Characterization of the mechanical Properties of Historical Buildings Using Semi Destructive Methods; Case Study Historic Buildings of Nafisi Sorkhehee and Kalantar in Tabriz - Journal of Research on Archaeometry
------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------
year 8, Issue 1 (2022)                   JRA 2022, 8(1): 135-154 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Aminifar E, Akhoundi F, Nejad ebrahimi A. Characterization of the mechanical Properties of Historical Buildings Using Semi Destructive Methods; Case Study Historic Buildings of Nafisi, Sorkhehee and Kalantar in Tabriz. JRA 2022; 8 (1) :135-154
URL: http://jra-tabriziau.ir/article-1-300-en.html
1- Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran
2- Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran , f.akhoundi@tabriziau.ac.ir
Abstract:   (735 Views)
Each year a large number of historical building are destroyed by seismic events. Assessment of seismic vulnerability of heritage buildings has an important role on their conservation process. Identifying the mechanical characteristics of the materials used in constructions is one of the most important steps in seismic assessment, which is determined through destructive and semi-destructive tests. Due to the fact that destructive testing on heritage buildings is considered as kind of damage, Italian researchers have proposed a qualitative method called the masonry quality index (MQI) to estimate the mechanical properties of heritage building materials. In this article, the function of mentioned method has been used to estimate the compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of building materials in Nafisi historical house in Tabriz and the validation of the results has been compared with the results of double flat jack test. According to the comparison of the obtained results, the minimum and maximum compressive strength obtained by the MQI method in the range 3.89 and 2.29 MPa, while the compressive strength obtained by the flat jack test was in the range of 1.13 - 0.81 Mpa. Which indicates a high contrast. Also, the minimum and maximum values ​​of modulus of elasticity calculated by the masonry quality index (MQI) method are in the range between 1628.5 - 1137.06 MPa, which is compared with the results obtained by the double flat jack test between 1182.06 – 1382.27 MPa, showed a good agreement with each other. According to the results of compressive strength, it is necessary more studies are needed to apply the MQI (masonry quality index) method on native heritage buildings. It seems that in case of further studies, the method of masonry quality index can be adjusted appropriately with native heritage buildings and it can be used as a fast and safe method to estimate the mechanical properties of building materials.
Full-Text [PDF 4118 kb]   (434 Downloads)    
Technical Note: Original Research | Subject: Conservation Science
Received: 2022/01/17 | Accepted: 2022/06/20 | Published: 2022/08/21 | ePublished: 2022/08/21

References
1. Borri A, Corradi M, Castori G, De Maria A. A method for the analysis and classification of historic masonry. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering. 2015;13(9):2647-65. [DOI:10.1007/s10518-015-9731-4]
2. Pouraminian M, Hosseini M. Seismic safety evaluation of Tabriz historical citadel using finite element and simplified kinematic limit analyses. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2014;7(4):409. [DOI:10.17485/ijst/2014/v7i4.13]
3. Gajjar PN, Gabrielli E, Martin-Alarcon DC, Pereira JM, Lourenço PB, Colla C. An experimental and numerical contribution for understanding the in-situ shear behaviour of unreinforced masonry. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021;44:103389. [DOI:10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103389]
4. Latinović M. Seismic evaluation of existing buildings according to document FEMA 310. САВРЕМЕНА ТЕОРИЈА И ПРАКСА У ГРАДИТЕЉСТВУ. 2018;13(1). [DOI:10.7251/STP1813664L]
5. Agency FEM. Rapid visual screening of buildings for potential seismic hazards: A handbook: Government Printing Office; 2017.
6. COVENIN. Edificaciones sismorresistentes, Norma COVENIN 1756-98. Comisión Venezolana de Normas Industriales, COVENIN, FONDONORMA, MINDUR y …; 1998.
7. Arya AS. Earthquake resistant design of masonry buildings. Advances in Indian Earthquake Engineering and Seismology: Springer; 2018. p. 259-71. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-76855-7_12]
8. Instructions for improving the vibrations of masonry buildings (code 376). Deputy for strategic supervision of technical system affairs2013.[In persian] [دستورالعمل به‌‌سازی لرزه‌ای ساختمان‌های بنایی (کد376). معاونت امور فنی دفتر امور فنی، تدوین معیارها، 1386.]
9. Abdunur C, editor Stress and deformability in concrete and masonry. IABSE Symposium on Strengthening of Building Structures-Diagnostic and Therapy, Venice, Italy; 1983.
10. Noland J, Atkinson R, Schuller M. A review of the flat-jack method for nondestructive evaluation. Proc Nondestructive evaluation of civil structures and materials, Boulder, USA. 1990.
11. Standard A. C1196-91. situ compressive stress within solid unit masonry estimated using flatjack measurements. 1991.
12. Rilem T. RILEM recommendations for the testing and use of constructions materials. RC. 1994;6:218-20. [DOI:10.1201/9781482271362]
13. RILEM, LUM.D.2, In-situ stress tests on masonry based on the flat jack, .
14. RILEM, LUM.D.3, In-situ strength/elasticity tests on masonry based on the flat-jack.
15. Binda L, Tiraboschi C. Fiat-Jack Test: A slightly destructive technique for the diagnosis of brick and stone masonry structures/Flachpressenprüfung: Eine zerstörungsarme Methode zur Untersuchung von Ziegel-und Natursteinmauenverk. Restoration of Buildings and Monuments. 1999;5(5):449-72. [DOI:10.1515/rbm-1999-5404]
16. Gregorczyk P, Lourenço PB. A review on flat-jack testing. 2000.
17. Binda L, Saisi A, Tiraboschi C. Investigation procedures for the diagnosis of historic masonries. Construction and Building materials. 2000;14(4):199-233. [DOI:10.1016/S0950-0618(00)00018-0]
18. Corradi M, Borri A, Vignoli A. Experimental study on the determination of strength of masonry walls. Construction and building materials. 2003;17(5):325-37. [DOI:10.1016/S0950-0618(03)00007-2]
19. Fanale LG, Dante2 and Pietrucci, Antonio3. APPLICATION OF NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION TEST METHOD FOR ITALIAN MASONRY: MASONRY QUALITY INDEX (MQI) METHOD. 2017.
20. Rovero L, Alecci V, Mechelli J, Tonietti U, De Stefano M. Masonry walls with irregular texture of L'Aquila (Italy) seismic area: validation of a method for the evaluation of masonry quality. Materials and Structures. 2016;49(6):2297-314. [DOI:10.1617/s11527-015-0650-2]
21. gholami s, akhoundi F. Siesmic vulnerability assessment of selected historical houses of Qajar period of Tabriz city according to Italian Guidelines: tabriz islamic art university; 2022.[In persian] [غلامی سمیه، آخوندی فرهاد. ارزیابی آسیب‌پذیری لرزه‌ای خانه‌های تاریخی منتخب دورۀ قاجاریه شهر تبریز طبق دستورالعمل‌های حفاظتی ایتالیا. دانشگاه هنر اسلامی تبریز،1400.]

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Research on Archaeometry

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb