Application of Near Surface Mounted (NSM) technique for Seismic Retrofitting of Heritage Buildings - Journal of Research on Archaeometry
year 6, Issue 1 (2020)                   JRA 2020, 6(1): 97-118 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


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

Akhoundi F, Mohammadpour R, Shahbazi Y. Application of Near Surface Mounted (NSM) technique for Seismic Retrofitting of Heritage Buildings. JRA. 2020; 6 (1) :97-118
URL: http://jra-tabriziau.ir/article-1-216-en.html
1- Tabriz Islamic Art University , f.akhoundi@tabriziau.ac.ir
2- University of Tabriz
3- Tabriz Islamic Art University
Abstract:   (774 Views)
The high vulnerability of the cultural buildings due to seismic actions urged researchers to retrofit them using reversible and compatible techniques. The application of fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) for enhancing the structural behavior of masonry buildings, under seismic actions, has been studied by many researchers. The near-surface mounting (NSM) technique is a relatively new retrofitting approach that involves bonding FRP bars/strips inserted into grooves cut of mortar joints. This method is an appropriate technique to be used in seismic retrofitting of heritage buildings, because of its low influence on the global mass, high strength-to-weight ratios, minimum durability concern, ease of handling, flexibility and fast installation that improve on-site productivity, low impact of building functions, and low architectural and structural interventions. No.1 Educational heritage building of Tabriz Islamic Art University has flexible diaphragms with unreinforced masonry walls as lateral and gravitational resisting system. The masonry walls have no tie beams or columns and appropriate connection to the floors. Furthermore, the building has irregularity in plane because of length to width ratio more than 3. Another deficiency of this building to resist seismic load is related to the existence of small percentage of masonry wall in transversal direction compared with longitudinal direction, which can be result in torsional irregularity in the structure. The aim of this paper is to investigate the effectiveness of applying NSM technique on seismic performance of this heritage building. For this purpose, a 3D Equivalent frame model was created in 3Muri software to simulate the structural behavior of strengthened masonry walls. The masonry was modeled by macro-modeling approach and FRP bars/strips were modeled as attaching to the masonry walls. A safety index value according to “Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage”, have been calculated to evaluate the seismic behavior of the building before and after applying retrofitting method. The selected safety index depends on shear strength of the structure, site seismic hazard zone and the desired building performance level. Nonlinear static analysis has been employed by 3Muri software to evaluate the safety index for selected limit states including Ultimate Limit State (SLU) and Damage Limit State (SLD). The distribution of lateral load is done in two different modes; proportional to the shape of the first mode and proportional to story mass. Based on the results of twenty-four pushover analysis, it has been concluded that inserting the FRP strips to the masonry walls and adding new masonry walls reinforced by FRP bars, increase the safety index significantly in both directions, especially in the transversal direction. Also it has been observed that shear strength of the building increased considerably after applying the retrofitting design relative to the existing condition. More uniform distribution of the safety index between different analyses was another positive effect of using this technique. The results of this research demonstrated the advantages of using NSM technique for seismic performance of heritage buildings and are based on a numerical modeling and pushover analysis which uses the performance criteria of safety index, while more experimental and numerical studies are proposed for future studies.
Full-Text [PDF 2341 kb]   (139 Downloads)    
Technical Note: Original Research | Subject: Conservation Science
Received: 2020/02/19 | Accepted: 2020/06/3 | Published: 2020/06/30 | ePublished: 2020/06/30

