Nondestructive Evaluation. Proceedings of Non-destructive Evaluation of Civil Structures and
Materials. Colorado, October.
4. R.C.de Vekey, Thin stainless steel flat-jacks: calibration and trials for measurement of in-situ stress
and elasticity of masonry, Proc 7th Canadian Masonry Symposium, Hamilton, V2, pp1174-1183,
1995.
5. Bettio C., Gelmi A., Modena C., Rossi P.P. (1993), Caratterizzazione meccanicae consolidamento
statico delle murature dei centri abitati di antica origine della provincia di Trento: rapporto preliminare
sui risultati delle indagini svolte, Convegno Murature, sicurezza, recupero, Trento, 185-222
6. Binda L. (1999), Caratterizzazione delle murature in pietra e mattoni ai fini dellindividuazione di
opportune tecniche di riparazione, Unit di Ricerca di Milano, Relazione Finale, Contratto CNR/GNDT
7. Binda L., Anzani A.(1993), The time-dependent behaviour of masonry prisms: an interpretation, The
Masonry Society Journal, vol.11, n.2, pp.17-34
8. Binda L., Gatti G., Mangano G., Poggi C., Sacchi Landriani G. (1991), The collapse of the Civic Tower
of Pavia: a survey of the materials and structure, Masonry International, vol. 6, n.1, pp.11-20
9. Binda L., Modena C., Baronio G.(1993), Strengthening of masonries by injection technique,
Proceedings of 6 NaMC, Vol.I, Philadelphia, pp.1-1 4
10. Binda L., Tiraboschi C., Tongini Folli R. (1998), On site and laboratory investigation on materials and
nd
structure of the Bell Tower in Monza, 2 Int. Conf. RILEM on Rehabilitation of structures, Highett,
Australia, pp.542-556

86/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.16 In-situ compressive tests (D1)


Scope of testing
Evaluation of compressive strength of built-in material.
Determination of the stress-strain curve.
Determination of modulus of elasticity.
Principle of test
A panel is isolated from a masonry wall with three cuts using a circular saw or water-cooled diamond wire.
Vertical loading of the specimen can be applied either in a monotonic or cyclic manner. For the elastic range
of response, the process is usually cyclic. Loading is applied by hydraulic actuators at the top of the panel.
Not to affect the stability of the masonry above, it is necessary to bring this action to the foot of the panel with
a system of vertical bars. In this case two metal bars are placed over the panel. Relative displacements are
measured by deformeter bases located vertically (optionally also horizontally) in the central part of the panel.
Figure of test set-up

Test procedure and measurements


To determine the elastic modulus of the masonry the load has to be applied on top of the panel evenly. The
maximum should be achieved 10 min to 15 min after the beginning of the testing, depending on the alleged
resistance of the masonry. The force should be applied on at least three equal steps to reach half of the
estimated maximum collapse force. After each step of loading, the compressive force has to be kept constant
(1 to 2 min) to determine the vertical deformations. To determine the compressive strength and elastic
modulus of the masonry the procedure is the same, the difference being only that the maximum force applied
here is the collapse force of the panel.
The following measurements have to be made: size of the cross section of the panel, maximum load, load at
which first visible cracks appear, time elapsed from the initial load to the maximum load, length of the
dilatometer bases.
Test results
The vertical stress of masonry panel under test:
F
f c = , A cross section of the panel, F vertical load applied at the panel
A
The vertical deformation is calculated as the average vertical deformation of all the bases:
L Lvk ,0
vk = vk ,i
, Lvk ,i lengt of the k-th vertical deformeter base at the load value Fi ,
Lvk ,0
Lvk ,0 lengt of the k-th vertical deformeter base before applying the load
The elastic modulus for the test to determine the elastic modulus alone:
f c,sup f c,inf
Es =
, f c ,sup maximum vertical stress on the panel,
v,sup v,inf

f c ,inf the lowest value for the vertical stress, v,sup vertical deformation of the k-th
deformeter base at the maximum load, v,inf vertical deformation of the k-th
deformeter base at the minimum load
The elastic modulus for the test until the panel collapses:

87/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Es ,1/3 =

f c ,1/3 f c ,inf

v ,1/3 v ,inf

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

f c ,1/3 vertical stress at the load value of 1/3 Fu ,

v ,1/3 vertical deformation at the load value of 1/3 Fu


Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets
A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Safety issues should be priority regarding planning tests.
Test result should contain information about the laboratory performing the test, date of preparation of the
panel, date of testing, classification of the panel, size and area of the section, the stress-strain curve, the load
when the first visible cracks occur and the collapse load, photos of the panel and other observations. The test
can also provide an estimate of the Poisson's ratio.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
RILEM TC 76-LUM, General recommendations for methods of testing load-bearing masonry,1988.
D.M. LL.PP. del 14/01/2008, Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni.
C.M. LL.PP. N. 617 del 02/02/2009, Istruzioni per lApplicazione delle NTC 2008.
D.M. LL. PP. 20/11/1987, Norme tecniche per la progettazione esecuzione e collaudo degli edifici in muratura
e per il loro consolidamento
References
1. A. Borri, M. Corradi, A. Vignoli, Experimental study on the determination of strength of masonry walls,
Construction and Building Materials, N. 17, 2003, pp. 325-337.
2. S. Chiostrini, L. Galano, A. Vignoli, Shear and compression testing of stone masonry walls, Atti del
Seminario CIAS Evoluzione nella Sperimentazione per le Costruzioni, Merano, 1994, pp. 223-250.
3. S. Chiostrini, A. Vignoli, In situ determination of the strength properties of masonry walls by
destructive shear and compression tests, Masonry International, The British Masonry Society, Vol. 7,
N. 3, 1994, pp. 84-96.

88/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.17 In-situ shear tests (D2)


Scope of testing
Evaluation of shear (in-plane tensile) strength of masonry..
Evaluation of stiffness, shear modulus and ductility.
Principle of test
The shear strength of the masonry is derived from the collapse of the masonry panel. The tangential elastic
modulus is determined using the same test by measuring the deformations of the diagonals of the panel at
certain load levels.
There are two types of shear tests: direct shear tests where panels under existing vertical compression are
subjected to horizontal loading, and compressive-shear tests where panels are uniformly pre-stressed in
compression before applying horizontal load.
In direct shear tests, a panel is isolated from a masonry wall with two vertical cuts and fixed to the wall with
two bases above and below. The dimensions of the panel are approximately 180 cm in height and 90 cm in
width depending on the texture of the wall. The horizontal load is applied monotonously in the middle of the
panel through two metal bars which allows for distribution of stresses through both semi panels. Deformations
are measured by eight deformeter bases, four on each side, arranged in a diagonal direction of the semi
panel. In direct shear tests there is a possibility of damaging a portion of the panel due to the unknown vertical
tension. In compressive-shear (additional pre-compression is applied prior testing) tests a vertical load is
provided through pre-stressing of specimen. For the compressive-shear test three cuts are necessary. The
pre-stressed action is distributed as in the compression test.
Figure of test set-up

Direct shear test

Compressive-shear test

Test procedure and measurements


In the direct shear test the horizontal load is applied constantly so that the maximum is achieved 15 to 20 min
after test execution. Load gradients ranging from 0.05 to 0.25 MPa/min are recommended depending on the
alleged resistance. In the compressive-shear test the vertical load on the top of the panel should be applied in
the first 5 to 7 min. During the shear test, vertical hydraulic actuators must be closed.
The following measurements have to be made: size of the cross section of the panel, maximum horizontal
force in the middle of the panel, horizontal load exerted by the actuator at the top at the time of the maximum
horizontal force in the middle of the action, load when first visible cracks appear, time elapsed from the
application of the load to maximum load and length of the dilatometer bases.
Lateral load is imposed in cyclic manner (one cycle per pre-defined displacement), with increasing the
amplitude of the displacement up to the limit state of the specimen. The failure of the specimen is pre-defined
as the attainment of the 80% of the maximum lateral resistance in softening region (safety issues).
Test results
The shear strength has to be calculated using the following formulas:
For the direct shear test:

u =

Fu
,
2A

Fu maximum horizontal load, A cross section of the panel

For the compressive-shear test

89/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

u =

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Tinf,u
, Tinf,u maximum horizontal load of the lower semi panel
A

Alternatively ft tensile strength may be calculated as:

f t = 0.5 0 + (0.5 0 )2 + ( b u ) 2 , where b represent shear distribution factor, while 0 represents stresses
due to normal loading.
The tangential modulus at 1/3 of the maximum load for both tests
2
1
E
1.2hinf
G hinf
=
=
1 +

, hinf height of the lower semi panel


K 0 0.9Tinf,u
GA 1.2 E d

140
120

Sila [kN]

100
80

Ke=197,5 kNmm
Hu=110 kN
ft = 0,14 MPa

60
40
20

Obvojnica
Idealizirana obvojnica
Eksperiment

0
0

Relativni pomik [mm]

Specimen before and after testing

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Safety issues should be priority regarding planning tests.
Information about the laboratory performing the test, date of preparation of the panel, date of testing,
classification of the panel, size and area of the section, the resistance and elasticity values, the load when the
first visible cracks occur, photos of the panel and other observations.
To avoid damaging the adjacent wall portion on which the actuator applies the horizontal load, the length of
this wall has to be at least 1/2 of the panel height.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
RILEM TC 76-LUM, General recommendations for methods of testing load-bearing masonry, 1988.
D.M. LL.PP. del 14/01/2008, Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni.
C.M. LL.PP. N. 617 del 02/02/2009, Istruzioni per lApplicazione delle NTC 2008.
D.M. LL. PP. 20/11/1987, Norme tecniche per la progettazione esecuzione e collaudo degli edifici in muratura
e per il loro consolidamento.
References
1. A. Bernardini, C. Modena, V. Turnesek, U. Vescovi, A comparison of three laboratory methods to
determine the shear resistance of masonry walls, Proceedings of 7th WCEE, Instanbul, 1980.
2. A. Borri, M. Corradi, A. Vignoli, Experimental study on the determination of strength of masonry walls,

90/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Construction and Building Materials, N. 17, 2003, pp. 325-337.


3. S. Chiostrini, L. Galano, A. Vignoli, On the determination of strength of ancient masonry walls via
experimental tests, Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Aukland,
2000, Paper N. 2564.
4. S. Chiostrini, L. Galano, A. Vignoli, Shear and compression testing of stone masonry walls, Atti del
Seminario CIAS Evoluzione nella Sperimentazione per le Costruzioni, Merano, 1994, pp. 223-250.
5. S. Chiostrini, A. Vignoli, In situ determination of the strength properties of masonry walls by
destructive shear and compression tests, Masonry International, The British Masonry Society, Vol. 7,
N. 3, 1994, pp. 84-96.
6. S. Chiostrini, A. Vignoli, An experimental research program on the behaviour of stonemasonry
structures, Journal of Testing and Evaluation, ASTM, Vol. 20, N. 3, 1992, pp. 190-206.
7. P. F. Sheppard, In situ test of shear strength and deformability of 18th century stone and brick
masonry walls, Proceedings of the 7th International Brick/Block Masonry Conference, Melburne,
1985.
8. V. Turnsek, P. F. Sheppard, The shear and flexural resistance of masonry walls, Proceedings of the
Research Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Skopje, 1980.

91/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.18 In-situ diagonal tests (D3)


Scope of testing
Evaluation of shear (in-plane tensile) strength of masonry..
Evaluation of stiffness and shear modulus.
Principle of test
To obtain the resistance and the shear modulus, quasi static cyclic tests until collapse are carried out. A
square panel is isolated from a wall with four cuts using a circular saw or a water-cold diamond wire.
Compressive load is applied along the diagonal of the square masonry panel by a hydraulic actuator causing
diagonal shear cracking. The hydraulic actuator is placed on one edge of the panel. To allow load distribution,
angle metal elements (shoes) at both edges of the panel must be provided. Relative displacements of the
panel are measured by at least two deformeter bases of approximate length of the panel size, positioned
along the diagonals of the panel.
Figure of test set-up

Test procedure and measurements


The tested panel must not have any cracks or cavities and the size must be at least (120 x 120) cm. The
sequences of cutting the wall are as following: a horizontal cut above, two vertical cuts and a 50 cm cut at the
bottom. In this way it is possible to detect any eventually critical locations of the masonry above the panel
after executing the first cut. A portion of the surrounding wall has to be further demolished manually in order to
allow for free deformation and to place the equipment. It is required that the edges of the panel in which metal
elements are placed are perpendicular to each other. For distribution of load, metal rods are placed at a
constant distance from the panels surface.
A quasi static cyclic test is performed until rupture of the panel. In order to verify correct positioning of the
metal elements, operation of the equipment and the acquisition system, a preliminary load cycle with a
maximum load of 5 kN is required. The maximum load of subsequent cycles depends on the tensile strength
for diagonal cracking with consideration of 4 cycles at least. Before starting a new cycle, it is necessary to
maintain the minimum load for a few minutes.
The data acquired during the test present the value of the applied load and lengths of four diagonal
deformeter bases.
Test results
The diagonal tensile strength:

ft = 0.5

Fu
A

A cross section of the panel, Fu maximum diagonal force applied on the panel

The corresponding shear strength (Turnek aovi criterion):

0 =

ft
1.5

The secant shear modulus that can be determined at each point of the shear-stress curve:

G=

1.05 F
, average angular defletion of the panel
=

92/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Safety issues should be priority regarding planning tests.
Different methods for evaluation of shear strength of masonry from diagonal compressive test exist. Proposed
methods can be found in ASTM E 519-02, 2002 and RILEM TC 76-LUM, 1991 and Brignola et al. 2009.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
ASTM E 519-02, 2002. Standard Test Method for Diagonal Tension (Shear) in Masonry
Assemblages, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, American Society for Testing and Materials.
RILEM TC 76-LUM, 1991. Diagonal Tensile strength tests of small wall specimens.
NTC 2008, Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni, DM 14 Gennaio 2008, Gazzetta Zecca dello Stato, Roma.
(Tabella C8A.2.1 di appendice C8A di Circolare 2 febbraio 2009, n. 617).
References
1. Brignola A., Podest S., Lagomarsino S., 2006. Experimental Results of Shear Strenght and Stiffness
of Existing Masonry Walls. Proceedings of V International Conference on Structural Analysis of
Historical Constructions, New Delhi, India, 6-8 November 2006, pp. 767-774.
2. Brignola A., Frumento S., Lagomarsino S., Podest S., 2009 Identification of shear parameters of
masonry panels through the in-situ diagonal compression test, International Journal of Architectural
Heritage. Vol 3, Issue 1 January 2009, pp. 52-73.
3. Turnek V., aovi F. 1971. Some experimental results on the strength of brick masonrywalls,
Proceeding of the 2nd International Brick Masonry Conference, Stoke on Trent, 1971; pp. 149-156.

93/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.19 In-situ shear test with Flat Jack (D4)


Scope of testing
The scope of the test is to determine the cohesion and friction angle of the wall according to the MohrCoulomb criterion to get the shear strength associated with the shear sliding mechanism.
Principle of test
A portion of the masonry subjected to sliding is isolated from the wall with two vertical cuts and remains
clamped with the upper and lower wall as in the double flat jack test. The portion is therefore subjected to
vertical compression acting on the wall. The cut in which the jack is put must have a thickness that allows
perfect placing of the jack and it has to be as flat as possible. The free cut must be thick enough to allow the
sliding of ashlar blocks. The size of the portion subjected to sliding depends on the size of the cuts, the used
jack and the wall texture.
Horizontal force is applied on the portion monotonically by a hydraulic pump through a semi-oval or
rectangular jack until determination of plastic behavior of the ashlar blocks. To determine the sliding of the
ashlar block at least two deformeter bases have to be placed perpendicularly to the vertical cuts in the middle
third of the masonry portion and symmetrically to the horizontal axis of the portion and possibly along the
diagonals of the portion.
Figure of test set-up

Test procedure and measurements


Loading speed depends on the strength of the masonry and existing vertical pressure. To ensure stabilization
of the load and allow measurements with a mechanical deformeter the horizontal load has to be kept constant
(21) min. Alternatively, measurements can be recorded with an acquisition system based on a system of A/D
conversion and a computer.
Besides geometric measurements carried out on the surface the following measurements have to be made
during the test: pressure in the pump when first visible cracks appear, height of the wall where the fracture line
appears and time elapsed from the application of load to maximum load.
Test results
The applied force is directly proportional to the pressure and the area of the jack. A correction coefficient Km
that takes into account edge effects and not perfectly flat surfaces is used within the range of 0.90 0.95:

F = p Am Km ,

Am cross section of the jack, p pression


Regarding the Mohr-Coulomb criterion, the shear strength of the ashlar masonry is assumed as a combined
effect of horizontal forces and vertical forces acting in the plane of the wall:

u = 0 + n

It is reasonable to assume that the sliding occurs along the horizontal mortar layers (area Am) and the area
around the jack (area Ap). The horizontal mortar layers are subjected to normal stresses that are considered
to be known from the results of the single flat jack test while the normal stresses along the area around the
jack are considered to be zero. Therefore the equilibrium condition can be as following:

Flim = Ap 0 + Am ( 0 + n )

94/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

In the test, the shear stress 0 and the friction angle have to be determined. 0 can be estimated as a value
of the friction angle, known for a typical masonry:

0 = ( Flim Am n ) / ( Ap + Am )

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


Safety issues should be priority regarding planning tests.
Important to identify preliminary ashlar blocks where the sliding potentially appears to have the best location
of the vertical cuts.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
ASTM C 1197-91, Standard test method for in-situ measurement of masonry deformability properties using
the flatjack method.
RILEM Technical Recommendations for the Testing and Use of Construction Materials, LUM.D.3 In-situ
strength/elasticity tests based on the flat jack (E & FN Spon, London, 1994) 503-508.
References
1. Binda, L., Tiraboschi, C., Flat-Jack Test as a Slightly Destructive Technique for the Diagnosis of Brick
and Stone Masonry Structures, Int. Journal for Restoration of Buildings and Monuments, Int.
Zeitschrift fur Bauinstandsetzen und Baudenkmalpflege, Zurich, pp. 449-472, 1999.
2. A. Vignoli, L. Galano, E. Del Monte, 2007, Determinazione sperimentale delle caratteristiche
meccaniche delle murature e specifiche di prova, allegato 3b.3 UR10-1.

95/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

4.2.3.20 In-situ shear test Shove test (D5)


Scope of testing
The shove test is for determination of the in-plane sliding resistance along a mortar bed joint.
Determination of coefficient of friction for brickwork masonry.
Principle of test
The shove test measures the shear strength of masonry in the field. A brick is removed,by sawing and drilling,
without damaging adjacent brick. Next, the head joint of an adjacent brick on the same course is removed. A
hydraulic jack is fit into the hole left by the removed brick. After its activated, the hydraulic jack shoves the
adjacent brick sideways into the open head joint. The maximum force needed to shove the brick can be
correlated with the shear strength of the masonry. Repeating shove test at different levels of vertical loading
above the position where the shove test was executed one can calculate coefficient of friction.
Figure of test set-up

a)

b)

d)
c)
Test procedure and measurements
Once a location has been establiched (not around oppenings), a single brick, djacent to the test brick, is
removed by drilling out the surrounding mortar joints. Head joint on the opposite site of the test brick is also
removed by drilling out the mortar. The test brick is thus isolated so that an applied horizontal force will be
reisted in shear along the two bed joint and the collar joint. Measurements are made of the dimensions of the
test brick and any visible flaws in the mortar joints are noted before load is applied.Load applied to the test
brick is increased gradually until sliding of the brick is first observed. The shear strength is then computed as
the maximum applied force divided by the effective area of the resisting bed joints and the collar joint.
Three methods are provided depending from the control of normal compressive stresses:
a) Method A (with Flatjacks Controlling Normal Compressive Stress)For determining mortar joint shear
strength index when the state of normal compressive stress at the test site is controlled during the test using
the flatjack method. Horizontal displacement of the test unit is monitored throughout the test.
b) Method B (without Flatjacks Controlling Normal Compressive Stress)For determining mortar joint shear
strength index when using an estimate of the normal compressive stress at the location of the test site.
Horizontal displacement of the test unit is not monitored during this procedure.
c) Method C (with Flatjack Applying Horizontal Load)For determining mortar joint shear strength index using
an estimate of the normal compressive stress at the location of the test site. Horizontal displacement of the
test unit is generally not measured during this procedure.

96/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Test results

Correlation regarding demage classes for architectonic and artistic assets


A-a

A-b

A-c

A-d

B-a B-b

E-a E-b

E-c

G-a G-b G-c

Q-a Q-b Q-c R-a R-b R-c

Notes for the interpretation of results and safety issues


The test is slightly destructive, since a brick must be extracted from the wall to allow the placement of a
hydraulick jack and a load cell. In addition, the mortar head joint on the opposite face of the brick to be tested
must also be removed. If performed carefully, no damage occurs to the surrounding masonry.
There must be enough volume of masonry to react the horizontal force so that the failure occurs in the test
brick rather than in the surrounding masonry.
Reliability of data - High
Reliability of data - Medium
Reliability of data - Low

Contact to surface required with coupling agent


Contact to surface required
Contact to surface not required

Code/recommendation references
ASTM C 1531-03 Standard Test Methods for In Situ Measurement Of Masonry Mortar Joint Shear Strength
Index
References
1.

97/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Guidelines for the design of investigations

In 2 overview of international recommendations on recording of monuments is given. Following


this, in 3 the set of information required for the seismic assessment of cultural heritage assets are
listed, considering different phases of the PERPETUATE methodology (see [1], [6], [8]). Then, in
4 there is a review of most useful diagnostic techniques both for architectonic and artistic assets.
In this chapter, some hints are given for the design of the surveying and investigations program,
depending on the type of asset and the level of assessment.
5.1

Planning diagnostic in-situ investigation

The reliability of the seismic assessment is strongly influenced by the completeness and the
accuracy of surveying and investigations. Considering cultural heritage assets, the wish of
documentation is even greater than for ordinary buildings.
The complexity of ancient masonry buildings, often subjected to many transformations along their
life, would require a detailed investigation in all structural and non structural elements, because it is
difficult to extend data acquired in one single point to other part of the building.
However, the diagnostic activity may be intrusive and non compatible with the conservation of the
cultural properties of the asset. Moreover, testing are expensive and it is necessary to consider the
available budget. Some indications on the unitary cost of each method are given in 5.4.
It is therefore necessary to find the optimal balance among all the above mentioned aspects.
The information that are necessary for the seismic assessment can be subdivided into two
categories:
1. qualitative information (constructive details, connections between structural elements, etc.):
these data can be obtained by visual inspection or inferred by other information; in this case,
depending on the assumed data, the mechanical model produces different single results;
2. quantitative information (thickness of elements, material parameters, etc.): in this case the
uncertainties can be taken into account by a probabilistic approach (e.g.: mean value and
coefficient of variation) or a fuzzy approach (giving an interval of plausible values); uncertainties
can be of different nature:
-

measure uncertainties: each one of the techniques described in 4 are characterized by


testing errors (often rather high); the value obtained by the test can be biased by the
application of the testing procedure to that particular material;

statistic uncertainties: if you measure the same parameter more times on the same material
you do not obtain the same value;

epistemic uncertainties: due to the fact that masonry is a non homogeneous material, thus
in each point it has different characteristics, even if made in the same period and with the
same constitutive elements.

98/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

The plan of investigations must consider all these aspects and try to be as complete as possible,
avoiding to be very detailed on some parameters and completely lacking in others.
A preliminary mechanical model can be very useful for a sensitivity analysis, aimed to single out
the parameters that have a stronger influence on the results; investigations should be focused on
those ones.
In order to take into account in the assessment all these sources of uncertainties, different
approaches can be adopted:
-

probabilistic uncertainties propagation: in this case all uncertain parameters must be


defined as random variables and the assessment can be done by different approaches
(Monte Carlo simulation, FORM by analytical formulation or by response surface
technique);

logic tree approach: considering for all uncertain parameters a plausible interval and
making a set of deterministic analysis, assuming proper weights to each one;

deterministic approach, with the use of confidence factors: in this case the quality and
completeness of data are summarized by a coefficient, to be applied to the material
parameters (for example, if the level of knowledge is low, strengths are reduced in order to
take into account the related uncertainties).

The last approach is the one proposed in EC8-3 [11], for the assessment of existing buildings. The
Italian guidelines [12] propose the adoption of partial confidence factors, correlated to different type
of information (see 5.4).
In 4 set of tables where presented for each technique of testing, where one of the parameters
which was considered was also the reliability of particular method (measure uncertainties and
interpretation uncertainties). The results are summarized in following table. Note that the most of
NDT methods are marked as medium or low reliable, since for the confirmation of the results of
NDT testing should be always accompanied with some MDT or DT technique to confirm the
results. More the nature of testing technique is destructive more reliable results are.
Table 6: Reliability of particular method of testing

High
Medium
Low

99/114

N6

N7

N8

N9

M1

M2

M3

M4

M5

M6

D1

Geoelectrical
Tomographies

Impact-echo

Pachometer

Pulse Sonic Test

Radar

Ultrasonics

Hardness test

Transducer Movement
Sensing

Coring and sampling

Hole Drilling Method

Endoscopy/Boroscopy

Method (PNT-G)

Single Flat Jack Test

Double Flat Jack Test

In-situ
tests

D2

D3

D4

D5

In-situ shove test

N5

In situ shear test with


FJ

N4

In-situ diagonal tests

N3

In-situ shear tests

N2

compressive

N1

Active Thermography

Reliability

NDT, MDT and DT Methods

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

5.2

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Applicability of different testing technique depending on the mechanical model

Regarding the methods illustrated in previous sections and the modelling strategies described in
Deliverable D7, it seems important noting how:
-

some tests provide data which may directly introduced in models;


other ones provide information which not always may be directly introduced in models but
which can address the choice on the proper modelling strategy to be adopted ( as an
example diagnostic techniques addressed to investigate the quality of connection among
different macroelements or that of multi-leaf panels).

With reference to test addressed to Investigation of mechanical properties of masonry, the


following table summarizes what parameters are necessary varying the modelling strategy
adopted. In particular, it seems useful remembering how models have been classified in
Deliverable D7 as: continuous models ( Continuum constitutive laws Models CCLM and Structural
Elements Models SEM); discrete models (Discrete Interfaces Models-DIM and Macro-blocks
models- MBM). CCLM and DIM models work at material scale, whereas SEM and MBM models
work at element scale.
Table 7: Investigation of mechanical properties of masonry depending from adopted model
Investigation of mechanical properties of masonry
Parameter
examined
Masonry
compressive
strength
Masonry
shear/tensile
strength
Masonry elastic
properties
Mortar
characteristics
Block
characteristics
Interface
characteristics

Parameter useful for


(modelling strategy)
CCLM
SEM
DM
MBM

Appropriate NDT, MDT and DT methods

M5- Single Flat-Jack


M2-drilling resistance
D1- In-situ compressive test
M1- Compressive test on cored samples
D2,D4&D5 In-situ shear test
D3 - Diagonal Compression test
M6 - Double Flat-Jack
N5 - (sonic methods)
M1- Laboratory tests on cored samples
M4- Method PNT-G
N8 - Hardness test
M1- Laboratory tests on cored samples
N8 - Hardness test
M1- Laboratory tests on cored samples
D5 In-situ shove test

Legend:
All sub-classes of models as illustrated in Deliverable D7 need the definition of these parameters
Only some sub-classes of models as illustrated in Deliverable D7 need the definition of these
parameters

In general it may be stated that the information obtained by tests addressed to investigate
Morphologic properties may be useful for all modelling strategies, even in different ways: in some

100/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

case, data will be directly introduced in models, in other ones they will be used in indirect way by
providing useful information to properly characterize mechanical properties of models. As an
example, information related to the location of detachments of the outer layer should be modelled
in detail only by adopting very detailed modelling strategies (e.g. in case of discrete or finite
element models), but anyway should be included also in structural element models by properly
modifying strength parameters.
In particular, with reference to NDT and MDT methods illustrated and objectives listed in 4.2, the
following tables summarize the more appropriate methods which may be applied depending from
observed problem.
Table 8. Investigation of morphological properties
Morphologic properties
Parameter examined
Thickness of structures, which are only accessible from
one side (e. g. basement, vault, etc.)

Location of detachments
Detection of multiple layers of masonry, determination of
the thickness of single layers

Location of detachments of the outer layer

Location of constructive mounting-parts (anchor, dowel,


hook, bar etc.)
Investigation of homogeneity of masonry

Location of larger voids (e. g. wall heating, chimney,


previous opening of the wall)

Investigation of masonry structure behind plaster


Location of non-visible cracks with crack components
parallel to the surface

Appropriate NDT and MDT methods


N6 Radar
N7 Ultrasonics
N3 - Impact-echo
M3 Endoscopy
N1 - Active thermography
N6- Radar
N6 Radar
N7 Ultrasonics
N3 - Impact-echo
M3 - Endoscopy
N6- Radar
N7 Ultrasonics
M3 Endoscopy
N6 Radar
N4 Pachometer
M3 Endoscopy
N5 Sonic test
N6 Radar
N7 Ultrasonics
N3 - Impact-echo
N5 Sonic test
N6 Radar
N7 Ultrasonics
N1 - Active thermography
N6 Radar
N7 Ultrasonics

Table 9: Investigation of cracks


Crack monitoring
Parameter examined
Location and documentation of visible cracks
Quantification of crack depth
Observation of crack expansion

101/114

Appropriate NDT and MDT methods


Visual inspection
N7 - Ultrasonics (conditionally)
N7 - Ultrasonics (conditionally)
N9 Monitoring

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

5.3

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Use of different testing technique depending on the classification of architectonic and artistic
assets

Methods for Metric Surveying and Recording (see 6.2), can provide reliable data considering each
methods accuracy (including factors such are experts knowledge and experience as well as
instruments performance) regarding identification of damage classes of AA and CA. On the other
hand the results from methods for Diagnostic Surveying and Recording should be discussed
regarding the outcome of testing that is to be expected (mechanical properties, dimension,
presence of different material etc.).
Summary of in-situ applicable NDT, MDT and DT methods regarding damage classes for
architectonic and artistic assets. Note, that where applicable, abbreviation MP (mechanical
parameters) or QA (quality assessment meaning that is not related to MP) are provided in order
to clarify type of information that should be expected.
Table 10: Applicability of particular testing technique depending from observed damage class

D1

D2

D3

D4

D5

In-situ diagonal tests

In situ shear test with FJ

In-situ shove test

M6

In-situ shear tests

M5

In-situ compressive tests

M3 M4

Double Flat Jack Test

M2

Single Flat Jack Test

M1

Method (PNT-G)

N9

Endoscopy/Boroscopy

N8

Hole Drilling Method

Pachometer

N7

Coring and sampling

Impact-echo

N6

Transducer Movement
Sensing

Geoelectrical Tomographies

N5

Hardness test

N4

Ultrasonics

N3

Radar

N2

Pulse Sonic Test

N1
Active Thermography

Damage class

NDT, MDT and DT Methods

A-a

QA

QA

MP

QA QA MP MP MP MP MP MP MP

A-b

QA

QA

MP

QA QA MP MP MP MP MP MP MP

A-c

QA

QA

MP

QA QA MP MP MP MP MP MP MP

A-d

QA

QA

MP

QA QA

MP MP MP MP MP

B-a

QA

QA

QA

MP

QA MP MP MP

B-b

QA

QA

QA

MP

QA MP MP MP MP MP MP MP

QA

QA

MP MP QA QA MP MP MP

QA

QA

MP

QA

E-a

QA QA QA QA

QA QA QA

MP

QA QA

MP

E-b

QA QA QA

QA QA QA

MP

QA QA

MP

E-c

QA QA QA

QA QA QA

MP

QA QA

MP

QA

QA

MP

QA

G-a

QA

QA

G-b

QA

G-c

QA

102/114

QA

QA
QA

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Q-a

5.4

D1

Single Flat Jack Test

Double Flat Jack Test

In-situ compressive tests

QA

MP

QA

QA

QA

MP

QA

QA QA QA QA QA

MP

QA

QA QA QA

D2

D3

D4

D5

In-situ shove test

M6

In situ shear test with FJ

M5

In-situ diagonal tests

M3 M4

In-situ shear tests

M2

Method (PNT-G)

M1

Endoscopy/Boroscopy

N9

Hole Drilling Method

Pachometer

N8

Coring and sampling

Impact-echo

N7

QA
QA

N6

Transducer Movement
Sensing

Geoelectrical Tomographies

N5

Hardness test

N4

Ultrasonics

N3

Radar

N2

Pulse Sonic Test

N1
Active Thermography

Damage class

NDT, MDT and DT Methods

MP MP MP MP

QA QA QA QA

Q-b

QA QA QA

Q-c

QA

R-a

QA QA QA

R-b

QA QA

R-c

QA

QA

MP MP MP MP

MP
MP
MP

Cost of different testing techniques

The cost of investigation of the asset can be conveniently split into two categories:
professional fees (time based closely comparable to hourly rates of other professionals)
and
expenses (including subsistence, travel, equipment costs and charges.
Time spent on collection and analysis is the major cost element in NDT/MDT/DT investigation.
Here, two governing parameters are:
the size of the asset and
the nature of the information required
The size of the asset that is going to be investigated will influence the amount of time that must be
spent collecting a representative sample of data. This will affect the site expenses and the amount
of time spent in analysis.
The nature of information required will affect the strategy of the investigation and therefore the
choice of techniques deployed. The costs for each individual method of testing are summarized in
following table:

103/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Table 11: Average cost of particular testing technique

NDT

Technique
Visual inspection and crack pattern
survey
Crack pattern survey (direct
inspection)
Gypsum or glass strips

NDT

Levelling

NDT

Thermography (N1)

NDT

Impact-echo (N3)

NDT
NDT

Pachometer (N4)
Manual percussion

NDT

Sonic transmission + direct visual


inspection

NDT

Sonic (N5)

NDT

Radar in reflection or in
tomographic mode (N6)
Ultrasonic impulse-echo (N7) and
tomography
Coring and direct visual inspection
by boroscopy or fiberscope or
videocamera (M1, M3)
Prismatic sample testing (M1)

NDT
NDT

NDT
MDT

MDT

MDT
MDT
MDT
MDT

DT

104/114

Double flat jack (M6)


Single flat jack (M5)
Hole Drilling Method (M2)
Direct visual inspection by
boroscopy or fiberscope or
videocamera (M3)
In-situ shear test (D2)

Cost
750 /day,
2
m /day: variable
750 /day,
2
m /day: variable
Labour cost corresponding to 30 minutes for a strip +
inspection and evaluation time costs (might be high
according to travel distance).
It is no possible to give a value because of the great number
of different cases; the costs depend on the technical
specifications of the equipment, the accessibility to the
measuring points, the installation technique of the sensors,
the frequency of measuring,
etc.
2500 /day
Duration of measurement depends on many factors. With
artificial heat source only relatively small areas can be
investigated. Examples:
Masonry with plaster 3cm: 2m require 90min
plaster 1cm: 2m require 10min
2500 /day
2
3 m /day
500 /day
Equal to cost of labour per time necessary to investigations.
Time consumption of about 15 min/m2 in average dependent
on documentation technique. (Without scaffolding costs).
1000 /day,
2
20 m /day for sonic plus
40 /h for calibration by core drilling
1000 /day for transmission,
2
20 m /day or 2000 /day for tomography
2-3 tomographic sections
1000-2000 /day, 100 mq/day or 2-4 tomographic sections
2500 /day
2
5 m /day
40 /h

