Latest revision as of 14:42, 30 November 2021

Abstract

Limit state analysis of masonry arches sets to assess the safety of the structure by determining the minimum thickness that just contains a thrust line. Based on the Heymanian assumptions regarding material qualities and the equilibrium approach to the static theorem it has been explicitly proven for semi-circular arches that both the thrust line and the resulting minimum thickness value is subject to stereotomy (brick or stone laying pattern), while present study demonstrates, that the latter statement holds for pointed-circular arches as well. This is not straightforward, since the number- and arrangement of the hinges at limit state vary subject to the geometry in case of pointedcircular arches, resulting a more complex problem. It is also explicitly shown, that stereotomy might also affect the corresponding (rotational) failure mode (for certain arch geometries). Stereotomy of an existing structure is not always known, hence it is relevant to search for a stereotomy related bounding value of minimum thickness for each of the various failure modes. The potential of the envelope of resultants as a thrust line (resulting from vertical stereotomy) leading to bounding value minimum thicknesses is discussed: as shown elsewhere it bounds the family of thrust lines, hence leads to an upper bound value of minimum thickness in case of semi-circular arches. It is demonstrated however, that this cannot be generalized for other rotational failure modes which occur for circular-pointed arches. The envelope of resultants does not necessarily lead to a bounding value of minimum thickness, and even if it does, it can be either an upper or a lower bound. However, it is found that the range of minimum thickness values is bounded in all possible failure mode types. The necessary conditions are provided for each.

Full document

References

[1] Heyman, J. The safety of masonry arches. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 11(4) (1969) pp. 363-385.

[2] Cocchetti, G., Colasante, G., Rizzi, E. On the analysis of minimum thickness in circular masonry arches. Applied Mechanics Reviews,64(5) (2011): 050802.

[3] Moseley, H. On the theory of the arch. In: The theory, practice and architecture of bridges, ed. J. Weale. London: Architectural Library, (1843).

[4] Gáspár, O., Sipos, A. Á. and Sajtos, I. Effect of stereotomy on the lower bound value of minimum thickness of semi-circular masonry arches. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, (2018) pp. 1-23.

[5] Milankovitch, M. Theorie der Druckkurven. Zeitschrift für Mathematik und Physik 55 (1907) pp.1-27.

[6] Alexakis, H.,Makris, N. Limit equilibrium analysis of masonry arches. Archive of Applied Mechanics, 85(9-10) (2015) pp. 1363-1381.

[7] Romano, A., Ochsendorf, J. A. The mechanics of gothic masonry arches. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 4(1) (2009) pp. 59-82.

[8] Nikolić, D. Thrust line analysis and the minimum thickness of pointed masonry arches. Acta Mechanica, 228(6) (2017) pp. 2219-2236.

[9] Aita, D., Barsotti, R., Bennati, S. Looking at the collapse modes of circular and pointed masonry arches through the lens of Durand-Claye’s stability area method. Archive of Applied Mechanics (2019), pp. 1-18.

[10]Gáspár, O., Sipos, A. Á., & Sajtos, I. The role of rotational collapse mode and catenarytype thrust lines in the limit state analysis of masonry arches. In Proceedings of IASS Annual Symposia 18 (2019), International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures (IASS), pp. 1-8.