An Introduction To Historical Masonry Buildings

An introduction to historical masonry buildings
An introduction to historical masonry buildings 1
Masonry as an assemblage
Historical masonry buildings are always realized by assembling simpler structural elements
and constraining them to each other in a statically determinate way, by means of unilateral
friction contacts.
The idea of assemblage can

be applied at different
scales:
at the scale of single
structural elements: walls
are made by superimposed
stones or bricks
at the building scale:
masonry buildings are made
by superimposed elements
(beams rest on on walls, …)
at the urban scale: buildings
rise one on top of the other,
or flank to each other.
1
friction contacts.

scales:
stones or bricks
(Formenti, 1870)
friction contacts.

scales:
stones or bricks
2
Significant outcomes of this particular structural concept:
(1) Damage seldom involve the whole structure and affect only a limited number of elements
(unlike what is common in statically indeterminate structures);
(2a) Analysis methods must take into account the intrinsically discontinuous nature of the
assemblage (discrete or continuous models?); C2
G3 G2 C6
G6 G7
C3 C7
C4
G4 G5
G1
C5
C1
3
(2b) Analysis methods must take into account the intrinsically discontinuous nature of the
assemblage (local or global assessment?);
(3) Reinforcement interventions should be of such a nature that one can disassemble
them (compatibility and reversibility);
4
Stability versus strength
Assemblage implies superposition but not strong connections:

- in static conditions this makes easy the maintenance of building allowing the substitution of
damaged or decayed elements
- in seismic conditions this introduces a weakness – for example: floor beams can behave,
in the presence of horizontal actions, as an hypostatic structure.
Anyway, in masonry structures (unlike

steel or r.c structures) the absence of
strong connections between elements
makes predominant the stability of
equilibrium with respect to the
strength of materials.
In eighteenth century, at the heights of

experimental researches on material
properties, Rondelet stated: “We have not to
forget that stability rather than strength
constitutes the firmness of buildings”
(Rondelet, 1834).
(Rondelet, 1834)
“Then you can believe that if the walls of the basilica of St Paul were not retained by the
timber roof of the great nave, and shore up by that of lower aisles, could not sustain
themselves“ (Rondelet, 1834).
Not by chance, once the fire destroyed the roof in 1823, longitudinal walls also collapsed, in
large part.
(Rondelet, 1834)
5
The disruptions of the ancient St Peter’s Basilica were attributed by Alberti to the excessive
length of longitudinal walls "not reinforced by curved portions nor shore up by any support"
(Alberti, 1485).
(Bannister, 1968)
In classic architectural Treatises the design methodology was based on the theory of
proportions which is governed by the same laws that govern the geometry. Applying the
theory of proportions also to mechanics means to assume that structures can be modeled
as rigid bodies (again, stability comes before strength).
Speaking of his famous four bridges, Palladio wrote: “The bridges built according to these
four types can be as long as you need, provided that all their parts are made bigger in
proportion" (Palladio, 1576).
(Palladio, 1576)
6
Similarly, the architecture of buildings is regulated

by the module (i.e. the column diameter at the
bottom).
“Thus, by making the module larger or smaller
depending on the type of building, anyone will be
able to use the proportions and profiles
appropriate to each order drawn in these books"
(Palladio, 1576)
intercolumnio altezza colonne
picnostilo 1.5 M 10 M
sistilo 2M 9.5 M
eustilo 2.25 M 9.5 M
diastilo 3M 9.5 M
aerostilo 3.5 M 8M
altezza colonne (piedi) altezza architrave

15 M/2
20 H/13
25 H/12.5
30 H/12
40 H/11
50 H/10
(Scamozzi, 1535)
Problems of stability prevail on problems of strength for most masonry constructions.