Compression and bending tests need about 8 hours for one


place (taking off samples, preparation of specimens, testing,
evaluation) + transport
1200 /each
800 /each
200 /each
40 /h

2 days duration (4 person/day)


cca. 2000 per wall, plus cutting the wall and travel
expenses

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

5.5

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Definition of confidence factors (according to [12])

There are two possible options to identify the effect of knowledge of AA on the obtained seismic
resistance. The first one is according to EC8-3 methodology and by defining proper confidence
factors according to pre-defined knowledge levels. Alternative to this approach is through
sensitivity analysis of mechanical parameters considering their deviation or coefficient of variation.
Once the constructions have been identified in relation to the depth of the geometric survey, the
material and constructive surveys, and the mechanical research regarding the terrain and
foundation, the designer assigns a confidence factor FC, ranging from 1 to 1.35, which grades the
reliability of the structural analysis model and the evaluation of the seismic safety index.
The confidence factor, that reflects uncertainties on the mechanical properties and hypotheses
adopted in different modelling strategies, is applied differently depending on the model for
evaluating seismic safety. They can be classified as follows:
1. Models which consider the deformability and the resistance of the materials and structural
elements (Continuum Constitutive Laws Models, Structural Element Models, Interface
Models);
2. Models which consider the balance limits of the various elements of the structure, taking
into account the masonry materials as stiff and non-resistant to traction (the creation of
kinematic models of rigid blocks, by means of the introduction of justifiable separations Macro-Blocks Models).
In the first case, the confidence factor is applied to the properties of the materials, reducing both
the plastic model as well as the resistance. The starting values of the mechanical characteristics to
which the confidence factor is applied will be defined in intervals after the usual construction
techniques of the age, on the basis of the resultants of the materials surveys and the construction
details.
In the second case, regarding rigid blocks, in which the resistance of the materials is not taken into
consideration, the confidence factor is applied directly to the structural capacity. In other words, by
reducing the corresponding acceleration to the various limit states. Whenever surveys are
conducted on the mechanical properties of masonry, a partial confidence factor FC3, a value lower
than 0.12 may be assigned only when the resistance of the masonry under compression is
considered in the evaluation model.
In both cases, the definition of confidence factors should refer to the material/typology which most
significantly penalises the specific mechanism of damage/collapse under question.
For example, the confidence factor may be determined by defining diverse partial confidence
factors, FCk (k=1,4), on the basis of the numerical coefficients reported in following table, in which
values are associated to four categories of research and to the level of depth reached:
FC = 1+FCk (k=1,4)
The definition of the level of the depth of research on diverse aspects of knowledge and relative
partial confidence factors:

105/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Table 12: Values of partial confidence factors as proposed by [12]


Geometric Survey
The Geometric survey has
been completed

Material and Construction


Survey
limited survey of materials and
constructive elements

Mechanical Properties of the


Materials
mechanical parameters
deduced from available data

FC1=0.05

FC2=0.12

FC3=0.12

Terrain and
Foundations
limited survey of terrain and
foundations, in absence of
Geological data or availability
of information about the
foundation

FC4=0.06
The Geometric survey has
been completed along with
the graphic rendering of
cracking and deformations

extensive survey of materials


and constructive elements

limited research of mechanical


parameters of materials

FC2=0.06

FC3=0.06

exhaustive survey of materials


and constructive elements

extensive research of
mechanical parameters of
materials

extensive or exhaustive
research on the terrain and
foundation

FC3=0

FC4=0

FC1=0

Geological data and


information regarding the
foundation structures is
available; limited research on
terrain and foundation

FC4=0.03
FC2=0

The geometric survey in any case, must be developed to a level of detail coherent with the needs
of the adopted geometric model in the analytical evaluation and/or the necessary qualitative
considerations. The material research (typology and texture of the masonry, and the state of the
floors, structures, and filled arches, etc.) and of the constructive details (wall clamping, eventual
weaknesses, entities and types of horizontal supports, measure taken for thrust containment,
material decay, etc.) must tend to be compatible with the necessities of protecting the building,
ascertaining the various construction typologies present, their placement and repetition, with
particular attention to all aspects which may trigger local collapse mechanisms.
When diverse structural materials are present, the level of depth and the consequent confidence
factor FC3 may refer to materials or the most significant materials which influence the assigning of
the seismic safety index. When the seismic analysis is based on an evaluation which differs from
local mechanisms levels of partial confidence factors relative to each modelled portion may be
utilised.
In the case of evaluation of local characteristics when information regarding terrain and the
foundations does not bear any relation to the specific collapse mechanisms, a partial confidence
factor FC4 of 0 may be assigned. In other cases, as far as knowledge regarding terrain and
foundations is concerned, aspects linked to the definition of the ground categories should be
distinguished from those relating to the transmittance of actions of the structure to the ground
(Geometry of foundations and geotechnical parameters of foundational terrain).

106/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

References
1. Abbas N., Calderini C., Cattari S., Lagomarsino S., Rossi M., Ginanni Corradini R.,
Marghella G., Piovanello V. PERPETUATE, Deliverable D4, Classification of the cultural
heritage assets, description of the target performances and identification of damage
measures, July 2010;
2. Binda, L, Anzani, A., Tiraboschi, C. et al. On-site investigation techniques for the structural
evaluation of historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical guidelines for an
appropriate use of the suggested equipment Flat Jack Tests, POLIMI, Milano, 2004.
http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
3. Bosiljkov, V., Maierhofer, C., Binda, L., da Porto, F. et al., ONSITEFORMASONRY. On-site
investigation techniques for the structural evaluation of historic masonry buildings.
Deliverable D10.2 & 10.4, Report on the evaluation at pilot sites (Report for owners of
historic buildings) : pilot site: Piece / Slovenia : revised report., Slovenian National Building
and Civil Eng. Inst., Ljubljana, 2004. http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
4. Bosiljkov, V., Maierhofer, C., Binda, L., et al., ONSITEFORMASONRY. Deliverable D11.3
final draft ver.04, Recommendations for the end users (December 2004): revised report.
Ljubljana: Zavod za gradbenitvo Slovenije, 2004. http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de.
5. Bosiljkov, V., Maierhofer, C., Binda, L., Valuzzi, M. et al., On-site investigation techniques
for the structural evaluation of historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.3 final draft
ver.04, Recommendations for the end users (December 2004) : revised report. Slovenian
National Building and Civil Eng. Inst., Ljubljana, 2004. http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
6. Calderini, C., Cattari, S., Lagomarsino, S. and Rossi, M. PERPETUATE, Deliverable D7,
Review of existing models for global response and local mechanisms, September, 2010
7. DAyala D., Novelli V. PERPETUATE, Deliverable D5, Abacus of the most common seismic
damage, September, 2010.
8. DAyala D., Novelli V. PERPETUATE, Deliverable D8, Review and validation of existing
vulnerability displacement-based models, September, 2010.
9. Da Porto, F., Binda, L. et al. On-site investigation techniques for the structural evaluation of
historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical guidelines for an appropriate use
of the suggested equipment Sonic pulse velocity test, UNIPD, Padua 2004.
http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
10. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part1: General rules, seismic
actions and rules for buildings, CEN/TC 250, Brussels, Belgium, October 30, 2003
11. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part3: Assessment and
retrofitting of buldings, CEN/TC 250, Brussels, Belgium, November, 2004.
12. Guidance on Inventory and Documentation of the Cultural Heritage , Council of Europe
Publishing, Strasbourg, 2001;

107/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

13. Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage, Directive of the
Prime Minister, 12/10/2007, G.U. n.24 of 29/1/2008, Gangemi Editor, Rome. ISBN 978-88492-1269-3, 2007 (harmonized with the text of DM 14.01.2008 according to approval of
23/07/2010).
14. ICOMOS, Principles for the Recording of Monuments, Groups of Buildings and Sites,
Ratified by the 11th ICOMOS General Assembly in Sofia, October 1996.
15. ICOMOS, Recommendations for the analysis, conservation and structural restoration of
architectural heritage, International Scientific Committee for Analysis and Restoration of
Structures of Architectural Heritage,, (Part I- Principles ratified as ICOMOS document by
the General Assembly in Zimbabwe,October 2003; Part II-Guidelines approved in the
meeting held by the committee at Barcelona, 2005).
16. Kpp, C., Wiggenhauser, H. On-site investigation techniques for the structural evaluation of
historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical guidelines for an appropriate use
of
the
suggested
equipment

Impact-echo,
BAM,
Berlin,
2004.
http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
17. Kpp, C., Wiggenhauser, H. On-site investigation techniques for the structural evaluation of
historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical guidelines for an appropriate use
of the suggested equipment Ultrasonic Methods, BAM, Berlin, 2004.
http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
18. Letellier R., Schmid W. and LeBlanc F., Recording, Documentation, and Information
Management for the Conservation of Heritage Places Guiding Principles, The Getty
Conservation Institute, 2007;
19. Maierhofer C., V. Bosiljkov, L. Binda, C. Modena, R. Van Hees, B. Lubelli, J. Akerboom, M.
Forde, C. Hennen, D. Biggs, M. Schuller and F. Casarin, RILEM TC SAM Strategies for
the assessment of historic masonry structures with NDT: State-of-the-Art for the
assessment of historic masonry structures with NDT, Report draft Version No.08, 2009
20. Maierhofer, C., Bosiljkov, V., Binda, L., da Porto, F. et al.,. On-site investigation techniques
for the structural evaluation of historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical
guidelines for an appropriate use of the suggested equipment : revised report., BAM, Berlin,
2004. http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
21. Maierhofer, C., et al. On-site investigation techniques for the structural evaluation of historic
masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical guidelines for an appropriate use of the
suggested
equipment

Active
Thermography,
BAM,
Berlin,
2004.
http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
22. Marchisio, M., DOnofrio, L. On-site investigation techniques for the structural evaluation of
historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical guidelines for an appropriate use
of the suggested equipment Geoelectric Tomography, UNIPI, Pisa, October, 2004.
http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de

108/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

23. Modena, C., Vignoli, A. et al., ReLUIS progetto - Linea di Ricerca N.1: Valutazione e
riduzione della vulnerability di edifice in muratura, Taskt 3b Murature, Prodotti Finali Sub
Task 3b.3 Indagini diagnostiche su tipologie murarie, Marzo, 2009.
24. Zanzi, L., Maierhofer, C., et al. On-site investigation techniques for the structural evaluation
of historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical guidelines for an appropriate
use
of
the
suggested
equipment

Radar,
BAM,
Berlin,
2004.
http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de
25. Zulueta,A., Barrallo, J., On-site investigation techniques for the structural evaluation of
historic masonry buildings. Deliverable D11.1, Technical guidelines for an appropriate use
of the suggested equipment Hole drilling, GEOCISA, October, 2004.
http://www.onsiteformasonry.bam.de

109/114

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

APPENDIX: Collection of data according to Italian guidelines

Survey form

What

FORM A Building
Information

Its goal is to identify the building in an univocal manner.

A1. Juridical qualification of owner


A2. References of the owner

Specify the juridical qualifications: State, Region, Province,


Commune, Entity or Public Institution, Private non-profit juridical
persons, Private owners.
Indicate: denomination, Fiscal Code, address, name of legal proxy,
name of representative responsible for the procedure.

A3. Denomination of the landmark

Give the proper name or the current denomination utilised for


identification of the landmark.

A4. Toponymic Information

Indicate: region, province, commune, toponymic of the location,


toponymic of the street, civic number.

A5. Geographic Coordinates

A6. Cadastral Data

A7. Adjacent Properties

A8. Period of Realisation

A9. Current End Use

A10. Photographic Documentation

A11. Planimetric Extract

A12. Morphological Description

A13. Presence of valuable elements

110/114

Explanatory Notes

Indicate the geographic coordinates (x, y) and the relative reference


system (preferably Gauss-Boaga, Rome 40). It is advisable to utilise
computer systems to directly locate the exact point.
Indicate: cadastral commune, map, parcel, and sub alternation.
Specify if the cadastral identification refers to a Cadastral Building
(C.F.) or to Cadastral Terrain (C.T.).
Indicate all elements adjacent to the landmark. For the cadastral
parcels the codes of Point A6 are valid; for all other elements
(streets, rivers, ditches, etc.) the terms may be chosen freely.
Indicate the year of construction of the landmark in its actual state.
An alternative to this is to indicate the part of the century (early, late,
first half, second half).
Indicate The current end use, distinguishing the use category
(Residential, Commercial, Third-Party Directional, Logistic-Factory,
Cultural, Art Studio, Sport Facility, Gaming-Recreational, TouristReception, Restaurant, Public Services, Military, Place of Worship,
Technological Equipment, Other, Unutilised) and the specific use
(free use of terminology; i.e. museum, shop, barracks, office
building, church, etc.).
Attach a minimum of 10 photographs for each landmark, complete
with captions. The photographic angles must document the
landmark in an exhaustive manner both internally as well as
externally. In particular, the exterior must be shot, the main
perspective from the front of the building and other angles, the
entrance hall and stairs, the most important interior areas, and
detailed shots of the pavements and ceilings
Attach the extract of the cadastral map, in 1:1.000 or 1:2.000 scale,
exactly identifying the location of the landmark, through the outlining
of the parcel.
Describe the physical structure of the construction, the architectonic
typology, and the most important architectonic and constructive
elements.
Indicate the presence of any valuable elements from a cultural
viewpoint. The term, decorative elements, is meant to signify those
listed in art. 11, paragraph 1, letter a) of the Code: frescoes, coats of
arms, graffiti, tomb stones, inscriptions, tabernacles, and other
building ornaments whether or not in public view, as stated in art.
50, paragraph 1: Specify if the element is inside or outside the
building. Moreover, signal the presence of treasures or notable
furniture collections as well as the presence of visible archaeological
findings.

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Survey form

What
A14. Other documentation

A15. Evaluation of Cultural Importance

FORM B. Sensitivity
Factors

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Explanatory Notes
Attach any other available documentation (blueprints, maps, aerial
photography, prints of reliefs, images, reports, administrative acts,
detailed modules).
Specify the details of eventual provisions of cultural interest (binding
decrees or declarations). Only when conducting seismic safety
evaluations, indicate the importance of the landmark, expressed in
terms relative to the following categories: limited, average, high.
Contain the necessary data for determining the rapport between the
building and its territorial context as an ends of classifying particular
sensitivity factors.