References
1. Emami S.M.A. Archaeometry, a discipline for linking archaeology to natural sciences (Aims and Scopes). Journal of Research on Archaeometry. 2016; 1: 75-82. [Original in Persian with English Abstract][امامی سید محمدامین. باستان‏سنجی پلی میان علوم طبیعی و مهندسی با باستان‏شناسی (اهداف و دورنما). دو فصلنامه علمی-مروری پژوهه باستان‌سنجی. 1394؛1(2): 75-82.] [DOI:10.29252/jra.1.2.75]
2. Lourenco PB. Computational strategies for masonry structures (Ph.D. thesis). Delft University Press, Delft, The Netherlands; 1996.
3. Callerio A, Papa E. An elastic-plastic model with damage for cyclic analysis of masonry panels. Computer Methods in Structural Masonry. 1998 Aug 20;4:19-26.
4. Zhuge Y, Thambiratnam D, Corderoy J. Nonlinear dynamic analysis of unreinforced masonry. Journal of structural engineering. 1998 Mar;124(3):270-7. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:3(270)]
5. Syrmakezis CA, Asteris PG. Masonry failure criterion under biaxial stress state. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. 2001 Feb;13(1):58-64. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2001)13:1(58)]
6. Berto L, Saetta A, Scotta R, Vitaliani R. Shear behaviour of masonry panel: parametric FE analyses. International journal of solids and structures. 2004 Aug 1;41(16-17):4383-405. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2004.02.046]
7. D'Ayala D, Speranza E. Definition of collapse mechanisms and seismic vulnerability of historic masonry buildings. Earthquake Spectra. 2003 Aug;19(3):479-509. [DOI:10.1193/1.1599896]
8. Augusti G, Ciampoli M, Giovenale P. Seismic vulnerability of monumental buildings. Structural Safety. 2001 Jan 1;23(3):253-74. [DOI:10.1016/S0167-4730(01)00018-2]
9. Bakeer T, Jager W. Seismic retrofitting of adobe masonry buildings based on collapse analysis. Retrofitting of Heritage Structures: Design and Evaluation of Strengthening Techniques. 2013:111. [DOI:10.2495/978-1-84564-754-4/10]
10. Instruction for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings. Tehran: Office of Deputy for Strategic Supervision. Department of Technical Affairs; 2014. [in Persian][دستورالعمل بهسازی لرزه‏ای ساختمان‏های موجود. تهران: معاونت نظارت راهبردی. امور نظام فنی؛ 1392.]
11. American Society of Civil Engineers. Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. FEMA-356. Washington D.C: Federal Emergency Management Agency; 2000.
12. Benedetti DU, Carydis P, Limongelli MP. Evaluation of the seismic response of masonry buildings based on energy functions. Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics. 2001 Jul;30(7):1061-81. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.52]
13. Branco M, Guerreiro LM. Seismic rehabilitation of historical masonry buildings. Engineering structures. 2011 May 1;33(5):1626-34. [DOI:10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.01.033]
14. Lourenço PB. Recommendations for restoration of ancient buildings and the survival of a masonry chimney. Construction and Building Materials. 2006 May 1;20(4):239-51. [DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.08.026]
15. Lourenço PB, Roque JA. Simplified indexes for the seismic vulnerability of ancient masonry buildings. Construction and Building Materials. 2006 May 1;20(4):200-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.08.027]
16. Bento R, Lopes M, Cardoso R. Seismic evaluation of old masonry buildings. Part II: Analysis of strengthening solutions for a case study. Engineering structures. 2005 Dec 1;27(14):2014-23. [DOI:10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.06.011]
17. Karantoni FV, Fardis MN. Effectiveness of seismic strengthening techniques for masonry buildings. Journal of Structural Engineering. 1992 Jul;118(7):1884-902. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1992)118:7(1884)]
18. Naeim F, Kelly JM. Design of seismic isolated structures: from theory to practice. John Wiley & Sons; 1999 Mar 25. [DOI:10.1002/9780470172742]
19. Ismail N. Selected strengthening techniques for the seismic retrofit of unreinforced masonry buildings (Doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland).
20. Instruction for seismic rehabilitation of structures with Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP). Tehran: Road, Housing and Urban Development Research Center; 2014. [in Persian].[دستورالعمل بهسازی لرزه‏ای ساختمان‏ها با استفاده از مصالح FRP. تهران: مرکز تحقیقات راه مسکن و شهرسازی، تهران؛ 1392.]