Nevertheless, sometimes we cannot set aside material strength and building scale
(incidentally, for such cases – in which the theory of proportions would lead to failing results
–Treatises’ authors used to invoke the imperfections of matter rather than admit the failure of
their theory).
Scale problems
if the scale model is stable, the full-scale structure is stable too
(geometrical problem)
if the scale model does not break, the full-scale structure can though collapse
(mechanical problem)
Non si può compartir quanto sia lungo,

sì smisuratamente è tutto grosso
(Galileo, 1638)
7
Strength problems
huge structures: the main pillars of Sainte
Geneviévè, as well as those of St Peters, were
strikingly under-sized up to the interventions of
Rondelet and Michelangelo, respectively (Poleni,
1748).
small section structures: columns, arches and

overturning walls whose contact surface is
strongly reduced during the mechanism
(Rondelet, 1834)
Strength problems
Structures in tension
“This kind of disposition has the inconvenience that architraves can break because they
span over an excessive intercolumniation. For this reason, in areostyle orders, stone or
marble entablature cannot be used …” (Vitruvio)
“As you can space columns by three column diameters, intercolumniations are too large; thus
architraves break. But such an inconvenience can be overcome building, above the
architrave and within the frieze, small arches [remenati] that carry loads and unload the
architrave” (Palladio, 1576).
8
Solutions for the architrave problem
Mixed structures
(lwood-stone, iron-stone)
Unloading arches [remenati]

(Palladio)
Structure versus construction
Solutions for the architrave problem
Flat arch
Pre-fractured architrave
9
Since masonry has a weak tensile strength (so much so that it is usually considered a no-
tension material), a tensile stress condition determines the failure of the material or triggers
internal resistant mechanisms that can work only by virtue of compressive actions.
In both cases loads are conveyed along arch paths that work in axial compression.
This determines the impossibility of knowing a priori, once and for all, the actual structure;
which never coincides with the construction and firstly depends on the load condition that the
construction itself has to face.
“C’est la vraie structure”

(Viollet Le Duc, 1863)
“The mortar can be regarded as totally unable to resist

tension, so that [...] it will tend to split [...] it is not
possible to determine in advance the size of all sections”
(Castigliano, 1875)
10
11
Opus quadratum masonry
Opus quadratum masonry
Opus quadratum (coursed ashlar) masonry is built of perfectly squared stones (ashlars) laid
in horizontal courses having the same height (opus isodomum) or different heights (opus
pseudo-isodomum); the stone arrangement has alternate courses of headers (diatoni,
according to Vitruvius) and stretchers (orthostati) – the former have their main dimension
orthogonal to the wall plane, the latter parallel - in which the headers are centered on the
stretchers and the joints between stretchers line up vertically in all courses.
The headers provide transverse bonding of the wall; the strechers provide in-plane bonding
of the wall.
As a consequence, coursed ashlar masonry has two main mechanical characteristics:
transverse compactness (it is monolithic) and horizontal layering (it is built with horizontal
levels).
(Palladio, 1576)
12
Coursed rubble masonry
Coursed rubble masonry is built of rough stones (rubble) of varying size having
approximately level beds and coursed at every third of fourth stone; bigger stones are
arranged alternatively as headers or stretchers and wedged by smaller stones and mortar.
It is a formula somehow intermediate between opus quadratum (because of the
geometrical regularity in stones arrangement) and opus caementicium (because of the use
of smaller stones and mortar as a binder).
The constructional
technique of coursed rubble
masonry is summed up in
the so called rule of the art
for masonry described in
late nineteenth century
Treatises of Architecture
(Sacchi, 1878; Donghi,
1905; Breymann, 1926).
The rule of the art for masonry
It can be abridged in the following points:
1. larger stones must prevail on smaller ones
2 a sufficient number of larger stones must be used as

headers
3. the most regular face of larger stones must be laid

on the underlaying course (so as to have the better
support); the second most regular face must be
exposed on the outer surface of the wall (in order to
protect it effectively form the elements)
4. the voids between larger stones must be filled and

wedged by small stone chips and a limited amount of
mortar
5. mortar function is simply to regularize the contact

between stones and not to bond them
6. at regular height intervals continuous level courses

must be realized in order to ensure the horizontal
layering of masonry
13
Mechanical quality of coursed rubble masonry
The prescriptions of the masonry rule of art aim at providing coursed rubble with the same
mechanical characteristics of opus quadratum: transverse compactness and horizontal
layering.
It follows that, the assessment of the mechanical quality of a coursed rubble wall coincides
with the assessment of the quality of its construction technique, and makes use of the
essential tool of the survey (Giuffrè, 1990).
14
Villa Sant’Angelo (AQ), 2009: good quality masonry works

Villa Sant’Angelo (AQ), 2009: bad quality masonry works

15
Noto Cathedral : collapsed pillars reveal their bad quality

Mechanical modelling
Since opus quadratum masonry sums up,

and idealizes, all the mechanical
characteristics of the coursed rubble
masonry, it can be used not only as a
term of comparison for assessing the
mechanical quality of real walls but also
as a mechanical model for them (with
the possibility of performing structural
analyses that on real masonry would be
unaffordable).
16
17
Mechanical characteristics of the elements
Excellent compressive strength of stones: taking into account the load level usually applied to
masonry structures it is largely acceptable the hypothesis of infinite compressive strength of the stones
(such an hypothesis is equivalent to considering stones as perfectly rigid bodies).
Joints cannot resist tensile forces: cohesion is a property of the individual stones, but not of the joints
between them; these can resist only compressive forces but do not counteract tensile actions (No-Tension
material).
Joints have Coulomb friction properties: friction is the only mechanical strength parameter
characterizing opus quadratum.
Mechanical characteristics of the assemblage
Wall compactness
(assured by the presence of headers and stretchers)
Horizontal layering
Mechanical characteristics of masonry
The most relevant outcomes of the above mentioned characteristics are (Giuffrè, 1990):
1. Limited diffusion of loads: the impossibility of withstanding tensile stresses implies that not the
entire wall supports the loads but only the portions on which the loads are directly applied
18
2. Well bonded masonry acting as a tie: the friction on horizontal joints generates a pseudo-tensile
strength that enables a properly bonded masonry to counteract actions that tend to crack it
3. Monolithic behaviour for out-of-plane actions: such a behavior is made possible by the horizontal
layering of masonry (which guarantees a cylindrical hinge around which the overturning motion can
develop without disrupting the wall) and by the presence of headers (that binds the entire thickness of the
wall)
19
20
4. Monolithic behaviour for in-plane actions: such a behavior is made possible by the presence of
stretchers; cracking mechanisms depend on the number and length of stretchers
21
22
Survey as a tool for mechanical assessment
23
24
References
L. B. Alberti, De Re Aedificatoria, edited by P. Portoghesi e G. Orlandi on 1485 editio princeps, Il Polifilo,

Milano, 1966.
A. Palladio, I quattro Libri dell’Architettura, Venezia, 1576.
J. Rondelet, Traité théorique et pratique de l'art de bâtir, Parigi, 1802; first Italian translation by Basilio
Soresina, Mantova, 1834.
D. Donghi, Manuale dell'architetto, Torino, 1905-1936
A. Giuffrè, Mechanics of historical masonry and strengthening criteria, in: 15th Regional Seminar on
Earthquake Engineering, Ravello, Italy, September 18-23, 1989
25

An Introduction To Historical Masonry Buildings

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Introduction To Historical Masonry Buildings

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An introduction to historical masonry buildings

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 1

The idea of assemblage can

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 2

The idea of assemblage can

The idea of assemblage can

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 4

Significant outcomes of this particular structural concept:

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 5

Significant outcomes of this particular structural concept:

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 6

Significant outcomes of this particular structural concept:

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 7

Significant outcomes of this particular structural concept:

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 8

Assemblage implies superposition but not strong connections:

Anyway, in masonry structures (unlike

In eighteenth century, at the heights of

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 9

Stability versus strength

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 10

Stability versus strength

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 12

Similarly, the architecture of buildings is regulated

altezza colonne (piedi) altezza architrave

Stability versus strength

Problems of stability prevail on problems of strength for most masonry constructions.

Non si può compartir quanto sia lungo,

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 14

small section structures: columns, arches and

Stability versus strength

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 16

Solutions for the architrave problem

Unloading arches [remenati]

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 17

Structure versus construction

Solutions for the architrave problem

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 18

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 19

Structure versus construction

“C’est la vraie structure”

“The mortar can be regarded as totally unable to resist

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 20

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 21

Structure versus construction

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 22

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 23

Opus quadratum masonry

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 25

The rule of the art for masonry

It can be abridged in the following points:

1. larger stones must prevail on smaller ones

2 a sufficient number of larger stones must be used as

3. the most regular face of larger stones must be laid

4. the voids between larger stones must be filled and

5. mortar function is simply to regularize the contact

6. at regular height intervals continuous level courses

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 26

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 27

Mechanical quality of coursed rubble masonry

An introduction to historical masonry buildings 28

Villa Sant’Angelo (AQ), 2009: good quality masonry works