B1 Dimensional Characteristics
B1a. Covering surfaces
B1b. Gutter height
B1c. Number of floors underground
B1d. Number of floors above ground
B1e. Eidotype

The term eidotype means a hand-drawn sketch or etching where the


floor plans are shown, perspectives, and sections of the building as
well as all elements of the site and in the constructive context that
must be highlighted in order to perform the evaluation. The ediotype,
when a geometric relief is lacking, constitutes a simplified geometric
model of reference on which the main dimensional data is shown
and later information.

B2 Localisation
B2a. Territorial zone

Report if the building is located in an urban context, outside of the


city, or on farmland, etc.

B2b. Environmental Geographic


Characteristics

Report if the building is near rivers, streams, the sea, landforms,


green zones, etc.

B2c. Environmental Anthropic Characteristics

Report if the building is located near primarily or secondary roads,


industrial complexes, worksites, etc.

B3 Terrain and foundations


B3a. Orographic Characteristics
B3b. Geo-morphologic Characteristics
B3c. Ground modifications

Report if the building is located in-plane or near crests, precipices,


etc. Indicate the slope of the terrain (expressed in percentages).
Report if the category of the foundation terrain, as specified in point
3.1 of the Guidelines. Also indicate if a risk of mudslides is present.
Indicate any eventual phenomena that modified the state of the
ground and the causes (changes to water tables, flooding, breaking
of aqueducts, droughts, excavations, surveys, etc.).

B4 Analysis of Building Aggregates

B4a. Architectonic Complexes

B4b. Parts of the Architectonic Complex

B5 Accessibility

B6 State of Use

FORM C Morphology
of the Elements

111/114

Specify if the landmarks is an isolated architectonic complex or a


building aggregate, and how many and which buildings form it.
Through an eidotype, define the dimensional rapport between the
floor plan and in elevation of the diverse constituent parts of the
architectonic complex. The term architectonic complex signifies a
system made up of more than one building which are physically
interconnected and form a circumscribed spatial entity.
Specify if the landmark is part of an architectonic complex and
define its rapport (corner building, key building, contiguous, etc.).
Report if the building is either completely or partially accessible, or
inaccessible because of intrinsic causes (collapse, condemned,
sealed off, etc.) or extrinsic causes (landslides, inaccessibility due to
lack of roads, garbage, etc.)
Report if the building is used in its entirety or only partially. Moreover
it should be stated the frequency of use according to the following
categories: very frequent (daily frequency), frequent (at least weekly
use), infrequent or unused (sporadic use).
Has the goal of identifying and describing the structural elements,
through the understanding of the morphology, typology, constructive
techniques and materials used.

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Survey form

What
C1 Codification of Structural Elements
C2 Possibility of Inspection
C3. Morphology
C4. Typology of structural elements

C5 Typology of finishing elements

C6 Constructive techniques of structural


elements

C7 Constructive finishing techniques

C8 Mechanical Parameters

C9 Elements of Artistic and Historical value

C10 Material finishing


FORM D State of
Preservation

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

Explanatory Notes
Identify the structural elements that are recognisable at a planimetric
level with alpha-numeric progressive codes according to the
categories below:
For each element codified in point C1, specify whether inspection,
partial inspection or no inspection is possible.
For each element codified in point C1 describe the morphology of:
For each element codified in point C1 describe the constructive
typology according to the terminology elaborated on the regional
level. For example:
For each element codified in point C1 describe the typology of the
finishing elements according to the vocabulary elaborated on the
regional level. For example: plaster, stone wall coverings, wood,
ceramics, lowered ceilings, structures in view, etc. Specify the
finishing element is inside or outside, intrados or extrados.
For each element codified in point C1 describe the constructive
typology according to the vocabulary elaborated at the regional
level. Masonry must be analysed utilising survey forms which must
contain:
- descriptions of the characteristics of the materials that make up the
components, the geometric rapport between the height of the block
and the thickness of the horizontal diaphragms, placement and
alignment deduced from the texture and the masonry equipment.
- evaluation of the interlocking of the blocks (placement of both
bands and regularly placed elements),conservation state and level
of disorganisation in the masonry
For each element codified in point C1 describe the constructive
typology according to the vocabulary elaborated at the regional
level.
For each element codified in point C1 report the mechanical
parameters obtained by diagnostic research done on the structure
or by analogy.
gn = Average resistance to compression
t0 = Shear resistance
E = Average value of normal elasticity
G = Average value of tangential elasticity
W =Average specific weight
For each element codified in point C1 identify and describe any
eventual elements of artistic value: decorated wall panels (friezes,
frames, frescoes, paintings, coats of arms, sculpture, etc.), ancient
construction techniques (plaster, wall treatments, beams, metallic
elements, particular wall textures), built-in furnishings (tapestries,
pictures, altars, statues, tabernacles, etc.).
For each element codified in point C1, and for eventual valuable
elements present, identify their materials through a visual analysis
or laboratory tests if available.

Classification and description of damage


phenomena to single structural elements
D1. Structural damage
D1a. Masonry panels

Out of plumb

Wall swelling

Vertical translation

Horizontal translation

Superficial cracking (specify the


wall depth/thickness

Passing cracking

Diffused or isolated fissures

Collapse

112/114

To be identified for each element listed in point C1. For fissures, the
evaluation is meant as the relief of the position of the cusps and of
cyma, maximum distance between the fissured edges and the
relative out-of-plane shifting of fissured edges.

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Survey form

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

What

Explanatory Notes

D1b. Resistant structures by shape

To be identified for each element listed in point C1: The evaluation


of the damage/collapse mechanism; Quantification and positioning
of cracking.

D1c. Horizontal Diaphragms

Visual evaluation of defects


(according to the visual
classification of the wood used)

Fragile Breakage

Type of Support

Misalignment of support

Deformation (F/L > 1/300; F/L >


1200; F/L >> 1200)

Collapse
D1d. Articulated wooden structures

Visual evaluation of defects


(according to the visual
classification of the wood used)

Quality of the junctions and unions

Fragile Breakage

Out-of-plane rotation belonging to


the structure

Inflexion

Collapse

To be identified for each element listed in point C1.

To be identified for each element listed in point C1

D2. Material Damage


D2a. Masonry structures

Separation

Erosion

Break-up
D2b. Simple and articulated wooden
structures

rottenness

termite damage
D3 Causes of Damage
D3a. Intrinsic causes

humidity

Thermal cycles

Rain water flow

vegetation

not estimable
D3b. Extrinsic causes

Seismic events

Landslides/flooding

Explosions/fires

Anthropic actions

not estimable
D4 Analysis of structural details

effectiveness of hubs in multi-rod


structures

effectiveness of orthogonal wall


connections

effectiveness of wall to ceiling


connections

presence of in-plane stringcourses

architraves with flexional resistance

thrusting structural elements

tie-rods, restraints, buttresses

presence of high vulnerability


elements
D5 Interactions between Structural Units

Grade of bonds between

113/114

To be identified for each element listed in point C1. Specify the


extension of the damages surface by a percentage.

To be identified for each element listed in point C1. Specify the


extension of the damages surface by a percentage.

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229

Survey form

What

Explanatory Notes

114/114

Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

contiguous elements
Actions of contiguous elements