21. Petersen RB, Masia MJ, Seracino R. Bond behavior of near-surface mounted FRP strips bonded to modern clay brick masonry prisms: Influence of strip orientation and compression perpendicular to the strip. Journal of Composites for Construction. 2009 Jun;13(3):169-78. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2009)13:3(169)]
22. Triantafillou TC. Strengthening of masonry structures using epoxy-bonded FRP laminates. Journal of composites for construction. 1998 May;2(2):96-104. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1998)2:2(96)]
23. Marcari G, Manfredi G, Prota A, Pecce M. In-plane shear performance of masonry panels strengthened with FRP. Composites Part B: Engineering. 2007 Oct 1;38(7-8):887-901. [DOI:10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.11.004]
24. Petersen RB, Masia MJ, Seracino R. In-plane shear behavior of masonry panels strengthened with NSM CFRP strips. I: Experimental investigation. Journal of Composites for Construction. 2010 Dec;14(6):754-63. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000134]
25. Petersen RB, Masia MJ, Seracino R. In-plane shear behavior of masonry panels strengthened with NSM CFRP strips. II: Finite-element model. Journal of Composites for Construction. 2010;14(6):764-74. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000137]
26. Rezaeifar O, Younesi A, Gholhaki M. Seismic Retrofit of a Historical Building in Tehran University Museum Using FRP Technology and Steel Jacketing. Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering. 2016 Feb 1;4(1):41-54.
27. Iranian code of practice for seismic resistant design of buildings. Standard No. 2800. 4th ed. Tehran: Road, Housing and Urban Development Research Center. 2014. [in Persian] [آیین‏نامه طراحی ساختمان‏ها در برابر زلزله، استاندارد 2800 ایران. ویرایش چهارم. تهران: مرکز تحقیقات راه مسکن و شهرسازی، تهران؛ 1393.]
28. Lourenço PB. Computations on historic masonry structures. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials. 2002 Jul;4(3):301-19. [DOI:10.1002/pse.120]
29. Lignola GP, Prota A, Manfredi G. Nonlinear analyses of tuff masonry walls strengthened with cementitious matrix-grid composites. Journal of Composites for Construction. 2009 Aug;13(4):243-51. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000007]
30. Lignola GP, Prota A, Manfredi G. Numerical investigation on the influence of FRP retrofit layout and geometry on the in-plane behavior of masonry walls. Journal of Composites for Construction. 2012 Dec 1;16(6):712-23. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000297]
31. Tomaževič M. Dynamic modelling of masonry buildings: storey mechanism model as a simple alternative. Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics. 1987 Aug;15(6):731-49. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.4290150606]
32. Magens G. Della Fontana A. Simplified non-linear seismic analysis of masonry buildings. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 5th International Masonry Conference; 1998 October 13-15; London: British Masonry Society; 1998. p. 190-195.
33. S.T.A. DATA. 3MURI-Seismic calculation of masonry structures according to M.D 14/01/2008 New technical codes for constructions; 2009.
34. Instruction for seismic rehabilitation of existing unreinforced masonry buildings. Tehran: Office of Deputy for Strategic Supervision. Department of Technical Affairs; 2007. [in Persian]. [دستورالعمل بهسازی لرزه‏ای ساختمان‏های بنایی غیرمسلح موجود. تهران: معاونت نظارت راهبردی. امور نظام فنی؛ 1386.]
35. EN C. 1-1: Eurocode 6: Design of masonry structures-Part 1-1: General rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels. 2005.
36. Moro L, activities M. Guidelines for Evaluation and Mitigation of Seismic Risk to Cultural Heritage: Gangemi; 2007.
37. Code P. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance-part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization. 2005.
38. EN C. Eurocode: Basis of structural design. United Kingdom: British Standards Institute. 2002.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


© 2021 All Rights Reserved | Journal of Research on Archaeometry

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb