Classification and Finite Element Analysis of Masonry Structures Used in Monumental Buildings between 330-1571 AD in Northern Cyprus

Batu brahimoullar

Submitted to the Institute of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of

Master of Science in Civil Engineering

Eastern Mediterranean University February 2010 Gazimausa, North Cyprus

Approval of the Institute of Graduate Studies and Research

Prof. Dr. Elvan Ylmaz Director (a)

I certify that this thesis satisfies the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering.

Prof. Dr. Ali Gnyakt Chair, Department of Civil Engineering

We certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering.

Asst. Prof. Dr. Giray zay Supervisor

Examining Committee 1. Assoc. Prof. Dr. zgr Eren 2. Asst. Prof. Dr. Erdin Soyer 3. Asst. Prof. Dr. Giray zay

ABSTRACT
Cyprus is one of the oldest islands in the Mediterranean Sea, where human settlements can be traced. The strategic position of the island, results with the settlement of many different civilizations through history. Each of them constructed structures special to their own architectural style. Therefore, the island accommodates to a rich architectural heritage today. Nowadays, it is possible to observe lots of historical buildings belonging to various periods all around the island.

The study focuses on historical masonry structures constructed between 330-1571 AD in Northern Cyprus. The architectural periods, which took place at the specified time interval, are Byzantine (330-1191), Lusignan (1192-1489), and Venetian (14891571). The architectural styles used in Byzantine and Lusignan periods are Romanesque and Gothic in order. The buildings which were constructed in Venetian period are made up of military nature.

The historical masonry structures, belonging to above periods, are evaluated by considering structural forms and elements. This general evaluation is consolidated with a case study, which compares St. Nicholas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) and St. Barnabas Monastery & Icon Museum in structural point of view. Also, Gothic structures in various parts of the Europe and Cyprus are compared to establish the regional differences of Gothic Architecture.

St. Peter and Paul Cathedral (Sinan Pasha Mosque) is selected as the main case study. Finite element analysis is performed with the help of Sap 2000 version 11

iii

computer program for observing the structural behavior, and checking the resistance of its materials under both static and dynamic loads. An appropriate repair strategy for the critical regions of the building is offered by combining the analysis outcomes and visual inspections. Effect of the flying buttresses on the structural behavior is also established in this case study.

Except from the above discussion, essential points that should be considered during the inspection, analysis and strengthening of historical masonry structures are mentioned. Including these information, the study is expected to create guidance for the civil engineers who will begin to study on the subject of historical buildings.

Keywords: Northern Cyprus, historical masonry structures, Gothic, structural elements, finite element analysis.

iv

Z
Kbrs, Akdenizde insanolunun yerleim kurabildii en eski adalardan birisidir. Adann stratejik konumu tarih boyunca birok farkl medeniyetin buraya yerlemesine yol amtr. Bu medeniyetlerin her biri kendi mimari stilleri ile badaan yaplar ina etmilerdir. Dolaysyla, bugn ada zengin bir mimari mirasa ev sahiplii yapmaktadr. Gnmzde, Kbrs genelinde farkl dnemlere ait birok tarihi yapy gzlemlemek mmkndr.

Bu alma milattan sonra 330-1571 yllar arasnda Kuzey Kbrsta ina edilmi tarihi yma yaplar zerinde younlamtr. Belirtilen zaman aral iinde yer alm olan mimari dnemler Bizans (330-1191), Lzinyan (1192-1489) ve Venedik (1489-1571) dnemleridir. Bizans ve Lzinyan dnemlerinde kullanlm olan mimari stiller srasyla Romanesk ve Gotiktir. Venedik dneminde ina edilmi yaplar ise askeri bir doaya sahiptir.

Yukardaki dnemlere ait olan tarihi yma yaplar, yapsal formlar ve elemanlar gz nnde bulundurularak deerlendirilmitir. Bu genel deerlendirme, St. Nikolas Katedrali (Lala Mustafa Paa Camii) ve St. Barnabas Manastr & kon Mzesinin yapsal gzleme dayal karlatrlmasn konu alan bir rnekleme almas ile pekitirilmitir. Ayrca, Avrupann eitli blgelerinde ve Kbrsta bulunan Gotik yaplar, blgesel deiiklikleri tantmak zere karlatrlmtr.

Ana vaka almas olarak St. Peter ve St. Paul Katedrali (Sinan Paa Cami) seilmitir. Yapsal davran gzlemlemek ve yap malzemesinin statik ve dinamik ykler altndaki dayanmn denetlemek iin Sap 2000 versiyon 11 bilgisayar v

program kullanlarak sonlu elemanlar analizi yaplmtr. Analiz sonular ve grsel denetimler birletirilerek yapnn kritik blgeleri iin uygun bir onarm yntemi sunulmutur. Bu vaka almasnda ayrca uan payandalarn (yanal desteklerin) yapsal davran zerindeki etkisi ortaya konulmutur.

Yukardaki tartmann dnda, tarihi yaplarn denetimi, analizi ve glendirilmesi hususunda gz nnde bulundurulmas gereken balca noktalardan bahsedilmitir. Bu bilgileri ieren alma ile, ileride tarihi yaplar alannda almaya balayacak inaat mhendisleri iin bir yol gsterici yaratlmas umulmaktadr.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Kuzey Kbrs, tarihi yma yaplar, Gotik, yapsal elemanlar, sonlu elemanlar analizi.

vi

To My Mother

vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I would like to thank Asst. Prof. Dr. Giray zay for his guidance throughout my thesis. The problems that I had faced with during the thesis study are accomplished with the help of his supervision.

I would like to thank Mr. Ogn Kl and Mr. Mevlt etin for their help during my laboratory study.

I would also like to thank my friends for their help in some stages of my study.

Special thanks to Directorate of Historical Works and Municipality of Famagusta. They allowed me to study within the historical building that I have selected as the case study.

Finally, I would like to thank my brother for helping me while measuring the dimensions of the historical masonry building that I have selected for my case study. Without his help, it would be very difficult to measure the dimensions of the building.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .. iii Z v DEDICATION .. vii ACKNOWLEDGMENT . viii LIST OF TABLES .. xiv LIST OF FIGURES .. xv LIST OF SYMBOLS/ABBREVIATIONS xxii 1 INTRODUCTION ... 1 1.1 Introduction ... 1 1.2 Previous Work Done . 1 1.3 Importance of Cyprus ... 5 1.4 Objectives and Scope 8 1.5 Limitations .. 10 1.6 Organization 10 2 EVALUATION OF HISTORICAL MASONRY STRUCTURES IN NORTHERN CYPRUS (330-1571 AD) .. 12 2.1 Evolution of Masonry Structures 12 2.2 Historical Periods and Architectural Styles in Cyprus (330-1571 AD) .. 21 2.2.1 Byzantine Period (330-1191) ... 21 2.2.1.1 Romanesque Style . 22 2.2.2 Lusignan Period (1192-1489) .. 25 2.2.2.1 Gothic Style .. 26

ix

2.2.3 Venetian Period (1489-1571) ... 31 2.2.3.1 Militaristic Style .... 32 2.3 Characteristics of Basic Structural Elements .. 33 2.3.1 The Wall ... 33 2.3.2 The Pier (Column or Pillar) . 37 2.3.3 The Arch .. 38 2.3.4 The Vault . 40 2.3.4.1 Dome . 42 2.3.4.2 Barrel Vault ... 45 2.3.4.3 Groin Vault ... 46 2.3.4.4 Rib Vault (Ribbed Vault) .. 48 2.3.4.5 Fan Vault ... 51 2.3.5 The Buttress . 53 2.3.6 The Apse .. 56 2.3.7 The Pinnacle . 56 2.4 Regional Differences of Gothic Buildings .. 58 2.4.1 France ... 58 2.4.2 England 59 2.4.3 Germany ... 60 2.4.4 Italy .. 61 2.4.5 Cyprus .. 61 2.5 Comparison of a Byzantine and a Lusignan Monument in North Cyprus . 64 2.5.1 St. Barnabas Monastery ... 64 2.5.2 St. Nicholas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) 66 3 PROPERTIES AND REPAIR TECHNIQUES OF MASONRY ELEMENTS 72

3.1 Components of Masonry 72 3.1.1 Unit (Stone or Brick) .. 73 3.1.2 Mortar . 76 3.2 Mechanical Properties of Masonry Elements 77 3.2.1 Compressive Strength . 78 3.2.2 Shear Strength . 81 3.2.3 Tensile Strength .. 82 3.2.4 Modulus of Elasticity .. 82 3.2.5 Poissons Ration .. 84 3.3 Cracks in Masonry Elements .. 84 3.3.1 Crack Theories for Masonry Elements 84 3.3.1.1 Compression Crack Mechanism under Axial Loads 85 3.3.1.2 Shear Crack Mechanism ... 87 3.3.1.3 Tension Crack Mechanism ... 88 3.3.2 Crack Patterns .. 89 3.3.3 Crack Modeling ... 91 3.3.4 Crack Propagation ... 92 3.3.5 Causes and Remedies of Cracks in Masonry Structures . 95 3.3.5.1 Reinforced Repointing Technique 96 3.3.5.1.1 Reinforced Repointing Used in St. Guistinas Bell Tower ... 98 3.3.5.1.2 Reinforced Repointing Used in St. Sofias Church . 100 3.3.5.2 Jacketing . 103 3.3.5.3 Grout Injection 103 3.3.5.4 Stone (Masonry) Consolidants 105

xi

4 GUIDANCE FOR THE ANALYSIS OF HISTORICAL MASONRY STRUCTURES ... 111 4.1 Historical Survey .. 111 4.2 Geometrical Description ... 112 4.3 Determination of Material Properties and Loads .. 113 4.3.1 Loads .. 113 4.3.2 Tests for Determination of Material Properties . 114 4.3.2.1 Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) . 114 4.3.2.1.1 Sonic Measurements 115 4.3.2.1.2 Rebound Hammer Test 116 4.3.2.1.3 Radar Investigation .. 116 4.3.2.1.4 Thermo Graphic Analysis 116 4.3.2.1.5 Magneto-metric Analysis . 117 4.3.2.1.6 Impact-Echo . 117 4.3.2.2 Destructive Testing . 117 4.3.2.3 In-Situ Testing 118 4.3.2.3.1 Flatjack Tests ... 118 4.3.2.3.2 Dilatometric Tests 119 4.4 Modeling and Analysis . 120 4.4.1 Difficulties in Modeling and Analysis ... 120 4.4.2 Modeling Strategies for Masonry Structures . 121 4.4.2.1 Macro-modeling .. 121 4.4.2.1.1 Methodology of Homogenization 122 4.4.2.2 Simplified Micro-modeling 123 4.4.2.3 Detailed Micro-modeling 124

xii

4.5 Idealizations for Analytical Modeling .. 125 4.5.1 Idealization of Geometry ... 125 4.5.2 Idealization of Structural Behavior 126 4.6 Finite Element Method . 128 5 CASE STUDY: FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF ST. PETER AND ST. PAUL CATHEDRAL (SINAN PASHA MOSQUE) .. 132 5.1 Location and History of the Building ... 132 5.2 Geometrical Description of the Building .. 134 5.2.1 Exterior .. 134 5.2.2 Interior 142 5.2.3 Plans ... 145 5.3 Determination of Material Properties ... 152 5.3.1 Compressive Strength Test 153 5.3.2 Flexural Strength Test 154 5.3.3 Unit Weight Test 155 5.4 Idealizations and Assumptions . 158 5.5 Modeling and Analysis . 159 5.5.1 Static Analysis ... 164 5.5.2 Dynamic Analysis .. 173 5.5.3 Critical Locations and Repair Techniques Offered ... 181 6 CONCLUSIONS . 183 REFERENCES 185 APPENDIX . 196 Glossary for the Typical Cathedral Ground Plan (Romanesque and Gothic) . 197

xiii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Chronology of Cyprus ... 6 Table 2.1: Comparison of St. Barnabas Monastery and St. Nicholas Cathedral .. 71 Table 3.1: Average physical properties of natural building stones .. 73 Table 5.1: Compressive strength test results .. 154 Table 5.2: Flexural strength test results .. 155 Table 5.3: Displacements at specified locations . 167 Table 5.4: Characteristics of building and soil condition ... 175

xiv

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Aerial view for the site of Choirokoitia .... 7 Figure 1.2: Beehive houses of the Neolithic, in Choirokoitia, Cyprus ... 7 Figure 2.1: Beehive houses from Choirokoitia village in Cyprus (c. 5650 BC) ... 13 Figure 2.2: Rectangular dwellings from a village in Iraq (c. 5500-5000 BC) .. 13 Figure 2.3: Different types of quarrying ... 15 Figure 2.4: Excavation of rectangular units .. 16 Figure 2.5: Excavation of rounded units ... 16 Figure 2.6: Re-sizing an excavated stone . 17 Figure 2.7: Shaping the stone unit 17 Figure 2.8: Transportation of a stone block from quarry to construction place ... 18 Figure 2.9: Methods of transporting column drums and architraves for the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus and Temple G at Selinunte ... 18 Figure 2.10: Stages in transportation of large stone units with the help of rollers ... 19 Figure 2.11: Lifting strategies used by Romans ... 19 Figure 2.12: Placing of stone blocks by the help of scaffolding (Romans) .. 20 Figure 2.13: Different types of scaffolding systems . 20 Figure 2.14: Aerial view of the St. Barnabas Monastery and Icon Museum 24 Figure 2.15: Front view of the St. Barnabas Monastery and Icon Museum . 24 Figure 2.16: Side view of the St. Barnabas Monastery and Icon Museum ... 25 Figure 2.17: Buttressing system of Gothic architecture (flying buttresses) .. 28 Figure 2.18: Transverse section of typical Gothic Cathedral ... 29 Figure 2.19: Front view of St. Nicolas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) 30

xv

Figure 2.20: Interior of St. Nicolas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) . 31 Figure 2.21: Side view of Famagusta city wall . 32 Figure 2.22: Aerial view of Famagusta city wall .. 33 Figure 2.23: A 450 year-old Siege cannon ball stuck in Famagusta city wall .. 33 Figure 2.24: Rubble masonry wall (un-coursed and un-dressed) . 35 Figure 2.25: Rubble masonry wall (coursed and roughly squared) .. 36 Figure 2.26: Ashlar masonry wall . 36 Figure 2.27: Cross section of a thick wall consists of both ashlar and rubble leafs.. 37 Figure 2.28: The minimum and maximum thrusts of (a) rounded (b) pointed arch with the same t/R ratio .. 39 Figure 2.29: Rounded arch 40 Figure 2.30: Pointed arch .. 40 Figure 2.31: Vaulting systems .. 42 Figure 2.32: A close-up view of Hagia Sophia's dome . 43 Figure 2.33: Dome of Hagia Sophia and relative pendentive system ... 44 Figure 2.34: The pendentive system . 44 Figure 2.35: A squinch in the palace of Ardeshir, near Firouzabad, Iran .. 44 Figure 2.36: Typical Barrel Vault . 46 Figure 2.37: Load transfer mechanism and massive supporting wall for the barrel vault ... 46 Figure 2.38: A typical groin vault . 47 Figure 2.39: Plan of the groin vault showing resultant outward thrust . 47 Figure 2.40: Groin vault in Bayeux Cathedral, France . 47 Figure 2.41: A typical rib vault . 49

xvi

Figure 2.42: Rib vault of St. Nicholas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) in Famagusta, North Cyprus . 49 Figure 2.43: Comparison of a typical Romanesque and Gothic vault .. 50 Figure 2.44: Rib vault of church Sint-Niklaaskerk in Belgium 50 Figure 2.45: Interior of Coutances Cathedral in France ... 51 Figure 2.46: Kings College Chapel in England ... 52 Figure 2.47: Fan vaulting over the nave at Bath Abbey, Bath, England .. 52 Figure 2.48: Flying buttresses of St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral (Sinan Pasha Mosque) in Famagusta, North Cyprus .. 54 Figure 2.49: Difference between Romanesque and Gothic buttress . 55 Figure 2.50: Triple apse of Basilica di Santa Giulia, Northern Italy 56 Figure 2.51: Forces acting on a buttressing pier ... 57 Figure 2.52: Interior of Coutances Cathedral, France ... 59 Figure 2.53: The longitudinal emphasis in the nave of Wells cathedral, England ... 60 Figure 2.54: The front faade of Regensburg Cathedral in Germany ... 60 Figure 2.55: Interior of Florence Cathedral in Italy .. 61 Figure 2.56: St. Nicholas Cathedral .. 62 Figure 2.57: Front view of St. Nicholas Cathedral ... 63 Figure 2.58: Eastern side of St. Nicholas Cathedral I ... 63 Figure 2.59: Eastern side of St. Nicholas Cathedral II . 63 Figure 2.60: Aerial view of St. Barnabas Monastery 64 Figure 2.61: West faade of St. Barnabas Monastery ... 65 Figure 2.62: North-east view of St. Barnabas Monastery . 66 Figure 2.63: Round arches along the living quarters St. Barnabas Monastery . 66 Figure 2.64: Aerial view of St. Nicholas Cathedral in Famagusta ... 67

xvii

Figure 2.65: West faade of St. Nicholas Cathedral . 68 Figure 2.66: East faade of St. Nicholas Cathedral .. 69 Figure 2.67: Interior of St. Nicholas Cathedral . 69 Figure 2.68: Rib vault of St. Nicholas Cathedral .. 69 Figure 2.69: Flying buttresses of St. Nicholas Cathedral . 70 Figure 3.1: Components of Masonry 72 Figure 3.2: Brick making in Egypt ... 74 Figure 3.3: Mixing clay with straw ... 75 Figure 3.4: Molding and drying bricks under sunlight . 75 Figure 3.5: A brick kiln . 75 Figure 3.6: A pottery kiln in Syria 76 Figure 3.7: Stress-Strain diagram showing the elastic modulus of masonry element .. 83 Figure 3.8: Compression along the axial direction ... 84 Figure 3.9: Crack mechanism under compression loads .. 86 Figure 3.10: Formation of vertical cracks in a masonry wall under axial compression forces 86 Figure 3.11: Mechanism of Shear Cracking . 87 Figure 3.12: Formation of diagonal crack in the shape of stair 88 Figure 3.13: Stepped crack and vertical crack photos of the specimens under tensional loading ... 89 Figure 3.14: Crack patterns of masonry under uniaxial compression .. 89 Figure 3.15: Crack patterns of masonry under uniaxial tension ... 90 Figure 3.16: Crack patterns in biaxial stress states for masonry ... 90 Figure 3.17: Crack propagation modeling in discrete method .. 93

xviii

Figure 3.18: Procedure of crack insertion using triangular elements ... 94 Figure 3.19: Stages of reinforced repointing technique 97 Figure 3.20: Repaired masonry wall . 98 Figure 3.21: View of St. Giustinas bell tower and crack pattern . 99 Figure 3.22: Details of placing steel bar and transversal tie . 99 Figure 3.23: Stages of intervention . 100 Figure 3.24: View of St. Sofia church and damaged pillars ... 101 Figure 3.25: Stages of intervention . 101 Figure 3.26: Flow chart of the methodology for grout injection 105 Figure 4.1: Macro-modeling ... 122 Figure 4.2: Method of defining common material parameters ... 123 Figure 4.3: Simplified micro-modeling .. 124 Figure 4.4: Detailed micro-modeling . 124 Figure 4.5: General load-displacement diagram for a structural analysis .. 127 Figure 4.6: Comparison of analysis methods . 128 Figure 5.1: West faade of St. Peter and Paul Church I . 136 Figure 5.2: West faade of St. Peter and Paul Church II 136 Figure 5.3: North faade of St. Peter and Paul Church I 137 Figure 5.4: North faade of St. Peter and Paul Church II ... 138 Figure 5.5: North and east faades of St. Peter and Paul Church ... 139 Figure 5.6: East faade of St. Peter and Paul Church I ... 139 Figure 5.7: East faade of St. Peter and Paul Church II . 140 Figure 5.8: South Faade of St. Peter and Paul Church I ... 141 Figure 5.9: South faade of St. Peter and Paul Church II ... 141 Figure 5.10: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (rib-vaults) .. 142

xix

Figure 5.11: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (windows and pointed arches) .143 Figure 5.12: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (rounded columns) .. 143 Figure 5.13: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (rib-vaults at different levels) . 144 Figure 5.14: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (view from top) I . 144 Figure 5.15: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (view from top) II ... 145 Figure 5.16: Interior plan of the St. Peter and Paul Church 146 Figure 5.17: Elevations on north faade . 147 Figure 5.18: Elevations on south faade . 147 Figure 5.19: Elevations on east faade ... 148 Figure 5.20: Elevations on west faade .. 148 Figure 5.21: Horizontal dimensions of north faade .. 149 Figure 5.22: Horizontal dimensions of south faade .. 149 Figure 5.23: Horizontal dimensions of east faade . 150 Figure 5.24: Horizontal dimensions of west faade 150 Figure 5.25: Pictures while measuring the dimensions 151 Figure 5.26: Pictures while measuring the dimensions ... 153 Figure 5.27: Stone saw machine used to cut the samples into specified sizes 156 Figure 5.28: Samples of stones cut into specified sizes .. 156 Figure 5.29: Compressive strength testing machine ... 157 Figure 5.30: Flexural strength testing machine ... 158 Figure 5.31: 3D view from east .. 160 Figure 5.32: 3D view from west . 161 Figure 5.33: 3D view from north 161 Figure 5.34: 3D view from south 162 Figure 5.35: 3D view of interior I ... 162

xx

Figure 5.36: 3D view of interior II .. 163 Figure 5.37: 3D view without buttresses 163 Figure 5.38: Deflected shapes of the building with all buttresses .. 165 Figure 5.39: Deflected shapes of the building without buttresses .. 166 Figure 5.40: Stress diagrams of solid elements for the model with buttresses ... 168 Figure 5.41: Stress diagrams of shell elements for the model with buttresses ... 169 Figure 5.42: Stress diagrams of solid elements for the model without buttresses .. 170 Figure 5.43: Stress diagrams of shell elements for the model without buttresses .. 171 Figure 5.44: Appearance of tensile stress at crack location 173 Figure 5.45: Response spectrum diagram ... 174 Figure 5.46: Seismic hazard zonation . 175 Figure 5.47: Stress diagrams of solid elements with buttresses .. 175 Figure 5.48: Stress diagrams of shell elements with buttresses .. 176 Figure 5.49: Stress diagrams of solid elements without buttresses 176 Figure 5.50: Stress diagrams of shell elements without buttresses . 177 Figure 5.51: Deformed shape with buttresses . 177 Figure 5.52: Deformed shape without buttresses 178 Figure 5.53: Mode shapes and periods of the building with buttresses .. 179 Figure 5.54: Mode shapes and periods of the building without buttresses . 180

xxi

LIST OF SYMBOLS/ABBREVIATIONS
A a b Eh Et Eth Ew fb fb' fbc feq fk Cross-sectional area Thickness of the sample Width of the sample Modulus of elasticity of mortar Modulus of elasticity of brick or stone Common modulus of elasticity Elastic modulus of masonry composite Compressive strength of the unit (stone) Compressive strength of the unit Compressive strength of unit Flexural strength of stone Characteristic compressive strength of the composite masonry element fm fmc fmt fn fwc fwt h K l Average compressive strength of mortar Compressive strength of mortar Tensile strength of mortar Compressive strength Compressive strength of masonry composite Tensile strength of masonry composite Height of the sample Constant Length between two supports

xxii

Pk th tt u1 u2 u3 m s x y 0 ASTM EC TS

Failure load Thickness of mortar Thickness of brick or stone Deflection in x-direction Deflection in y-direction Deflection in z-direction Constant Constant Factor reflecting the moisture content of unit Shape factor Transverse strain Axial strain Internal friction angle Shear strength Cohesion value Poissons ratio American Society for Testing Materials Euro Code Turkish Standards

xxiii

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction
Historical masonry monuments, which can be named as living history, are very important sources of information in forming a link between the past and the present. They shed light on the way of living and culture of previous human beings with whom we are sharing the same lands today. They are also important in civil engineering point of view since they reflect the evolution of construction techniques and elements through history. Because of these reasons, historical monuments are priceless. Therefore, these unique structures should be conserved and renovated if necessary. Conservation and restoration works should be performed by specialized people in order to not disturb the historical nature of the original building. Conservation is a team work that includes wide range of players from different fields (archeologist, architect, town planer, engineers of various specializations) in which civil engineers play an important role.

1.2 Previous Work Done

There are lots of historical buildings throughout the world which are invaluable in historical point of view. Therefore, many researches have been carried out regarding them, that have been started to become more effective in the recent years with the help of modern computer programs and developments in the areas of inspection, testing, monitoring, modeling and structural analysis. Some of these studies

including the inspection, modeling, analysis and restoration of historical masonry structures performed by worthy researchers are shown in the following paragraphs.

Loureno (1999) presents an overview of possible approaches for the numerical modeling of masonry structures. Modeling strategies for masonry structures, which are detailed micro-modeling, simplified micro-modeling and macro-modeling, are discussed in his study and it is pointed out that one of these modeling strategies should be selected depending on the level of accuracy and the simplicity desired [19].

Loureno (2001, 2002) discusses the types of analysis for historical constructions. In his paper, the possibilities of analysis of historical constructions are addressed and a set of guidelines is proposed. It is pointed out that the type of analysis should be selected according to the cost, experience of analyst, level of accuracy required, availability of input data and use of results [69, 61].

nay (2002) creates a detailed background in understanding the behavior of masonry structures. Properties of masonry elements and analysis options are clearly pointed out. A case study for measuring the safety level of a selected historical masonry structure against earthquake loads is carried out at the final section of his study [16].

Rossi (1997) describes the possible testing techniques that are adequate for historical masonry structures in detail. These methods can be classified under the heading of non-destructive testing, in-situ testing and destructive testing [47].

Valuzzi, Binda and Modena (2002) present the repair techniques which can be applied to historic buildings. Experimental and analytical studies are carried out for different types of repair methods, which are injections, jacketing and repointing of bed joints reinforced by stainless steel wires [53].

Binda, Modena, Baronio and Abbaneo (1997) discussed the repair and investigation techniques for stone masonry walls. The grout injection technique is studied in detail with an implementation which includes the following steps: (i) laboratory characterization of the materials sampled from the walls, and choice of grouts suitable for injection through an injectability test, (ii) injection on site of checkpoints, (iii) control of the injection efficacy by flatjack test and survey of the penetration and diffusion of the grout [54].

Price (1996) presents the causes of stone decay, the way of measuring extend of the decay and remedial treatments which can be applied to overcome the problem of decaying of stone. The steps of the treatment include cleaning, consolidation and surface coatings [58].

Loureno (2006) addresses the recent developments in the areas of inspection, nondestructive testing, monitoring and structural analysis of historical constructions. He points out that these developments allow for safer, economical and more adequate remedial measures [77].

Heyman (1995) presents a background for the structural engineering of masonry structures. The analysis options, structural systems, etc. which are crucial in

understanding the structural behavior of masonry are discussed in his study [17]. 3

Bull (2001) discusses the computational modeling of masonry. Analysis options, material properties, various homogenization formulas and etc. are included in his study which is a rich information source for the engineers who works on historical masonry structures. Most of the problems regarding the analysis of masonry structures can be solved in the light of this study [35].

Loureno and Zucchini (2001) give information on the homogenization models of masonry. Some of the homogenization formulas are presented in their study [76].

Carey and Patten (1987) briefly describe the evolution of finite element programs and program systems for engineering analysis which are performed with the help of computers [72].

Borst, Remmers, Needleman and Abellan (2004) discuss about crack modeling strategies, which are discrete and smeared crack models, in a historical perspective. The details of each model are presented in the paper [44].

Tzamtzis (2003) gives information on the finite element modeling of cracks and joints in discontinuous structural systems. Different methods, which are used to model the cracks and joints, are presented in his study [45].

nay (2000) discusses application of finite element method for historical structures. The benefits of modern computer programs regarding input and output data are pointed out [78].

Adam (1994) addresses the building materials and construction techniques used by previous constructors, starting from the initial masonry constructions and reflecting the evolution trough time, especially during the Roman Period [6].

zay (2004) presents the historical periods of the Cyprus at the same time with the monuments, which were constructed during the medieval period of Cyprus (Byzantine, Lusignan and Venetian Periods). The history and the chronology of the Cyprus are briefly described in his study [80].

1.3 Importance of Cyprus

Cyprus is among the oldest islands in the Mediterranean Sea, where human settlements can be traced. It is on the crossroad of Europe, Asia and Africa. Being a junction between East and West makes the island an important strategic place. Therefore, lots of different civilizations settled to the island during its history. Each civilization had their own structural style and each of them created new structures or modified some of the built ones according to their structural style. By this way, Cyprus came up with a rich architectural heritage. Nowadays, it is possible to observe many historical buildings, which are scattered all around the island, belonging to various historical periods. The chronology of the different periods, which took place in Cyprus, is shown in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1: Chronology of Cyprus [1, 2, 3] PERIOD - Stone Age Neolithic Age Chalcolithic Age - Bronze Age Early Bronze Age Middle Bronze Age Late Bronze Age - Iron Age Geometric Period Archaic Period Classical Period Hellenistic Period Roman Period - Middle Age and Afterwards - Byzantine Period - Richard the Lionheart and Templars - Lusignan Period - Venetian Period - Ottoman Period - British Period - Cyprus Republic - Cyprus Republic (in the South Cyprus) - Cyprus Turkish Federate Government - TRNC (in the North Cyprus) DATE 7000-2300 BC 7000-3500 BC 3500-2300 BC 2300-1050 BC 2300-1900 BC 1900-1625 BC 1625-1050 BC 1050 BC-395 AD 1050-750 BC 750-475 BC 475-325 BC 325-58 BC 58 BC- 330 AD 330 AD and afterwards 330-1191 AD 1191-1192 AD 1192-1489 AD 1489-1571 AD 1571-1878 AD 1878-1960 AD 1960-1963 AD 1974 to present 1975-1983 1983 to present

The findings of archeological excavations show that the first people who settled to the island were dating back to 7000 BC. They probably came from neighboring mainland, bringing seeds and domestic animals like pig, sheep, etc. with them. These people are the ones who built one of the oldest villages in the world, that is consist of an early masonry housing type (beehive houses). The village is called Choirokoita and it is located in Maroni Valley which is 20 km from Larnaca [4, 5]. 6

Figure 1.1: Aerial view for the site of Choirokoitia [3, 79]

It is one of the oldest Neolithic sites and also one of the most important prehistoric sites in the Mediterranean area. The houses present in the village are one of the earliest masonry housing types throughout the world and therefore, the existence of the village has a remarkable effect on the architectural heritage of the Cyprus.

Figure 1.2: Beehive houses of the Neolithic, in Choirokoitia, Cyprus [3]

The earthquakes at the end of Roman Period, which is one of the reasons for ending the Roman domination, was an important turning point in the architectural history of the island. Some of the cities and lots of buildings collapsed because of the strong earthquakes during 76 AD and 345 AD. Afterwards Byzantines started to shape the architecture of the island, followed by other dominations [1].

Until the Middle Age, Cyprus was dominated by Assyrians, Egyptians, Persians, Greeks and Romans. After the Middle Age, domination of Cyprus was followed by Byzantines, Lusignans, Venetians, Ottomans and Brits until 1960. In between Byzantine and Lusignan periods, Isaac Comenius, Richard the Lion Heart and Knights of Templar separately took the control of the island during a small time period. After the year of 1960, control of the island was in the hands of Turkish and Greek Cypriots. They announced the Cyprus Republic in 1960, but after few years some disagreements between two sides arises, causing the separation of the Cyprus in 1974, as South Cyprus and North Cyprus [1, 2, 3].

The rich architectural heritage of the Cyprus makes the island an important historical place. Therefore, the deserved importance should be given to the historical buildings and monuments by conserving and introducing them to the world.

1.4 Objectives and Scope

The study focuses on masonry structures used in monumental buildings between 330-1571 AD in Northern Cyprus. The historical masonry structures are evaluated by considering structural forms and elements in detail. Finite element analysis is performed for the selected historical masonry structure with the help of Sap 2000

computer program as a case study. The objectives regarding the research on masonry structures in North Cyprus are: To present and discuss structural styles and forms used in various architectural periods in North Cyprus between 330-1571 AD. To represent the main characteristics of basic structural elements (including materials, dimensions, construction techniques, etc.) according to the architectural periods. To compare and establish the regional differences of Gothic structures in various parts of the Europe and Cyprus. To compare selected Gothic and Romanesque buildings in North Cyprus in structural point of view. To observe the structural behavior and check the resistance of the selected historical masonry structure under both static and dynamic loads. For this purpose, Finite Element Analysis will be performed by the help of Sap 2000 computer program. By combining the analysis outcomes and visual inspections, an appropriate repair strategy for the critical regions of the selected masonry structure will be suggested.

Except from the above discussion, essential points that should be considered during the inspection, analysis and strengthening of historical masonry structures are mentioned. Modeling strategies, analysis options, appropriate tests for historical masonry structures, geometrical description, historical analysis, cracks, masonry materials, and idealizations are among the indicated headings. Including these

information, the study is expected to create guidance for the civil engineers who will begin to work on this area.

1.5 Limitations
Lack of materials, which were needed for the laboratory investigation in order to decide the material properties that are to be used in the case study, was the only limitation of the study. Although compression, tension and unit weight tests could be performed in the laboratory, modulus of elasticity and poissons ratio values had to be decided by using the formulas and assumptions supplied by the Eurocode.

1.6 Organization
In chapter 1, the importance of historical structures and the need for conservation is pointed out. Some of the previous studies, which were carried out by worthy researchers, are presented in order to have a background about inspection, modeling, analysis and rehabilitation of historical masonry structures. The importance of Cyprus in historical point of view is also discussed. The objectives and scope of the thesis are identified at the same time with the outline of the thesis.

Chapter 2 describes the evolution of masonry structures through history to be able of better understanding the link between the past and the present. The historical periods and following architectural styles in Cyprus, between 330-1571 AD, are discussed. Characteristics of basic structural elements belonging to the presented architectural styles are also pointed out in order to consolidate the discussion. A research on the regional differences of Gothic buildings in various parts of the Europe and Cyprus is carried out as a sub case study while a selected Byzantine and a Lusignan monument in North Cyprus are compared as another sub case study in order to point out the structural differences of the architectural styles used in these two periods. 10

In chapter 3, properties of masonry elements are discussed to be able of understanding the masonry behavior better. The crack and deterioration problems in the historical masonry structures are presented at the same time with causes and repair techniques which can be applied to historical masonry.

In chapter 4, guidance for the analysis of historical masonry structures is created.

Chapter 5 is composed of the main case study in which St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral (Sinan Pasha Mosque) is modeled and analyzed with the help of Sap 2000 computer program. For this purpose, dimensions of the existing building are measured and laboratory tests for deciding the material properties are carried out. Finite element method is used to perform both static and dynamic analysis. At the last step of the case study, a suitable repair strategy is offered by combining visual inspections and analysis outcomes for the deteriorated regions.

Finally, conclusions are drawn in chapter 6.

11

Chapter 2

EVALUATION OF HISTORICAL MASONRY STRUTURES IN NORTHERN CYPRUS (330-1571 AD)

2.1 Evolution of Masonry Structures

The history of architecture was started about ten thousand years ago. The need for protection against natural conditions and from the attacks was the reason of building sheltered places. The first shelters of human beings were rock caves. Then they start to learn how to build tents by using bark, skins, turves and brushwood. It was followed by huts which were made out of wattle and daub. After this stage, houses of stone, clay or timber appeared [37]. Therefore, the evolution of mankind can be directly linked with the rise of architecture.

The evolution of housing in the Ancient Near East was from huts, to apsidal houses and finally to rectangular houses. Examples of prehistoric architecture of masonry in the ancient Near East are shown below [37].

12

Figure 2.1: Beehive houses from Choirokoitia village in Cyprus (c. 5650 BC) [37]

Figure 2.2: Rectangular dwellings from a village in Iraq (c. 5500-5000 BC) [37]

13

The historical masonry monuments were generally built by using stone as the main masonry material. During ancient times, there were no construction codes. Therefore the masons (masonry craftsman) were creating the structures by trial and error cycles. After collapses, the correct way of placing the units was found out and the structure was constructed. Also, the older masonry masters were describing their experiences to the younger masons. By this way less collapses were taking place during the construction of a masonry structure. To have background about practical construction techniques helped mankind in producing new theories and applying them to produce bigger and better looking buildings. The establishment of bearings, the measurement of distances and the estimation of heights are the three operations which were improved and supported by inventions of new instruments to be able of creating sophisticated buildings as the history moved forward.

Masonry, which is the oldest building technique, was used for early housing and stone was possibly the first masonry material to be used. The earliest examples of first permanent stone masonry houses are located near Lake Hullen in Israel (90008000BC) [37].

Another old masonry material is brick. It is made by putting mud into moulds and leaving them to dry under sunlight or in a kiln. Generally, it was used for houses and stone was preferred for monuments. Easy production process and being light in weight are the advantages of brick against big stone units. The widely used material for building houses in Egypt from pre-dynastic times (5000 BC) until the Roman occupation (AD 50) was sun dried brick. The mud needed for brick production was mainly collected from Nile River. During the drying process under sunlight, bricks

14

were shrinking about 30%. Therefore, cracks were appearing on the bricks. Addition of chopped straw and sand into the mud overcame this problem [37].

There are three stages in a complete construction task. These are quarrying, transporting and placing. The first quarrying in the history was collecting masonry materials above the ground surface. Then it is improved by excavation of the soil, removing of the overburden and exploitation of the exposed surface rock by the help of cutting tools. Sometimes, natural fissures were helping the workers in extraction of stone. Also, mines were starting to be created, which were assisted by a natural incline, so those rocks from inner parts could be extracted [6].

Figure 2.3: Different types of quarrying [6]

15

Except from square and rectangular stone units, rounded shafts were started to be excavated from the quarries. During time, stone was taking various forms under the hands of creative stone workers with the help of new tools, so that the needed shapes could be obtained for the desired projects.

Figure 2.4: Excavation of rectangular units [6]

Figure 2.5: Excavation of rounded units [6]

16

Figure 2.6: Re-sizing an excavated stone [6]

Figure 2.7: Shaping the stone unit [6]

Transporting small pieces of stone was easy. It could be done without the help of any instruments. But, for the structures, which are consisted by bigger pieces of stone units, the need for tools, that will make the transportation easier, arises. These tools were also improved during time to make the transportation of larger stone units possible.

17

Figure 2.8: Transportation of a stone block from quarry to construction place [6]

Figure 2.9: Methods of transporting column drums and architraves for the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus and Temple G at Selinunte [6]

18

Figure 2.10: Stages in transportation of large stone units with the help of rollers [6]

Lifting the large stone unit was another important task that should be solved. Various techniques were tried for this purpose. The pictures below describe the lifting techniques used by Romans [6].

Figure 2.11: Lifting strategies used by Romans [6]

The last step is the placing. The invention of scaffolding system in placing process is an important evolution. By the help of scaffoldings, placing became easier and taller buildings could be created.

19

Figure 2.12: Placing of stone blocks by the help of scaffolding (Romans) [6]

Figure 2.13: Different types of scaffolding systems [6]

20

During a long time, masonry is used as a construction technique through the history and nowadays about 90% of cultural heritage buildings are made out of masonry. The availability of masonry materials and the help of gravity on labor productivity were the main factors supporting the use of masonry. Presently, however, the role of stone in building industry has changed. Instead of structural applications, stone is started to be used mostly as a facing material. Better and more economical materials defeated the stone in quarrying, transporting and placing. Simultaneously, the use of masonry decreased in modern building industry. Also underdeveloped masonry codes and lack of insight in behavior of masonry structures are the other factors which influence the use of masonry in structural applications. Reinforced concrete and steel became the widely used building materials in todays building industry.

2.2 Historical Periods and Architectural Styles in Cyprus (330-1571 AD)

The architectural periods, which took place at the specified time interval, are Byzantine (330-1191 AD), Lusignan (1192-1489 AD), and Venetian (1489-1571 AD). The architectural styles used in Byzantine and Lusignan periods are Romanesque and Gothic in order. The buildings which were constructed in Venetian period are generally made up of military nature. The historical masonry structures, belonging to above periods, are evaluated by considering structural forms and elements. 2.2.1 Byzantine Period (330-1191) Division of the Roman Empire effected the domination in Cyprus. After the separation of the Roman Empire as Eastern and Western, the island was started to be controlled by the Eastern Roman Empire, today widely known as Byzantine Empire. Consequently, the Roman Period in Cyprus namely ended and Byzantine Period has 21

started. The Byzantine Period was approximately began in 330 AD and continued until 1191 AD. The earthquakes, just before the beginning of Byzantine Period in Cyprus, destroyed the cities and lead to the beginning of a new era, which is connected with modern life in Cyprus. After the earthquakes, new cities were constructed and most of the destroyed ones were not rebuilt [1, 11]. 2.2.1.1 Romanesque Style In the Byzantine Period, a kind of Romanesque style was used in the architecture. Romanesque means descended from Roman. Since the Byzantine Empire is a continuation of the Roman Empire, the architectural style used in Byzantine Empire would be a continuation of Roman architecture. But Roman building techniques in brick and stone were changed during time and improved in Romanesque style with the innovations in building technology. The requirement of bigger and better looking buildings encouraged the people in finding new construction techniques. The human beings always improved themselves in construction technology through time as in other fields.

With the rise of Byzantine Period and Romanesque style, the geometric complexity of the buildings began to increase, brick and plaster were used in decoration of important public structures in addition to stone, classical orders were used more freely, carved decorations replaced by mosaics, massive piers in addition to massive walls, and complex domes resting on them are introduced, and windows filtered light through thin sheets of alabaster to softly illuminate interiors [7].

The Byzantine architecture also improved itself during time. Rubble walls, smaller windows and un-vaulted roofs were upgraded. The increased and improved use of vaulting systems helped the structural creations so that larger free spaces at the 22

interiors are obtained. Also, the interior space of the structures were tried to be increased with new techniques. For example, apses were introduced and the space under the dome was enlarged by the additions of these apses. The vaulting system was improved and buttressing is used for generating extra support for the walls.

Thick walls, round arches, small windows, sturdy piers, apses, barrel and groin vaults, large towers and decorative arcading are the basic structural elements of the Romanesque style.

The massive solidity and strength are the major characteristics of Romanesque architecture. The buildings constructed by Romanesque style had clearly defined forms and they were generally in a very regular, symmetrical plan so that the overall appearance is one of the simplicity when compared with the Gothic buildings. In contrast with both the preceding Roman and later Gothic architecture in which the load bearing structural members are, or appear to be, columns, pilasters and arches, Byzantine architecture , relies upon its walls, or sections of walls [8, 9, 10].

St. Barnabas Monastery & Icon Museum is one of the examples of the Byzantine architecture that has still been maintained in good condition. It consists of two domes, barrel vaults, apses, round arches, thick walls, small windows and a bell tower. After the restoration of the monastery by relics and museum office, today, it is used as an icon and archeological museum. Pictures of the St. Barnabas Monastery & Icon Museum from different views are shown through Figures 2.14, 2.15 and 2.16.

23

Figure 2.14: Aerial view of the St. Barnabas Monastery & Icon Museum

Figure 2.15: Front view of the St. Barnabas Monastery & Icon Museum

24

Figure 2.16: Side view of the St. Barnabas Monastery & Icon Museum

2.2.2 Lusignan Period (1192-1489) The Byzantine Empire was getting weaker. During this time interval, a Byzantine noble arrived to the island and introduced himself as the new governor of Cyprus with simulated papers. His name was Isaac Comnenus. No one doubts about these papers since he was the cousin of Byzantine Emperor I. Manuel. After he had been accepted as the governor of Cyprus, he took the control and he introduced himself as the Cyprus emperor. Since the Byzantine Empire was in a bad condition at that time, they didnt struggle with Isaac Comnenus and the island got under the control of him [1].

In 1191, three ships which were sailing within the fleet of British king Richard the Lionheart for Western Crusaders, separated from the fleet because of storms and washed the shore of Limasol. Richards bride and sister were sailing in these ships. So, Richard the Lionheart started searching these ships and found them in Cyprus. 25

The following events ended the Isaac Comnenus control and Richard Lionheart captured the island. Therefore the western crusaders had a significant effect on the history of Cyprus [1].

After taking control of the Cyprus, Richard Lionheart left some of the British soldiers in the island and continued the crusade. But the following civil commotion in Cyprus and the war expenses of Britain forced Richard to sell the island. He sold the island to Knights Templars, who were unable to hold the island because of further hostility among the local population due to tax rising. Finally, they sold the island to Guy de Lusignan who lost his throne in Jerusalem and was searching a new place for himself (1192) [1, 12].

After this event, Lusignan Period had been started in Cyprus and continued for three centuries. As soon as Guy de Lusignan took the control of Cyprus, he began making strong efforts to populate the island with western settlers. He also gave importance to bring artists and constructors who were capable of building and decorating castles, palaces and churches for him. He selected Nicosia as the main city and after that the name of Nicosia went beyond the borders of Cyprus, being a well known place in western countries. The Lusignan Royal Family spent most of their incomes to Cyprus for building churches, magnificent palaces, monasteries, cathedrals, chapels, residences and fruit gardens [1,12]. Therefore, the most glorious times of Cyprus history was during Lusignan Period. 2.2.2.1 Gothic Style Gothic style is the common architectural form, which was used in Lusignan Period. It was evolved from Romanesque style. With the different structural elements and construction techniques, which were used in Gothic art, one can clearly distinguish 26

the Romanesque and Gothic styles. The masons of Gothic architecture tried to solve the problem in construction of heavy masonry ceiling vaults over wide spans. During previous styles, collapses were taking place while wide spans of ceilings were tried to be constructed. The traditional vaulting systems (barrel or groin vault as shown in Figure 2.31) were exerting a huge pressure in downward and outward directions on the walls supporting them. Therefore these walls had to be very thick even for small spans. The problem was solved by Gothic masons with the innovation of pointed arches (see Figure 2.30) and flying buttresses (see Figure 2.17). With the help of pointed arches, the pressure coming from the ceiling was distributed in more directions. The development of ribbed vaults, as shown in Figure 2.31, reduced the thickness of stone in the roof construction. The ribbed vault was consisting of thin arches of stone, running diagonally, transversely and longitudinally. It was lighter and more versatile than the barrel and groin vaults. Also the ribbed vaults were transferring the load from ribs to discrete points rather than along a continuous wall edge as in barrel vaults. By this way the pressure coming from the vaulting system could be distributed into a number of supports, which were piers or columns, rather than only two supporting walls. The smaller outer trust which was diffused to many supports let the masons to construct wider roof spans. The combination of ribs and piers decreased the structural effect of the vertical walls. Therefore, thinner walls could be constructed with large openings for big windows or other glazing decorations.

A crucial point was that the outward thrust of the ribbed ceiling vaults was carried across the outside walls of the nave (see appendix), first to an attached outer buttress and then to a freestanding pier by means of a half arch known as a flying buttress

27

(Figure 2.17). The flying buttress leaned against the upper exterior of the nave (thus counteracting the vault's outward thrust), crossed over the low side aisles (see appendix) of the nave, and terminated in the freestanding buttress pier, which ultimately absorbed the ceiling vault's thrust [13].

Figure 2.17: Buttressing system of Gothic architecture (flying buttresses) [37]

The pointed arches (ribbed vaults), flying buttresses, tall spires, thin walls, large windows and large roof spans, which are simultaneously creating a bigger and brighter interior, are the features of Gothic style which provide a dainty structure. Especially, the flying buttresses and ribbed vaults helped the Gothic masons to produce larger and taller buildings ever constructed without collapse until that time. A transverse section of typical Gothic Cathedral is shown in Figure 2.18.

28

Figure 2.18: Transverse section of typical Gothic Cathedral [37]

Some of the major examples of Gothic architecture in Cyprus during Lusignan Period are St. Nicolas Cathedral, St. Sophia Cathedral, Bellapais Abbey and Kyrenia Castle. St [15]. Nicolas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) which was built in Famagusta and St. Sophia Cathedral (Selimiye Mosque) which is in Nicosia were converted to mosques during the Ottoman period and nowadays they are still used as mosques. Bellapais Abbey is located in Kyrenia and today, it is used as a cultural center and concert hall. The Kyrenia Castle is also used by todays people in such a way that one part of it has been organized as an archeological museum. It is very beatific to adapt these historical and valuable buildings for the modern life usage.

29

If the St. Nicolas Cathedral is studied in more detail; three gabled and canopied doors, twin towers over the aisles, ribbed vaulted roof, flying buttresses, piers and decorative windows can be shown as conspicuous properties. When the Ottoman Turks captured the town from the Venetians, the cathedral was converted into a Mosque and a minaret was added. The name was changed as Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque.

Figure 2.19: Front view of St. Nicolas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque)

30

Figure 2.20: Interior of St. Nicolas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque)

2.2.3 Venetian Period (1489-1571) The last Lusignan king of Cyprus who solidly placed on the throne in 1464 after having victories against Genoese in Famagusta was II. James. He fell in love with a noble Venetian girl Caterina Cornaro. Their marriage ended in six months since James died while hunting in Famagusta. After this event, Catherina Cornaro became the head of government as a queen. The Venetians came to the last step of their plans. They slowly took the control of military power in the island, while Caterina Cornaro was only a nominal queen and had no rights for giving any orders. The Venetian commandants, who completely took the control of Cyprus, wanted from Cornaro to live her throne. She had no choice and she left her throne in 1489. By this way Venetian period had been started in Cyprus. Venetians were accepting Cyprus as a last bastion against the Ottomans in the east Mediterranean. Therefore, they gave importance in defense of Cyprus against Muslim attacks and the architecture shaped accordingly [1]. 31

2.2.3.1 Militaristic Style Since the Venetians gave importance to the defense of Cyprus, they brought up with a Militaristic style in the architecture. They increased the height and width of the city walls surrounding Famagusta which were originally built by Lusignans (Figure 2.21, 2.22). During Lusignan Period there was no cannon fire so the walls were not so thick. Venetians increased the thickness of walls and put earth on the top of the walls to handle the impacts of cannon fire in a better way. They also built new city walls surrounding Nicosia. Most of the buildings which were constructed in Venetian period are in military nature. Only few buildings had different type of functions such as; Queens house, Bidulb Gate and some dwellings [1]. As some of the Lusignan buildings adapted for re-use in todays life, a dwelling unit which was built in Venetian Period is used as a lapidary museum in Nicosia today.

Figure 2.21: Side view of Famagusta city wall

32

Figure 2.22: Aerial view of Famagusta city wall

Figure 2.23: A 450 year-old Siege cannon ball stuck in Famagusta city wall

2.3 Characteristics of Basic Structural Elements

Characteristics of the basic structural elements used in historical masonry structures are examined according to construction techniques, dimensions and materials. 2.3.1 The wall The walls are the complementary elements of the other structural forms such as domes, vaults, and arches. Although they are generally used as an architectural element for surrounding the structure to create a closed area, they also act as a 33

structural element and carry the vertical loads coming from roofing system. They also play an important role against lateral forces. In the cases where the walls are used as structural elements to carry vertical and horizontal loads of the structural system, they are built in a very thick form and/or supported with buttressing systems. In such cases, they should be very strong because the failure of the wall would be ended with the failure of the structure [16, 17].

During the Byzantine period, the roofing system forced the walls to be a structural element rather than an architectural element. The thrust coming from barrel vaults could only be carried with thick walls in the absence of flying buttresses. But with the usage of ribbed vaults in Lusignan period, the loads could be distributed to a number of piers which were supported with flying buttresses and the weight of the vault was decreased. By this way the structural effect of the walls were also decreased and they could be built in a thinner form. Also, the thick walls of Romanesque architecture during Byzantine period could only have few and comparatively small openings. The gothic style during Lusignan period eliminated the structural effect of the walls in a quite big proportion so that creating big openings on the walls were not creating a structural problem any more. Because of this reason, large windows and other glazing products were able to be placed through the walls, creating a dainty look and brighter interior for the monuments.

In the cases where the walls are used as structural elements in historical buildings, they are obviously built in a very thick form. They actually took this thick form after the collapses of the thin ones. Thin walls were built first but their collapse forced the masons to built very thick walls to overcome this problem with a big safety margin [16, 18]. After this argument, one may ask; why the walls of historical monuments 34

have to be studied for safety today. The answer is as follow; although the walls of historical monuments were built in a big safety margin, they were deteriorated during time because of weathering, earthquakes, impacts such as bombs, etc. which causes the material of the wall to reduce its strength and the need for safety check arises.

During the medieval ages, there were two basic types of walls. These are, namely, rubble and ashlar. But each of them has several subdivisions. Rubble wall is consist of irregular, (rounded, squared or polygonal shaped) and randomly placed pieces of stone which are connected to each other by mortar. These pieces are sometimes roughly squared or dressed on the face and sides to form a wall of more regular appearance. They may be coursed (leveled) or un-coursed. On the other hand, ashlar wall is made up of regularly placed stone pieces, which are cut or sawed to provide flat and smooth faces with sharply squared corners and edges. They are always in a leveled form [18, 19]. Ashlar and rubble walls are presented through Figures 2.24, 2.25 and 2.26.

Figure 2.24: Rubble masonry wall (un-coursed and un-dressed)

35

Figure 2.25: Rubble masonry wall (coursed and roughly squared)

Figure 2.26: Ashlar masonry wall

If the walls are thin, then only one leaf of masonry will be enough. But for the thicker walls, more than one leaf of masonry will be necessary. Leafs may be consists of all ashlar, all rubble or a combination of ashlar and rubble as shown in Figure 2.27. In such cases, the ashlar leafs produce the outer skin and rubble leafs produce the inner part of the wall.

36

Figure 2.27 Cross section of a thick wall consists of both ashlar and rubble leafs [19]

2.3.2 The Pier (column or pillar) The pier is a structural element rather than an architectural element which can be in various forms and shapes. It may be consists of pieces of stone put together or only a big single piece of stone. In the cases where it is produced by pieces of stone, generally, the interior is made up of rubble masonry and the outer skin is ashlar. It might be rounded, squared or rectangular in shape. It is used to transfer the load coming from the above vault or arch to the ground, like a column [16, 17, 20].

In both Byzantine and Lusignan Periods, it is used to transfer the load exerted by the above structural element to the ground. The construction techniques and shapes were quite similar. The difference according to the periods is the structural elements above the piers. In Byzantine period, piers were used to carry rounded arches, and the vaulting systems were generally carried by thick walls. Piers were sometimes used to help the thick walls in this process. But, in Lusignan period, piers were used to carry pointed arches and ribbed vaults with the help of flying buttresses [17, 20]. 37

2.3.3 The Arch The arch is a structural element which is used to span an open space and at the same time to support the weight above. The masonry arch is consisting of pieces of ashlar stones put next to each other with the help of mortar. The stone arch production is impossible without the usage of supports during the construction period. Supporting pieces of wood or other materials were used beneath each stone unit the last piece of stone is put at the topmost level. After a time the supports were removed and the arch rests alone.

During history special types of adhesives were added into the mortar, such as egg white, to increases the connectivity property. But the main idea which holds the masonry arch without failure is the resolution of all the forces coming to the arch into compressive stresses. The compressive forces hold the stone units together in a state of equilibrium which are put next to each other to span an open area. The resistance of stone against compressive forces lets the masonry arch to be durable under large loads. The failure of stone masonry arching systems is generally caused by bending of the abutments (piers or walls) which are used to hold the arch. Therefore the walls or piers holding the arch should be very strong or supported by buttresses [16, 20, 21, 22, 23].

Unlike the piers, there are differences between Byzantine and Lusignan arches. Arches in Romanesque architecture were rounded (semicircular) which are formed in a continuous curve while Lusignans used pointed arches which can be defined as an arch with a pointed apex. Pointed arch is one of the distinctive features of gothic architecture (others are ribbed vault and flying buttress) which distinguishes it from

38

Romanesque style. The rounded and pointed arches are compared between Figure 2.29 and Figure 2.30.

The pointed and rounded arches can also be distinguished from each other by considering their thrusts. The thrust of a structural element is the amount of force with which this element pushes against its neighbors or abutments. Figure 2.28 shows the minimum and maximum thrusts of both rounded and pointed arches with the same thickness/radius ratio [22].

Figure 2.28: The minimum and maximum thrusts of (a) rounded (b) pointed arch with the same t/R ratio [22]

The two arches shown in the above figure have the same t/R ratio of 18%. The thrust calculations shows that the pointed arch thrusts about 15% less then rounded arch. [22]

39

Figure 2.29: Rounded arch

Figure 2.30: Pointed arch

2.3.4 The Vault The arch has thin width with respect to its length. Therefore it is not effective in carrying loads coming out of plane in horizontal direction which is arising in the monuments having complex structural geometries. In such cases a series of arches can be combined in various forms to cover a space with a ceiling or roof which is named as vault. The weight of the vaults is carried by walls or piers as in arches. 40

These abutments are supported by various buttressing systems in different periods. The basic types of vaults are dome, barrel, groin, rib, and fan vaults [16, 23, 24].

In the world, Romanesque architects commonly used dome, barrel, and groin vaults. It is the gothic style which mostly used rib and fan vaults. Coming to Cyprus, in Byzantine period, dome and barrel vaults were used while Lusignans were using rib vaults as an architectural feature. In some cases, dome, which is the basic vaulting system, was used by Lusignans too. The vaulting system used by Byzantines was very heavy. Therefore thick wall or thick piers were needed to carry these loads and it was not easy to create large and tall ceilings. With the help of light rib vaults and flying buttresses, Lusignans were able to create larger roofs spanning long vertical and horizontal distances [24]. Different vaulting systems are presented in Figure 2.31.

41

Figure 2.31: Vaulting systems; (a) barrel vault, (b) groin vault, (c) rib vault, and (d) fan vault [25] 2.3.4.1 Dome Domes are one of the earliest examples of vaulting system. The dome used in beehive houses in Neolithic age in Cyprus is among the first evidences for settlements with an upper floor [24].

A dome can be thought of as an arch which has been rotated around its vertical axis. Considering this argument, it can be concluded that the domes have a considerable strength. The pieces of stone which are creating the dome are hold together by compression and friction forces as in arches. They are started to be built from bottom and finishes at the topmost layer. They can be either single leafed or multiple leafed masonry. 42

For placing a dome over a square or rectangular place, pendentives or squinches are used. Figures 2.34 and 2.35 describe the pendentive and squinche systems respectively. The pendentives are triangular elements, which are thinner at the bottom and wider at the top, used to establish the continuous circular or elliptical base needed for the dome. In masonry the pendentives thus receive the weight of the dome, concentrating it at the four corners where it can be received by the piers beneath. The development of pendentives were made by Romans and until that time squinches were used for filling in the upper angles of a square room to form a proper base to which the dome sits on [24, 26, 27]. Figure 2.32 shows the dome of Hagia Sophia while the relative pendentive system is also shown in Figure 2.33.

Figure 2.32: A close-up view of Hagia Sophia's dome [28]

43

Figure 2.33: Dome of Hagia Sophia and relative pendentive system [29]

Figure 2.34: The pendentive system (painted yellow) [26]

Figure 2.35: A squinch in the palace of Ardeshir, near Firouzabad, Iran [27] 44

2.3.4.2 Barrel Vault A barrel vault is simply produced by placing a number of arches next to each other in such a way that they are joined together with the help of mortar in order to create the shape of a barrel that is cut lengthwise in half. Placing of the arches is in such a way that, they are locked into each other as in Figure 2.36. The forces which are induced on the barrel vault are transferred from the top to the bottom and finally to the abutments which are generally walls. Therefore, the vertical forces are transferred into horizontal forces at the intersection points of vault and abutments creating an outward pressure on the supporting walls (abutments), (see Figure 2.37). In the light of this argument, the abutments should be very thick to retrain these forces and/or supported with buttresses. The failure of such systems generally takes place if the supports are not strong enough to handle the outward trust exerted by the above barrel vault. For example, at Muchalls Castle in Scotland adjacent walls to the barrel vaulted chambers are up to 4.6 meters thick, adding the buttressing strength needed to secure the curved design [23, 24].

In the historical monuments where barrel vaults were used, only a small amount of sunlight was able to reach the interior because of small window openings. It was not possible to open large spaces on the walls to create big windows because the walls were the main structural elements which hold the heavy barrel vault and they should be strong enough. Creating large openings on such walls would eventually cause the collapse of the system. At the same time, the lack of flying buttresses during those times was another factor which was prohibiting the creation of large windows.

45

Figure 2.36: Typical Barrel Vault [30]

Figure 2.37: Load transfer mechanism and massive supporting wall for the barrel vault [30] 2.3.4.3 Groin Vault Groin vaults were developed by Romans. A groin vault can be simply described as a combination of two or more semicircular barrel vaults having the same diameter in such a way that, one crosses another (see Figure2.38) and the thrust exerted by the groin vault is carried by the piers which are located at the intersection points of the edges. The name of groin is coming from the intersection of the barrel vaults which produces a true ellipse. They were mostly used by Romanesque architects. With the usage of groined vaults, the thrust could be distributed into several abutments as shown in Figure 2.39, but the vaults were still very heavy and there was no flying

46

buttress to support these vaults, so it was still hard to built wide and high roofs [23, 24]. An example of groin vault in Bayeux Cathedral, France is shown in Figure 2.40.

Figure 2.38: A typical groin vault [24]

Figure 2.39: Plan of the groin vault showing resultant outward thrust [24]

Figure 2.40: Groin vault in Bayeux Cathedral, France [33]

47

2.3.4.4 Rib Vault (Ribbed vault) Rib vaults were started to be used at the end of Romanesque period, while their usage increased, improved and combined with flying buttress systems during gothic period. The 12th century architects realized the advantage of groin vault compared with the previous vaulting types. Then they started to add ribs into the vaults to support the weight. These ribs were functioning as reinforcements, and therefore making a much thinner vault construction possible. The rib vault uses a diagonally reinforced arch resting on thin piers, permitting large opening on the walls to be produced for placing large windows, while also allowing the vaults to extend higher. Increasing the number of ribs and piers were decreasing the thrust coming to each pier, resulting with a lighter structural skeleton. Such a light structural skeleton with cross ribbed vault and other thin structural elements replaced the massive Romanesque vaults, allowing the construction of large interior spaces with a brighter vision [23, 24]. A typical rib vault is shown in Figure 2.41, while Figures 2.42, 2.44 and 2.45 gives live examples of rib vaulting systems. Typical Romanesque and Gothic vaults are compared in Figure 2.43.

48

Figure 2.41: A typical rib vault

Figure 2.42: Rib vault of St. Nicholas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) in Famagusta, North Cyprus

49

Figure 2.43: Comparison of a typical Romanesque and Gothic vault [31]

Figure 2.44: Rib vault of church Sint-Niklaaskerk in Belgium [24]

50

Figure 2.45: Interior of Coutances Cathedral in France [24]

2.3.4.5 Fan Vault The fan vault was developed in the 14th century and used in the late gothic style. It is similar with the rib vault, but the ribs have entirely same curve and spaced equidistantly, in a manner resembling a fan [24]. World's largest fan vaulted structure is presented in Figure 2.46 and a live example of a fan vaulted masonry structure is shown in Figure 2.47.

51

Figure 2.46: Kings College Chapel in England (the world's largest fan vaulted structure) [24]

Figure 2.47: Fan vaulting over the nave at Bath Abbey, Bath, England [24]

52

2.3.5 The Buttress Buttresses are used to create an extra resistance for the abutments (walls, piers columns, pillars) which are holding the above structural element (arch or vault) by providing an extra horizontal strength for the wall. They help these abutments to keep standing against outward thrusts exerted by the vaulting systems, by means of reinforcement. The buttresses used by Romans were having a limited height. Therefore, very thick walls should be constructed to resist the outward pressure exerted by the heavy vaults in tall buildings. Gothic architects used flying buttresses which were able to reach high distances so that the abutments carrying the vaults of tall buildings could be supported in a superior way. When the better structural supports combined with lighter vaults and thinner walls in gothic architecture, the ability of opening large window spaces through the walls appeared [17, 23].

The techniques and materials used in the construction of flying buttresses are as in arch construction. Wood supports are used to hold the weight of stone pieces as they are joined next to each other until the last piece is placed and mortar is dried.

Flying buttresses of St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral (Sinan Pasha Mosque), which is located in Famagusta, is presented in Figure 2.48. Also, comparison of Romanesque and Gothic buttress is taking place in Figure 2.49.

53

Figure 2.48: Flying buttresses of St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral (Sinan Pasha Mosque) in Famagusta, North Cyprus

54

Figure 2.49: Difference between Romanesque and Gothic buttress [32]

55

2.3.6 The Apse The apse is a semicircular vertical projection of masonry which is roofed by a half dome. It was used by both Byzantine and Lusignan architects in monasteries, churches and cathedrals. Live example of a triple apse masonry is shown in Figure 2.50.

Figure 2.50: Triple apse of Basilica di Santa Giulia, Northern Italy [33]

2.3.7 The Pinnacle The pinnacle is a small portion of masonry element with respect to the pier underlying below, which is placed at the top of the intersection point of pier and buttress. The aim for pinnacle construction may seem as a decorative element at the first look. But it has a considerable structural effect in supplying the needed stability for the topmost part of the pier. The outward thrust exerted by the flying buttress, that the pier carries, causes a sliding failure at the topmost level of the supporting pier. This sliding can be prevented with the help of a pinnacle. So, the pinnacle can be simply defined as stabilizing element for the pier and flying buttress connections [17, 23]. 56

Figure 2.51: Forces acting on a buttressing pier [16]

The above figure shows the forces acting on a buttressing pier and the stabilizing effect of the pinnacle. Considering part (a) which shows the forces acting on a buttressing pier, the buttress will be stable if it does not overturn about the point A. In part (b), there is no pinnacle placed on the top of the pier. Therefore there will be tendency to sliding failure under the action of the thrust P. To avoid such sliding failure and to stabilize the upper part of the pier, a pinnacle is placed onto the pier in part (c) with a relatively small weight, in order to increase the frictional force along a potential line of slip. As mentioned before, the addition of an extra weight into the system (pinnacle) will not affect the overall structural stability because the pinnacle has only a small weight with respect to other structural elements. Pinnacles are mostly used by gothic architects since they are used at the same time with flying buttresses.

57

2.4 Regional Differences of Gothic Buildings

Although the structural elements are constant in gothic style throughout the world, there are some small variations regarding size, decoration, materials, and construction techniques according to the place of construction. Different Gothic monuments undergo local influences in different regions. For example, the type of materials or the skills and artistic mind of stonemasons may not be the same in every part of the world. Consequently, the constructed structure would have small variations with respect to the places, keeping in mind that the main logic and structural elements of Gothic architecture does not vary according to different regions. In this section, Gothic buildings in various parts of the Europe and Cyprus will be compared to see the regional differences. 2.4.1 France The main feature of gothic cathedrals in France is their vertical height. They are built very tall. Another distinction of French cathedrals is that, they are very compact with no or very slightly built transepts and subsidiary chapels. The front part always looks to the west and it consists of three big entrance doors (portals) having a rose window placed above them and two large towers at the sides. The east side is the back part of the structure with no entrance doors, which is constructed in a polygonal shape. As a whole, all of the Gothic cathedrals in France are stylistically unified in appearance while the ones in England show a great diversity for almost every building [33].

58

Figure 2.52: Interior of Coutances Cathedral, France [33]

2.4.2 England Almost every English cathedral shows a stylistic diversity within itself except Salisbury Cathedral. But all of them have a common regional feature, which is their longitudinal length. They are very long in horizontal direction. The transepts are very significant in English cathedrals and they are far away from a compact model. The added chapels also cause a sprawl in the cathedrals view. The west front may have two towers or none and smaller entrance doors. There is never a rose window on the top of the entrance doors but on the exterior walls of the transepts. The back part of the structure also has a unique characteristic, which is the square construction with decorative carvings especially the capitals. Unlike the French cathedrals the east part of the English cathedrals are square rather than polynomial [33].

59

Figure 2.53: The longitudinal emphasis in the nave of Wells cathedral, England [33]

2.4.3 Germany The features of Gothic Architecture in Germany are similar with France except the size of towers. The cathedrals in Germany have very tall and thick towers which can not be constructed completely in most of the times. The faade at the west front has a narrow look because of the enormous towers in both sides [33].

Figure 2.54: The front faade of Regensburg Cathedral in Germany [33] 60

2.4.4 Italy The Italian cathedrals generally have few and widely placed columns. The present tower is often free standing, as the baptistery part does. The major distinction of the gothic cathedrals in Italy is the use of polychrome decoration both externally and internally. Marble veneer is used on the external walls while the arches at the interior are consist of black and white segments, columns are painted (usually red), walls are covered with frescoes and the interior of apses are covered with mosaic [33].

Figure 2.55: Interior of Florence Cathedral in Italy [33]

2.4.5 Cyprus The Gothic cathedrals in Cyprus have a moderate size with respect to other regions of the Europe. The features are very similar to the French cathedrals. Considering the best example of gothic architecture in North Cyprus, which is St. Nicholas Cathedral, the following observations could be done. The entrance is located at the west side with three gabled and canopied entrance doors and two towers at the sides. The rose window is at the top of the main entrance door.

61

The Gothic cathedrals in Cyprus are compact with no transepts. The east side is polygonal with no entrance doors. There is an extra entrance door at the north side of the cathedrals. The frescoes, decorations and the glazings which belong to Lusignan religion in the biggest gothic cathedral in Famagusta (St. Nicholas Cathedral) and also in St. Sophia Cathedral in Nicosia were removed during the Ottoman Period since they were belong to a different religion, so it is not possible to comment about these features. Also the cathedrals had a minaret added to their west corner during the Ottoman Period. The places of doors and windows of St. Sophia Cathedral were altered in Ottoman Period but it is known that these elements were as in St. Nicholas Cathedral originally. The main building material in Cyprus which was also used during Lusignan period was dressed limestone.

Figure 2.56: St. Nicholas Cathedral

62

Figure 2.57: Front view of St. Nicholas Cathedral (west side)

Figure 2.58: Eastern side of St. Nicholas Cathedral I

Figure 2.59: Eastern side of St. Nicholas Cathedral II

63

2.5 Comparison of a Byzantine and a Lusignan Monument in North Cyprus

In this section, a typical Byzantine monument is compared with a typical Lusignan monument in order to show the variations in structural elements according to the historical periods and following architectural styles. For this reason, St. Barnabas Monastery & Icon Museum in Salamis, which is a Byzantine building, and St. Nicholas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) in Famagusta, which is a Lusignan building, are compared in structural point of view. 2.5.1 St. Barnabas Monastery & Icon Museum St. Barnabas was born in Salamis. He studied in Jerusalem and returned back to Cyprus in 45AD. Although his family was Jewish, he started to work as a

missionary for Christianity. In 477AD, the monastery was constructed at the location of the grave of St. Barnabas. The place is close to the Royal Tombs at Salamis. It consists of a church, a courtyard, and living quarters for priests [1].

Figure 2.60: Aerial view of St. Barnabas Monastery

64

St. Barnabas Monastery reflects the basic characteristics of the architectural style used in Byzantine period. It consists of two large domes, thick walls, small windows, barrel vaults, supporting columns, an apse and a bell tower placed to the left part of the front side lying on the west. The thick walls and small windows give the building a massive look. Walls of the building are functioning as a structural element to carry the loads of heavy barrel vaults without the help of flying buttresses so they have to be very thick. There arent any large openings on them as a window space because doing so will disturb the stability of load carrying walls. Therefore, the windows are very small. Some marble columns are used to support the domes. The round arches along the living quarters shown in Figure 2.63 are also reflecting basic arching technique used by Byzantine architects.

Figure 2.61: West faade of St. Barnabas Monastery

65

Figure 2.62: North-east view of St. Barnabas Monastery

Figure 2.63: Round arches along the living quarters of St. Barnabas Monastery

2.5.2 St. Nicholas Cathedral (Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque) St. Nicholas Cathedral is a typical Gothic structure built by the Lusignan dynasty between 1300 and 1400 AD. It is the biggest Medieval building in Famagusta. When the Lusignans took the control of Cyprus in 1192, they brought wealthy people, money, and prosperity with them. Cyprus, which became a trading post, was an important place for Lusignan Kings. Therefore, they spent a lot of money and constructed magnificent buildings with the help of architects who were brought from

66

France. St. Nicholas Cathedral is one of these buildings whose architecture resembles closely to the great cathedral of Rheims in France [14].

Figure 2.64: Aerial view of St. Nicholas Cathedral in Famagusta

The stone used in construction is fine limestone which is bright yellow in colour and very well worked. The west faade consists of three large gabled and canopied doors and a rose window above the main central door (see Figure 2.65). Also there are two towers at both sides of the west faade whose upper parts were damaged. When the Ottomans captured the island, they also added a minaret to the left side of the west faade and changed the name of the cathedral as Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque. After then the cathedral was started to be used as a mosque. According to the Muslim religion, all images on stones, fresco or stained glass windows belonging to Lusignan religion were either removed or plastered over. But the structural elements of the cathedral regarding to the Lusignan architecture have been preserved. The distinctive structural elements of the cathedral are flying buttresses, ribbed vault, pointed arches

67

and thin walls. Large windows are the distinctive architectural elements of the cathedral. The rib vault supported by circular columns and flying buttresses is the key point behind the construction of such a tall building. Using rib vaults, as mentioned in section 2.3, reduces the weight of the roofing system and the present weight can be distributed into various columns (see Figure 2.68). An extra support against the outward thrust created by the vault, which is flying buttress, is also used in this cathedral (see Figure 2.69) so that the need for thick walls for resisting the outward thrust of the vaulting system are diminished. Therefore thinner walls with large opening for window spaces were constructed in St. Nicholas Cathedral. Pinnacles are also used to maintain the stability of the flying buttresses (see section 2.3.7). The structure is compact with no transept whose east side is polygonal without any entrance door as shown in Figure 2.66. The large windows cover all sides of the cathedral and create a bright interior.

Figure 2.65: West faade of St. Nicholas Cathedral

68

Figure 2.66 East faade of St. Nicholas Cathedral

Figure 2.67: Interior of St. Nicholas Cathedral

Figure 2.68: Rib vault of St. Nicholas Cathedral

69

Figure 2.69: Flying buttresses of St. Nicholas Cathedral

Table 2.1 summarizes the comparison of St. Barnabas Monastery and St. Nicholas Cathedral.

70

Table 2.1: Comparison of St. Barnabas Monastery and St. Nicholas Cathedral St. Barnabas Monastery Historical Period Date of Construction Location Materials Wall Type View Front Side No. of doors at the front side Towers Height Interior at daytime Arches Windows Walls Vaulting System Vault Supported By External support for Vaulting System Byzantine 477 AD Salamis Mixed stone Rubble Diffusely and Massive West One One, on the left side of west facade Moderate Little bright Rounded Small Thick Barrel + Dome Walls and Columns None St. Nicholas Cathedral Lusignan 1300-1400 AD Famagusta Fine Limestone (bright yellow) Ashlar Compact and Dainty West Three Two, on the both sides of the west faade Tall Brighter Pointed Large Thinner Rib vault Columns Flying Buttress

71

Chapter 3

PROPERTIES AND REPAIR TECHNIQUES OF MASONRY ELEMENTS

3.1 Components of Masonry

Natural stone and brick are the most widely used masonry materials. But they can not produce a masonry element without the help of adhesives. Generally mortar is used to connect specific sizes of natural stone or brick to each other, forming a masonry element that is behaving as a whole. Components of a masonry element are shown in Figure 3.1, at the same time with terms that are used to define specific locations.

The idea of creating the masonry element is similar to that in concrete. As the aggregate and cement are combined each other in producing the concrete element, units (stone or brick) and mortar are combined in producing the masonry element. The difference is that, the size of units present in masonry element is much bigger than the size of aggregates present in concrete [16].

Figure 3.1: Components of Masonry [19] 72

3.1.1 Unit (Stone or Brick) Specific sizes of stone or brick are called units. A number of units are combined together with the help of mortar, creating a masonry element as a whole.

Stone is among the oldest construction materials. The availability of stone is the main reason for its usage in historical buildings. Stone is very resistant against compressive stress while the resistance decreases a lot against tensile stress. The strength of masonry element that is composed of stone and mortar is based on the type and shape of stone, plus the strength of mortar and the workmanship in combining the stone and mortar. Some of the stones that are generally used in historical buildings are shown in Table 3.1, with their average physical properties [16].

Table 3.1: Average physical properties of natural building stones Stone Type Compressive Strength (MPa) 30-70 25-65 18-35 5-30 10-30 7-30 Shear Strength (MPa) 14-33 9-45 6-20 2-10 3-10 2-10 Tensile Strength (MPa) 4-7 1-15 2-6 2-4 3-4 6-11 Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 30000-55000 25000-70000 10000-55000 13000-50000 15000-55000 23000-45000

Granite Marble Lime Stone Sand Stone Quartz Serpentine

As it can be observed from the above table, the shear strength of stone in a masonry element is generally 25% of its compressive strength.

73

The strength and other material properties of masonry element made up of stone units and mortar are generally decided by the homogenized behavior of stone and mortar combination. This can be calculated by various types of homogenization formulas (see section 4.4.2).

Another oldest construction material is brick. It is made out of mud. The bricks that were used in historical buildings are generally made up of clay. The clay can be obtained by collecting the remains of sand stone which are accumulated along the surface of river beds. The mud or clay is then mixed with straw or other de-fattening agents (with the help of water). Then it is shaped rectangular by the help of moulds and left to dry or heated in ovens as shown in Figures 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5. When the brick production was first started, the mud was put into moulds and left to dry under sunlight. After the drying process, the brick was ready [16]. The use of oven in brick production was probably started with the observation that the brick forgotten next to a cooking fire seemed to be stronger than the others. A very early example of burnt brick mass production is given by an up-draught kiln excavated in Khafaje, Iraq, dating to the third millennium BC. It was circular in plan with four holes beneath the oven floor, and it was very similar in construction to the up-draught kilns used by the Romans two thousand years later. A pottery kiln, which was used by is shown in Figure 3.6. The wall painting, which was discovered in the tomb of Rekhmara, shows the way of brick production in Upper Egypt in 1500 BC (see Figure 3.2) [37].

Figure 3.2: Brick making in Egypt, as depicted in a wall painting in the tomb of Rekhmara at Thebes (1500 BC) [37] 74

Figure 3.3: Mixing clay with straw [16]

Figure 3.4: Molding and drying bricks under sunlight [16]

Figure 3.5: A brick kiln [16]

75

Figure 3.6: A pottery kiln in Syria [37]

The strength of brick masonry depends on the quality of material that is used to produce the bricks plus the way that the bricks are obtained (the amount of heat applied to the clay for converting it into brick), the quality of mortar and the pattern of bricks that are used to built up the masonry element. The strength of bricks (assuming they are made up of the same material type) depends on the amount of heat which is applied to them during their production. The variation of strength between a well heated brick and a poor heated brick may be three times [16, 37].

The compressive strength of bricks that were used in historical buildings generally varies between 10 MPa and 20 MPa. But the weathering and deterioration factors may cause the strength of bricks to fall below 10 MPa. Generally, tensile strength of brick is 10% of its compressive strength and shear strength is 30% of its compressive strength [16, 37]. 3.1.2 Mortar Mortar is produced by mixing sand, water and materials which have the ability of connectivity. Lime was the commonly used connectivity material in the mortar production of historical buildings. The main function of mortar is to connect the units 76

(stone or brick) for creating the masonry element as a whole. Mortar has a considerable effect on the strength of masonry element.

The ability of connecting units together is named as connectivity property of mortar. There are some factors affecting the connectivity property of mortar. These factors can be described as follows: The amount of connectivity material that is present in mortar increases the connectivity property and strength. The amount of water present in the mortar effect the strength and connectivity property of it. The surface texture of units also affects the connectivity property of the mortar. Rough surfaces come up with better connectivity properties. They increase the connectivity ability of the mortar used.

There are lots of different additives, which were used in order to increase the strength and improve the properties of mortar, through the history. For example, pig fat, blood, milk and egg white were used to increase the rate of hardening for mortar. Linseed oils, glues obtained from animals, and soft soap were used to increase the water isolation property. Also linen fibers, animal hair, barley, urine, Arabic gum and the milk of fig were used to increase the strength of mortar [36].

3.2 Mechanical Properties of Masonry Elements

Mechanical properties of the masonry elements are discussed in this section for understanding the masonry behavior better. Appropriate formulas in order to calculate these properties are also mentioned.

77

3.2.1 Compressive Strength Masonry elements generally undergo compressive stresses due to their structural forms. Compressive strength can be defined as the maximum compressive force (the force when first crack appears) divided by the area that the force is applied. There are various factors effecting the compressive strength of masonry elements such as type, shape and water absorption capacity of the units; moisture content; thickness, deformation properties and amount of ingredients in mortar.

The best way of obtaining the compressive strength of a masonry element is to test the element that is composed of units and mortar in the laboratory as a composite. But carrying out such an experiment for historical buildings will be very difficult, since taking a large amount of sample from such a building will disturb the historical nature of it and, doing so is legally forbidden in most of the cases; therefore small samples can be taken from the original structure and tested in laboratories under compression forces. Samples of units and mortar can be taken separately, tested in laboratory separately and the test results can be combined to obtain the average strength of units plus mortar. By this way, the effect of mortar is included in the compressive strength capacity of the observed masonry element. Some regulations or codes, which are created for the nowadays masonry elements, can be applied to historical buildings for obtaining average results. The effect of material variation restricts the creation of codes for historical buildings. This is the reason why the regulations and codes do not give exact outcomes when applied to historical masonry. Euro Code EC6 is a source which can be helpful in calculation of composite compressive strength of historical masonry. It is originally used for nowadays materials but it can be adapted for historical masonry elements.

78

The following formula is used in Euro Code EC6 for the calculation of composite compressive strength [35].

fk =K (fb' ) (fm)

(3.1)

where; fk is the characteristic compressive strength of composite masonry element (MPa) fm is the average compressive strength of mortar (MPa) fb' is the compressive strength of unit (MPa) K,, are the constants

Generally, and are used as 0.65 and 0.25 for new masonry while K depends on the selected type of units. In order to obtain the compressive strength of the unit (fb'), the following formula is suggested in Euro Code EC6 [35].

fb'= fb m s

(3.2)

where; fb is the compressive strength of the unit (MPa)

m is the factor reflecting the moisture content of unit s is the shape factor depending on the shape and size of unit

There are different formulas used by various researchers in order to approximate the compressive strength of the masonry element [35]. Some of them are as follows:

Brocher (1961)

fwc = 0.7

fbc

fmc 79

(3.3)

Brenner (1990)

fwc = 1.4

2.5 fbc

fmc

(3.4)

Kirtschigg (1985)

fwc = 1.59 * 0.205 * fmc + 0.189 fbc

(3.5)

Hendry (1981)

fwc =

fbc or fwc =

fmc

(3.6)

Mann (1982)

fwc = 0.83 fbc0.66 fmc0.18

(3.7)

Tassios (1983)

fwc =

fbc fbc.fwc fmc + + 1.4 6 4 20

(3.8)

where; fwc is the compressive strength of masonry composite fbc is the compressive strength of unit fmc is the compressive strength of mortar

On the other hand, there may be some limitations not allowing the researcher to take samples of unit and mortar separately. This problem is generally caused by thin mortars or lack of laboratory equipments. In such cases, only the unit can be tested in order to decide its compression strength and this value can be used to represent the compressive strength of the masonry element. Considering the masonry elements made up of regularly shaped and arranged brick units, the compressive strength of masonry element is very close to the compressive strength of units. The effect of units compressive strength on the masonry elements compressive strength decreases with the usage of irregular, massive stone units while the importance of type and thickness of mortar increases [35].

80

3.2.2 Shear Strength Shear strength of a masonry element is the ability of withstanding the forces coming parallel the unit-mortar connections. Shear strength of a masonry element depends on the connection between mortar and unit. Therefore, the properties of both mortar and units play an important role in the appearance of shear strength for a masonry element. Also the sequence of units or, in other words, the pattern of unit placement during the construction is another factor affecting the shear strength of the masonry element.

The most realistic way of obtaining the shear strength of a masonry element is testing it as a whole in the laboratory. This method can be applicable for the modern masonry construction since the constructor has got units and mortar having unique material properties and lots of them are available in stock. Therefore some of them can be used as an example and combined together to produce a masonry element that will reflect the behavior of unit-mortar combination properties in the masonry structure. But considering historical masonry, it is impossible to remove a masonry element from the structure and test it in laboratory. Only small samples can be taken from the historical buildings and tested in laboratory. Considering the outcomes obtained from the investigation of these small samples, formulas can be produced in order of guessing the shear strength of historical buildings masonry elements. The following formula can be used for this purpose [35].

= 0+fn

(3.9)

where; is the shear strength (MPa) 81

0 is the cohesion value is the internal friction angle fn is the compressive strength(MPa)

Previous researches show that 0 varies between 0.2-0.5 and varies between 0.2-0.1 3.2.3 Tensile Strength Tensile strength is simply the ability of withstanding tensile forces. These forces generally appear by bending of the structure. Also, expansion and contraction, which are caused by temperature changes and moisture, are the other reasons for the appearance of tensile forces.

Tensile strength of a masonry element, which is induced by the bending of the structure, depends on moisture content of the units, amount and properties of the mortar, and surface texture of the units [16]. The following formula is used by Tassios and Chronopoulos (1985) for approximating tensile strength of the masonry element [35].

fwt= fmt

(3.10)

where; fwt is the tensile strength of masonry composite fmt is the tensile strength of mortar 3.2.4 Modulus of Elasticity The modulus of elasticity or elastic modulus of an object can be defined as the slope of stress-strain diagram in the elastic deformation region.

82

Figure 3.7: Stress-Strain diagram showing the elastic modulus of masonry element

Ew =

Sress Force/Area = Strain l/l 0

(3.11)

If the modulus of elasticity can not be evaluated through experimental test, then the following formula, which if offered by EC6, can be used.

Ew= fwc

(3.12)

where; Ew is the elastic modulus of masonry composite

is 1000 for limit state analysis is 600 for serviceability limit state analysis

Ew can also be calculated by homogenization formulas in which elastic modulus of units and mortar are separately calculated and brought together in one equation, as described in Chapter 4.4.2.

83

3.2.5 Poissons Ratio When a sample of material is stretched in one direction, it tends to contract in other directions. Conversely, when a sample of material is compressed in one direction, it tends to expand in the other directions. Poissons ratio () is the measure of this tendency. Assuming that the material is compressed along the axial direction;

Figure 3.8: Compression along the axial direction

= - trans / axial = - x / y

(3.13)

where; is the Poissons ratio trans (or x) is the transverse strain (negative for axial tension, positive for axial compression). axial (or y) is the axial strain (positive for axial tension, negative for axial compression).

Poissons ratio of historical masonry generally varies between 0.1 and 0.2.

3.3 Cracks in Masonry Elements

3.3.1 Crack Theories for Masonry Elements A lot of researches have been carried out to derive different crack theories of masonry. During these studies, it was generally accepted that units and mortar-unit 84

interfaces are behaving as linear elastic. The main factor affecting the crack mechanism of masonry elements is decided to be the geometric form of the structure [16].

The crack theories of masonry can be classified in three main groups. These are compression cracks which takes place when the forming compression forces within the masonry composite go beyond the compression limit of the units, shear cracks and tension cracks which depends on the type and quality of the mortar-unit bond. 3.3.1.1 Compression Crack Mechanism Under Axial Loads Axial compression loads acting on masonry composite, cause horizontal tensile stresses to appear on the units and mortar. The horizontal tensile stresses produce vertical splits on the stone or brick units. By this way compression cracks take shape. Figure 3.9 shows the crack mechanism of masonry under compression loads [16].

The reason of such cracks is the different strain characteristics of units and mortar. Under compression force, mortar exhibits a huge horizontal deformation without cracking. But the horizontal deformation of stone or brick units creates vertical cracks caused by tensile stresses acting on the them. Therefore tensile capacity of each single unit gains a big importance [38].

85

Figure 3.9: Crack mechanism under compression loads [16]

There are many factors affecting the compression crack mechanism. These are poissons ratio, modulus of elasticity, bonding between mortar and unit, coefficient of friction between mortar and unit, shear resistance of masonry element, tensile strength of masonry element [38].

Figure 3.10: Formation of vertical cracks in a masonry wall under axial compression forces [16] 86

3.3.1.2 Shear Crack Mechanism There are two forms of shear cracking. First one is sliding which appears in the joints and can be named as joint shear. Second one is the diagonal shear which depends on assembling of units and mortar. Joint shear takes place according to the resistance of the mortar against the parallel movement of two adjasent stone of brick units in opposite directions as in Figure 3.11 [38].

Figure 3.11: Mechanism of Shear Cracking [16]

Diagonal shear crack is caused by induced tensile stresses which appears at some angle to the line of shear force acting on the masonry element. In order to prevent diagonal shear cracks, there should be a strong bond between stone or brick units and mortar. Otherwise step cracks will appear on the structural element as shown in Figure 3.12 [38].

87

Figure 3.12: Formation of diagonal crack in the shape of stair [16]

3.3.1.3 Tension Crack Mechanism The brittle behavior of masonry elements result in sudden cracks under tensile forces. Tension cracks in a structural element, which are generally caused by bending, usually start at the places of joints. Then the cracks can be affected from each other and get bigger until the collapse of the structural element.

Except from bending, expansion and contraction of masonry due to temperature and moisture changes are the other causes of tensile stress appearance on the structure [38, 39]. Figure 3.13 shows pictures of a stepped crack and a vertical crack of the specimens under tensional loading.

88

Figure 3.13: Stepped crack and vertical crack photos of the specimens under tensional loading [39]

3.3.2 Crack Patterns The cracks in masonry elements may follow different paths according to the state of stress applied on them. In the following figures, possible crack patterns of masonry elements under uniaxial compression, uniaxial tension and biaxial stress states, are shown.

Figure 3.14: Crack patterns of masonry under uniaxial compression, stressed at various angles to the bedding plane [38, 39]

89

Figure 3.15: Crack patterns of masonry under uniaxial tension, stressed at various angles to the bedding plane [38, 39]

Figure 3.16: Crack patterns in biaxial stress states for masonry [38, 39]

90

3.3.3 Crack Modeling There are two basic methods for crack modeling in the literature. They are namely discrete crack method and smeared crack method [41, 42, 44, 45]. These methods can be used; To model a crack that is present in the structure and observe the structural behavior after the analysis with a constant (not increasing) load, To model crack propagation under an increasing load.

Discrete crack models are created by introducing various kinds of elements to the places where the original cracks in the structure are observed. These elements can be joint elements, interface elements or space elements. Joint and interface elements should be modeled with the approximate constitutive laws [42]. As a result, the exact shape of each crack is introduced to the finite element model with the discrete crack approach representing the discontinuity as a geometric entity [42, 44, 45].

Counterpart of discrete crack method is the smeared crack method. In smeared crack method, instead of introducing a geometric entity into the structural model for representing the effect of the crack, the homogeneity of the geometry is not disturbed but a softening strategy is applied to the regions where the cracks are observed. This can be done by approximately modifying material properties at the places of cracks such as reducing the strength or decreasing the elastic modulus at the specified regions [41, 44, 45, 46].

It can be easier to use smeared crack models where there are lot of small cracks at a location. By this way each small crack will not have to be introduced to the model as a geometric entity. If it is tried to model each small crack as a different element, the 91

time needed to create the model will be much longer. Both of the methods will give similar results when small cracks are considered. But when sharp cracks creating big discontinuities in the system are considered, it may be better to use discrete crack approach so that the physical behavior of the structure can be defined more clearly. In such conditions, defining the crack as a geometric entity will make the analysis more realistic and the results will be closer to the actual structural behavior [46]. 3.3.4 Crack Propagation The growth of cracks can be observed by using the methods that are described above. This can be done by using an increasing load pattern instead of using a steady load. In each stage of crack growth, the applied load is increased step by step to see the further propagation of the crack.

Lets consider the discrete crack approach first. As a result of increasing load, the strain capacity of the material is exceeded. The place, where the strain limit of the material is gone beyond after a load increasing stage, is determined. Then the structural material is removed from that place and replaced with a space element or appropriate joint or interface element. The process continues step by step and the propagation of the crack is observed with an increase in load. The following figure simply shows the modeling strategy of a step of crack growth by using discrete crack approach.

92

Figure 3.17: Crack propagation modeling in discrete method [44]

Using triangular elements will be a better choice for a more detailed crack propagation study where it is possible to model any path of the crack growth. But this will be a very complicated study in geometrical point of view where re-meshing should be done in every step. In the Figure 3.18, the procedure of crack insertion using triangular elements is shown. Part (a) shows the location of the place where material softening occurs. In other words, the place, where the strain limit is exceeded, is established. In part (b) the neighboring triangular elements are removed to be able of introducing the new crack. Then the appeared crack is inserted into the model in part (c). Finally re-meshing of the region around the crack is done [40].

93

Figure 3.18: Procedure of crack insertion using triangular elements [40]

A similar procedure takes place in smeared crack approach. The location of the material where the strain limit is exceeded after a load increment is established and a softening strategy is applied to that region which will reflect a crack behavior for that region.

Both the discrete crack and smeared crack approaches make the same job. The difference is that discrete crack method can be carried out by introducing a geometric entity to the model for defining the discontinuity caused by the crack while smeared crack method does not deal with geometry but modifies the material properties to describe a crack.

94

3.3.5 Causes and Remedies of Cracks in Masonry Structures Small amounts of movement can be absorbed by masonry without producing any cracks since masonry has the ability to deform elastically. Large movements are the ones causing cracks [3]. The factors causing cracks in masonry can be; expansion and contraction due to temperature and moisture changes, differential foundation settlements, insufficient supporting systems for openings, the influence of freeze and thaw cycles, structural modifications, aging of materials, expansion of salts [47, 48, 49].

It is beneficial to establish the cause of the crack and check if it is active, passive or cyclic before starting a remedy work. This can be done by; historical analysis, where the events causing the cracks on the structure can be obtained by previous records if available, chemical tests, where the changes in material compositions such as formation of salt crystallizations on the surface can be decided, and monitoring, where the variations in structural cracks during time can be observed. Also it is possible to make a comment about the cause of the crack by observing the existing crack patterns. For example, diagonal cracks at the edges of windows and doors are caused by foundation settlement. In such cases where a differential settlement problem takes place, a soil engineer also may be required.

Monitoring is a very beneficial method which helps the researcher in making a comment about the changes in the geometry of the structure. The idea is that, the selected part of the structure is observed for a time period to record the changes in the geometry. This can be done by installing various automatic measuring equipments to the decided regions which are going to record the changes during time automatically. They should be well protected against possible harm or pilferage. 95

Alternatively, one can regularly visit the site and take manual measurements. Monitoring makes it possible to decide if the cause of deformation is time and temperature dependent. Otherwise it can be concluded that the deformations are caused by other factors. The basic features that can be monitored are; openings of the main cracks, internal and external temperature, behavior of soil and rock foundations, absolute and vertical movement of vertical structures [47].

Cracks can be divided into three categories according to their movements during time. These are; active, passive and cyclic cracks. Active cracks are those which are getting bigger during time. Passive cracks are those which are no longer increasing in width or length. Lastly, cyclic cracks that are opening and closing seasonally due to temperature changes are considered. As mentioned before, monitoring technique can be used to decide the category of the crack. If it is concluded that the crack is active, its cause should be decided before applying a remedy strategy if possible. In such cases, the appropriate rehabilitation work should start with deciding the cause of crack growth, continues with eliminating the cause and ending by strengthening the damaged parts. But if it is found that the crack is passive or cyclic, then an appropriate strengthening technique can be used directly for the cracked locations. By this way the integrity of the cracked masonry can be restored [50]. 3.3.5.1 Reinforced Repointing Technique Reinforced repointing technique can be described as cutting of bed joints to remove the old mortar and to open space so that steel reinforcement is placed to the cracked locations to stabilize the integrity of the structure. Then the cut areas are filled by a new mortar that is named as repointing. In order to avoid incompatibility problems with original materials in historic structures, lime-based mortars should be preferred

96

to polymeric or cement products as repointing material [51, 52]. Figure3.19 shows the basic stages of reinforced repointing technique, while in Figure 3.20, a repaired masonry wall after the application of reinforced repointing technique is presented.

Figure 3.19: Stages of reinforced repointing technique [50]

97

Figure 3.20: Repaired masonry wall [50]

3.3.5.1.1 Reinforced Repointing Used in St. Giustinas Bell Tower The bell tower of St. Giustina church in Padua (Italy) is a three-wythe masonry structure, 70 m tall. It was built during the XIII century up to 40 m and than raised up to the current height in the XVII century. The overloading of the lowest part of the structure and the deterioration of the masonry have led to a serious crack pattern, characterized by large and widely distributed cracks, as shown in Figure 3.21.

98

Figure 3.21: View of St. Giustinas bell tower and crack pattern [51]

The intervention has been performed just on the external side of the wall but the positioning of some steel anchors through the thickness of the wall has been considered, to improve the connection among the layers. The repair has been executed by placing a single stainless steel bar into the bed joints. Before the application of the technique, the partial reconstruction of some portions of the wall was necessary [51]. Figure 3.22 shows details of placing steel bar and transversal tie.

Figure 3.22: Details of placing steel bar and transversal tie (anchor) [51] 99

The application of transversal ties was considered to improve the connection between the layers and to reduce the transversal deformations [52].

Figure 3.23: Stages of intervention [51]

In part (a) of Figure 3.23, placement of rebar along the bed joints of the masonry wall is shown. One can see the insertion of the transversal tie (anchor) in part (b). As mentioned before the function of anchor is to improve the connection between the layers and to reduce the transversal deformations. In part (c) one can see the view of bed joints after repointing while the hole that is drilled for insertion of anchor is still unfilled. The final view of intervention work can be seen in part (d). 3.3.5.1.1.2 Reinforced Repointing Used in St. Sofias Church Hazardous conditions have been found in some of the pillars of the St. Sofia church (Padua, Italy). All sides of the pillars have been reinforced and the bars have been connected together by ties. As in the previous case, the technique allowed to easily restore the integrity of the wall [51]. 100

Figure 3.24: View of St. Sofia church and damaged pillars [51]

Figure 3.25: Stages of intervention [51]

In Figure 3.25, stages of reinforced steel insertion are shown. Part (a) shows the excavation of bed joints, followed by insertion of steel bars in part (b). The view of inserted steel bars and transversal tie can be seen in part (c). Final view of intervention process is shown in part (d).

101

The reinforced steel insertion and repointing technique used in St. Giustinas bell tower and St. Sofia church are not the only remedy woks which took place in the complete rehabilitation. Except from these, some ultimately damaged parts were replaced and injection of stabilization materials took place during the complete rehabilitation process.

Reinforced repointing technique is the main remedy for restoring the integrity of passive or cyclic cracks in masonry elements. But if any part of the masonry is deteriorated excessively, then that part should be rebuilt. This process is named as local rebuilding.

Other effective rehabilitation techniques that are used for both strengthening and maintenance of deteriorated masonry elements are grout injection, jacketing and application of stone consolidants. The strength of stone or brick units may decrease during time by the weathering effects. Moreover the surface of the stones may lose part of its exposed grains that gives rise to a decrease in the thickness of the masonry element. Also some cracks and cavities may progress along the inner parts of masonry. In such cases different consolidation techniques can be used to restore the integrity of the masonry and to increase the compressive strength.

The verification of the improvement after the rehabilitation can be done by performing flat-jack tests [8]. Flat-jacks are used to decide the present state of stress at a particular location within the structure without disturbing the tested place. The test can be carried before and after the application of the remedy work to observe the increase in strength. The flat-jack test will be discussed in detail in Chapter 4.

102

3.3.5.2 Jacketing As stated by Binda, Modena and Valuzzi, the consolidation of damaged walls by jacketing is a largely diffused technique in Italy [53]. It can be applied to both stone and brick masonry. If a masonry wall is reduced in thickness and damaged so that there exists a considerable loss in compressive strength, then the jacketing technique can be applied for strengthening. The technique is based on the application of a thin concrete slab, including usually small grain size aggregates and proper additives to prevent shrinkage and to improve the adhesion with the wall, reinforced by steel net. The reinforced plaster slab should be placed on both sides of the wall and a series of transversal steel ties are placed across the thickness of the wall to connect the two external layers. The factors effecting the amount of strength gained by the masonry wall include; thickness of the slabs, amount of the reinforcement and the size plus distribution of reinforcement in steel net [53]. 3.3.5.3 Grout Injection The use of grout injection is very common for strengthening and repairing masonry walls all over the world [53]. In the cases where the cracks and cavities are progressed along the inner parts of the masonry and create a loss in the integrity of the structure, grout injection can be used to restore the continuity and increase the strength. The injection simply saturates the cavities to homogenize the masonry behavior [55, 56].

The steps for a detailed application of grout injection described by Binda, Modena, Baronio and Abbaneo are as follows [54]:

103

(i) Survey of the wall section and sampling of the materials contained in the internal part of the wall, (ii) Laboratory characterization of the sampled materials and grout types to be used, (iii) Preparation of physical models representing the internal wythe of the wall to be injected, (iv) Injection of the models and subsequent inspection, (v) Testing of the injected specimens, (vi) Choice of the grout, (vii) Flat-jack tests before injection in chosen points of the walls, (viii) Injection of the walls, (ix) Flat-jack tests repeated in the previously tested points and comparison of the results, (x) In-situ checking of the penetration and diffusion of the grout.

These steps are summarized in Figure 3.26.

104

Figure 3.26: Flow chart of the methodology for grout injection [54]

Lime based grouts are preferable during the repair of historical masonry structures since they are more compatible with the original masonry elements [55]. 3.3.5.4 Stone (Masonry) Consolidants The masonry structures may loose strength during time because of weathering and decay. This can appear by a reduction in thickness or by weakening in material properties. Stone consolidants are chemical compounds that are used to increase the strength of masonry and makes it less prone to decay [56, 57, 58, 59].

They are applied on to the surface of masonry by spraying or brushing. Then, they are absorbed by the pores of masonry elements and penetrate to the inner parts. The

105

absorption capacity of masonry is important in this stage. More absorption means greater increase in strength.

The stone consolidants increase the strength of masonry by restoring the bond between adjacent stone particles. This can take place in three different ways [56]:

Replacements: They can replace some chemicals, which are prone to decay, within the masonry. For example, calcite is a chemical present in some stone types. It readily reacts with carbon dioxide or sulphur dioxide to form products that are able to dissolve in water. In such conditions, we can use barium hydroxide to react with the calcite in order to form new chemicals (barium-calcium products) that are less soluble in water and therefore less prone to decay. The problem that we can face with in this example is that barium solutions dont penetrate stone easily and react with calcite slowly.

Precipitants: Chemically resistant materials can be precipitated in the pores of stone in order to slow the decay and to improve the strength. The consolidant is dissolved in a solution to be able of penetrating the stone. Then the solution is applied on to the surface of masonry few times. Then the solution is absorbed by the masonry, the chemically resistant material within the solution separates, settles in voids and reacts with the stones natural binders. For example, silica solutions deposit silicon dioxide which bones with silica which is presenting the stone. The reports show that, with the penetration of 2.5cm or more, strength is improved by 30%-40% using this technique. The method is very effective on the stone types which contain silicate materials like sandstone, but it can also be used on limestone and marble.

106

Polymers: Weathered grains of stone can be cement back together by synthetic organic polymers. Some polymers can be used as water repeller. Most of the polymers are viscous and dont penetrate into the stone themselves. Therefore they should be dissolved in a solvent. The solution is than applied on to the surface of masonry and absorbed by the pores of stone. After evaporation of the solvents from the masonry, the polymers are left behind in the pores. Another problem arising with the use of polymers is that their long term performance is unknown since they were starting to be used in 1960.

Stone consolidants can be separated into two main categories. They can be either organic or inorganic. Organic consolidants include a wide range of polymers. These are ethyl silicates, silicones (silanes, siloxenes, and siliconates) and resins (epoxy

resins, methacrylic resins, unsaturated polyester resins, and polyuratane resins). Inorganic consolidants include lime-water, puzzolan-cements, waterglasses, fluates and baryte water [57].

Within these two primary categories of consolidants, archylic polymers, alkyltrialkoxy-silanes, aryl-akyl-poly-siloxanes, ethyl silicates and silicon ester, epoxy resins, and lime water are the most widely used ones within the conservation works carried out for masonry [57].

It is a difficult task to determine the consolidant type to be used. A consolidant may give good results when applied to a stone but the same consolidant may give poor results, even and acceleration of deterioration can take place if it is applied to a

107

different type of stone. The factors below should be considered in selection of masonry consolidant [56].

Type of stone Cause of decay Amount of decay Present and future environment Amount of stone to be consolidated Importance of the monument

An appropriate consolidant should be easy to apply, penetrate deep, not entrap moisture inside the stone and not alter the stones appearance while strengthening the deteriorated masonry [56].

Some of the above consolidants, including lime, barium hydroxide, alkoxysilane and epoxy are discussed in detail [58].

Lime (inorganic stone consolidant): Limestone was commonly used for most of the historical monuments. Keeping this in mind, nothing could be more natural than putting lime into limestone. A saturated solution of lime (calcium hydroxide) is applied onto the surface of masonry and absorbed by the pores of stone. The subsequent evaporation of the solution will remain a deposition of calcium hydroxide within the stone. The deposition will react with carbon dioxide in the air to form another deposition that is calcium carbonate. This could serve to consolidate the stone, in much the same way as carbonation of calcium hydroxide leads to the hardening of lime mortar. 108

Barium Hydroxide (inorganic stone consolidant): Barium hydroxide can be used to convert calcium sulfate (that is present within the stone) into barium sulfate. This will reduce the deterioration of masonry caused by the solution and recrystalization of calcium sulfate.

Another function of barium hydroxide is to increase the resistance of masonry against acid rains. The resistance is increased by carbonation of barium hydroxide and subsequent formation of barium carbonate coating on the surface of masonry. Barium hydroxide can also consolidate the stone by means of the formation of solid solutions of barium calcium carbonate.

Simple applications of barium hydroxide solution appear to be ineffective since it doesnt penetrate through stone easily and react with calcite slowly. Some chemicals should be added into the solution to overcome these problems. Ammonium carbonate is one of these chemicals that dissolves calcium sulfate and helps the reaction.

Alkoxysilanes (organic polymer): Alkoxysilanes (silanes) are one of the most widely used stone consolidants since 1976. Within the silanes, methyltrimethoxysilane and tetraethoxysilane are the most popular ones because of two main reasons. First one is their commercial availability and second one is their contribution in creating other products (based on them).

The silanes are hydrolyzed by water, which may come from atmosphere, present in stone, or may be added as an ingredient, to form silanols. Various solvents may be used to help the solution to be absorbed by the stone. Also lead compound can be used as a catalyst to increase the rate of hydrolysis and condensation reaction. These 109

two reactions often take place after the solution is absorbed by the stone. When the hydrolysis of silanes is completed, the appeared silanols are polymerized by condensation reaction in order to produce silicone polymer. The appeared polymer is the essential material that supplies the required strength for the deteriorated masonry.

Epoxy (organic polymer): Epoxy resins are very good adhesives but their application should be well organized to be able of obtaining good results. In this stage, choice of solvent and the effectiveness of application procedures are essentially important.

In order to help the stone consolidants in absorption process, the surface of the masonry should be cleaned. The built-up dirt on the surface of the stone should be removed to let the consolidant penetrate into the masonry. The gentlest cleaning method that is adequate to remove the dirt should be selected. This can be blasting the surface with air or water, or using various chemical cleaners [56].

Some of the products may act as a water repellent and a stone consolidant at the same time. For the stone consolidants those are apart from above category, using an extra water repellent after the application is helpful. By this way moisture-related problems can be minimized and the applied stone consolidant can be more beneficial.

110

Chapter 4

GUIDANCE FOR THE ANALYSIS OF HISTORICAL MASONRY STRUTURES

Chapter 4 includes the basic informations that should be considered during the complete analysis of historical masonry structures, starting from initial inspection of the building until the last step of the analysis which is done with the help of various computer programs in modern engineering. Different testing and modeling options are considered in detail so that the engineers who will begin to work on historical masonry structures can select the type of testing and modeling strategies according to the available data and expected results.

4.1 Historical Survey

Having knowledge about the past history of a structure is essential for a detailed structural analysis. It is important to know if there exists any restoration works which took place before, so that the location and type of remedy material used during past restorations can be defined to the new model. Another beneficial aspect of historical survey is that, the researcher may find information about construction techniques that were used during construction of the original building. The use of different materials may be also recorded while the original building was constructed, so that the researcher may have a general idea about the materials used. The past documents may supply information on causes of damage for some parts of the building that might be fires, earthquakes, and etc. They may also point out any replacements of structural elements done during previous rehabilitation studies. Having knowledge 111

about these informations, will be very helpful in creating a reliable and detailed model of the structure. It will be also useful in understanding the structural behavior better [60].

For proceeding a historical survey of an ancient building, the only way is to search for previous records about the building. These may include plan of the original construction, any records on materials or construction techniques, the informations used during previous restoration works and the interventions made, records for causes of previous damages, etc.

Unfortunately very few documents are available in the archives for ancient buildings. Considering the structures that are built recently, original drawings with the construction materials used and any restoration works which takes place thereafter are recorded since it will be useful for further studies on the building. Because of various reasons, lack of documents arises for historical buildings, which raises difficulties for the historical survey.

4.2 Geometrical Description

A correct geometrical definition of the structure is a must for a reliable structural analysis. Traditional measuring equipments (meter, metric ribbon, plumb line etc.) and topographical methods can be used to create the present geometrical model of the structure. Another preferable method for geometrical description is

photogrammetric analysis [60]. Photogrammetry is the science of being able to take measurements from photos. After taking the photographs of the building, one can go to his office and create the geometrical model by using these pictures. Some advantages of photogrammetry are; a high level of accuracy is achievable and the

112

photographs may be archived for the use in future. The basic rules which should be obeyed while taking photos are as follows:

Adjust the setting of the camera zoom before starting to take photographs and use the same adjustment for all the photos.

Try to fully fit the object into the photograph. Use the highest resolution possible. Use ring method to create the 3-D view, which is taking photos of the same object by moving around it. The angle and the distance between the object and camera should be the same in every point of the cycle.

Measure the distances between specific points of the object and mark them to create references for generating the distances in pictures. Otherwise the study will be unitless [68].

The results obtained by photogrammetric analysis or other measuring methods should then be connected with crack pattern surveys to create the final model. The location, width and depth of cracks should be obtained by direct surveys on site if there exists any.

4.3 Determination of Material Properties and Loads

4.3.1 Loads The loads that should be considered can be classified under two categories. First category is the source of load and second one is the way that the load acts. According to the first category the loads are separated as natural loads and service loads.

113

The most important natural load is composed by the own weight of materials creating the structure. Another important natural load is the earthquake load. The other natural loads are wind load, snow load, and the loads created by soil pressure and water pressure. For massive masonry monuments, wind loads or snow loads (if present) do not create any problem since the material producing the monument is very heavy itself and it is very strong under compression forces. But for tall spires, wind loads may be worthwhile to be calculated. Service loads are the loads created by the people and movables, which are known as live loads.

According to the second category the loads are classified as vertical and horizontal loads. Briefly, own weight of the materials, live loads and snow loads are vertical loads while earthquake load, wind load and the loads created by soil pressure are horizontal loads [16]. 4.3.2 Tests for Determination of Material Properties There are several ways of determining the material properties. The methods used can be named as destructive testing, non-destructive testing and in-situ testing. According to the data that is desired to be obtained and considering legal conditions for the selected historical building, the type of testing method can be selected. 4.3.2.1 Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) Non-destructive testing, as its name refers, is testing the material without giving any damage. It requires no direct action on the masonry. Testing procedure is quite simple and the equipments used are not very expensive. Therefore, NDT can be preferred in most of the cases. It gives significant data on the homogeneity of masonry characteristics. It also points out irregularities within the masonry such as metals, voids, cracks and etc.

114

One major disadvantage of non-destructive testing is that, direct measure of the material properties (such as compressive strength) can not be decided. The outcomes of testing are usually qualitative values, which can help us in understanding the relative quality of investigated material [60].

By considering the above disadvantage, it can be concluded that the only way to define exact material properties needed for structural analysis, is carrying out

destructive testing, that is simply taking samples from the structure and testing them in laboratory. 4.3.2.1.1 Sonic Measurements Sonic measurements are most widely used non-destructive testing method. The working mechanism of the system can be described as follow: A generator, which is fixed on a selected location of the structure surface, produces sonic or ultrasonic impulses that are collected by a receiver or receivers which are located in other places of the structure surface. The sonic/ultrasonic waves are able to penetrate through different materials in different speeds. Therefore the time that the waves move from generator to receiver is considered as the working mechanism of the system [60, 64].

In masonry, ultrasonic waves are useless due to the joints between blocks of stone or brick. Sonic impulses should be preferred because of the inhomogeneous nature of masonry [60].

There are different schemes of carrying out sonic measurements through masonry such as different placement techniques of generator and receiver. But in any

115

placement technique the main principle is that the signals produced by generator travel through masonry and collected by receiver.

The following data can be obtained by sonic tests: Homogeneity of the structure Mechanical quality indexes in different locations Presence of cracks Changes caused by grouting reinforcements (test should be done before and after grouting) [60]. 4.3.2.1.2 Rebound Hammer Test Rebound hammer is originally used to evaluate the compressive strength of concrete. But it may be used for masonry as a qualitative analysis. In the case of calibrating it with the values obtained by destructive testing of masonry sample in laboratory, rebound hammer can be used for quantitative analysis of masonry. In other words, rebound hardness can be related to compressive strength by the laboratory calibration [60, 64]. 4.3.2.1.3 Radar Investigation The system uses high-frequency electromagnetic waves (100 MHz-1 GHz), given out by an antenna. The materials having different dielectric constants within the tested region can be distinguished. Therefore damp areas, presence of metals, pipes or cavities can be detected by this method [60, 64]. 4.3.2.1.4 Thermo-graphic Analysis The method uses thermal radiation that travels through the masonry and collected by sensors. The logic of the system is to distinguish materials that have different thermal conductivities so that presence of cavities can be pointed. It is very useful in frescoed

116

surfaces where other techniques may harm the paintings. But the disadvantage is that, it can only penetrate few centimeters from the surface so that the method is not useful for deciding anomalies located at the inner sections [60, 64]. 4.3.2.1.5 Magneto-metric Analysis Although it is a method used for deciding place and thickness of reinforcements within the concrete, it may be adapted for masonry. A magnetic probe is placed to the surface of the masonry and metallic elements such as chains, reinforced pointing, and metal connecting pins can be determined by its magnetic field [60, 64]. 4.3.2.1.6 Impact-Echo The method uses echoes of waves for deciding the anomalies within the masonry. The waves which are sent through the masonry are collected by the recievers. By this way the voids within the masonry could be decided [64]. 4.3.2.2 Destructive Testing Destructive testing can be defined as taking samples from the structure and testing them in laboratory. It is the most reliable method of finding material properties needed for structural analysis. It can be used for determination of physical and mechanical properties, chemical composition, and defining its origin. Knowing the materials that the masonry is consist of, will be very helpful in selecting a possible repair or restoration material.

Generally coring technique is used for taking samples from the masonry. A rotary saw with a diamond cutting edge could be suitable for sampling. The boreholes produced after coring can be used for performing other tests such as dilatometric tests, cross-hole sonic tests, endoscopy, video camera survey, which are helpful for physical identification of the material [60].

117

From the mathematical point of view, it is better to take samples as much as you can from the masonry. But considering historical point of view, it is better to take samples as less as possible especially if an important historical building is studied because the building has a historical value that should not be disturbed. For most of the historical masonry structures, it is forbidden to take any samples without having a legal permission. During testing, the static nature of masonry should not be disturbed. The cavities caused by removal of samples should be carefully filled with appropriate materials at the end of the test so that the original look of the masonry will remain the same. 4.3.2.3 In-Situ Testing In-situ testing can be described as testing the material in its original place. It provides mechanical properties of materials which are not possible to be obtained by using non-destructive testing methods. These properties could be enough for a desired structural analysis.

The most obvious difference between in-situ and destructive test is that; destructive testing damages the tested specimen and it is not appropriate to use that material again for backfilling while in-situ testing produces gives only a little damage on the tested material. The damage that in-situ testing may create on the structure is very small cavities opened for insertion of measuring devices and they are easily recoverable. Another difference is that the sample has to be taken to laboratory for destructive testing but in-situ testing, as its name refers, is done on site. 4.3.2.3.1 Flatjack Tests Flatjack testing is the most famous in-situ testing method where important parameters of masonry such as state of stress, deformability, and strength

118

characteristics can be decided. The application of the test is by insertion of thin flatjacks through the mortar layers. The insertion procedure is only slightly destructive and the thin layer of space caused by removal of mortar can be easily filled after the test with an appropriate mortar. In order to decide the state of stress for a selected region, it is enough to insert only one thin flatjack while two parallel flatjacks (about 50 cm apart from each other) should be placed through the mortar for finding strength characteristics and deformability [60, 64]. Representation of reliable mechanical properties of large areas and undisturbed tested samples are important features of flatjack tests.

Another use of flatjack is the case where a damaged structural element is replaced or a new structural element is introduced into a consisting historical monument for giving support to the structural system. As such events flat jacks are essential for controlling if the new element works properly or not. Considering the Milano Tower in Pavia (an ancient city in northern Italy, located on the Ticino River); a new wall was built during restoration works since it was a must, but flatjack tests that were performed on the wall pointed out that most parts in the basis of the wall were unloaded. This brings to light that the decided remedy does not work properly. 4.3.2.3.2 Dilatometric Tests Deformability, which is found by using double flatjacks, represents a value for the masonry located near the surface. Dilatometric tests are carried out for finding modulus of deformability at the inner layers of masonry. In order to perform this test, boreholes should be opened by coring. Then the measuring device is inserted through the borehole which applies hydrostatic pressure to the surface of the sample without damaging and measures the resulting deformation. Using flatjacks, a large area can

119

be tested but dilatometric test gives result for only a specific point. In spite of the above disadvantage, the method is important since it gives deformability characteristics for inner layers of masonry that is not possible by using two parallel flatjacks [60].

4.4 Modeling and Analysis

4.4.1 Difficulties in Modeling and Analysis The analysis of a historical masonry monument is a difficult and complex task. The problems are caused because of the reasons which are listed below:

Lack of data about geometric dimensions;

The fact that the material properties are varying for different parts of the masonry, in other words, knowing that the materials producing the masonry are not homogenous, makes it impossible to evaluate the exact structural behavior; Generally, the materials that are tested for deciding properties are the ones located at the surface of the masonry. It is quite difficult to determine the mechanical properties and other structural properties, such as the arrangement of units, for the inner parts of massive masonry elements. Therefore, there is a lack of information for inner regions; Excessive cost of detailed laboratory analysis; Lack of documents describing the original construction sequence; Geometrical descriptions and plans original structure are missing; Changes in the material properties due to long time periods because of various factors such as weather conditions, retrofitting works etc.; 120 recorded during construction of the

 Lack of records about the previous damages on the structure and lack of information about the present damage condition; Regulations and codes are non applicable for historical masonry structures [39, 61, 67, 69]. 4.4.2 Modeling Strategies for Masonry Structures It is almost impossible to create the exact model of a historical masonry structure since different parts may show distinctive mechanical properties and it is not possible to test every single unit. What can be done is to carry out material tests as much as possible in various parts of the building. As a result, a very detailed model can be created with defining units and mortar separately and using different material properties for each unit and following mortar separately. This will be very difficult, very expensive, very long and therefore unbeneficial. Considering these disadvantages, it will be unnecessary to create such a model for the whole structure. Simple models can support the researcher with enough outcomes. Detailed models can be created for critical locations only keeping in mind that it is impossible to test every single unit for deciding its material properties. The units are modeled separately in detailed models but generally one mechanical property is used for all. The type of model to be chosen should be decided by considering the level of accuracy and simplicity desired. In other words, one should select the model type by keeping in mind the results that he or she expects to find. The three basic modeling types are described below. 4.4.2.1 Macro-modeling This type of modeling treats the unit and mortar as a single homogeneous material (see Figure 4.1). It is considered that the structure is consists of only one material. Instead of defining unit and mortar properties and joints separately, only one 121

definition of material property is done and no unit-mortar joint is defined. Therefore, the constituted model will reflect an average behavior of the structure [35, 39, 64, 65, 67].

Figure 4.1: Macro-modeling [65]

With the reduction in time and required material information, as well as simplicity of creating the model by computer, macro-modeling is more practical when massive masonry structures consist of many units are considered. In most of the studies where massive buildings are considered, macro models are enough for obtaining the desired analysis results. But for some studies micro modeling is a must, especially when only one (problematic) structural element is going to be investigated. 4.4.2.1.1 Methodology of Homogenization There are various homogenization strategies invented by different researchers. They all combined unit and mortar properties by different approaches to create a homogenized material which reflects an average behavior of both unit and mortar.

122

Figure 4.2: Method of defining common material parameters [62]

As it can be seen from the Figure 4.2, a simple cell taken from the masonry wall can be converted into a homogenized element by considering the material properties and amounts of unit and mortar. The technique was used by Loureno and parameters are defined as, th: thickness of mortar, tt: thickness of brick or stone, Eh: modulus of elasticity of mortar, Et: modulus of elasticity of brick or stone, to determine the common modulus of elasticity Eth [62, 66].

Eth = {(th+tt)/((th/Eh)+(tt/Et))}*

(4.1)

where is the mass unit volume. 4.4.2.2 Simplified Micro-modeling In simplified micro-modeling, the mortar and the units are replaced by an equivalent material while the joint is replaced by an equivalent interface, as shown in Figure 4.3. The interface element has zero thickness. In the model the units are expanded and their material properties are changed due to using an equivalent material for units and mortar. The reason of expansion is to fill the space caused by modeling the mortar place as a zero thickness interface element [35, 39, 64, 65, 67]. 123

Figure 4.3: Simplified micro-modeling [65]

This type of modeling is quite more accurate than macro-modeling since each unit is defined one by one. But it is less accurate than detailed micro-modeling since Poissons effect of the mortar is not included. 4.4.2.3 Detailed Micro-modeling In detailed micro-modeling, units, mortar and unit-mortar interface are defined separately (see Figure 4.4). Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio and optionally inelastic properties of both units and mortar are mentioned [35, 39, 64, 65, 67].

Figure 4.4: Detailed micro-modeling [65]

This type of modeling generates the most accurate results. It is especially used for partial analysis of historical monuments. The reason is that, analyzing the whole structure with such a system will be very long and difficult. Generally decided critical parts are modeled with this strategy for rehabilitation purposes. Actually both

124

macro and micro modeling should be used for a detailed rehabilitation study of a historical monument. Since it will be very difficult to use micro-modeling for the whole monument, firstly macro modeling should be done to determine the critical regions or elements. Afterward, decided structural part should be investigated by micro-modeling before deciding amount and type of repair.

4.5 Idealizations for Analytical Modeling

The nature of historical masonry materials is quite complex. Therefore a good analytical model of a historical masonry monument should be as simple as possible while being sufficient of representing the load effects acting on the masonry. To be able of creating such models, some idealizations should be done. The most common idealizations are idealization of geometry and idealization of structural behavior [39, 64]. 4.5.1 Idealization of Geometry The difficulty in distinguishing between decorative and structural elements of historical masonry structures forces the researcher to make some assumptions. The complex geometry also has to be simplified in order of performing a practical analysis. The geometrical idealization should be as simple as possible while considering that the model created will be sufficient for the expected results.

Solid, shell or frame elements can be used while geometrical model is created. The selection of element type should be done according to the expected results. For example; when a thick wall is going to be analyzed for in-plane loading to obtain stress distribution through the thickness of the wall, solid elements should be preferred since they are able to show the stresses through the thickness of the wall. If shell elements were selected, it will be impossible to see the stresses through the

125

thickness of the wall. Shell elements would reflect the stresses only along the wall. [64]. 4.5.2 Idealization of Structural Behavior There are three main idealizations for the structural behavior. They can be classified as follows [38, 39, 64]:

Elastic Behavior (Linear) Plastic Behavior Non-Linear Behavior

Elastic analysis uses Hooks Law for interpreting material behavior, that is The increase or decrease of strain is directly proportional to the decrease or increase of stress. In other words, the material is able to deform back to its original shape when the applied load is removed [64]. The units and the mortar are accepted to have a single material property and to behave like a single material during the elastic analysis of masonry buildings [38].

In plastic analysis, the idea is that; when the applied load is increased to a specific point, the material deformation becomes unrecoverable afterwards. Therefore plastic analysis is an appropriate idealization when the researcher wants to decide the load that will cause the failure [38, 39].

Non-linear analysis lets the researcher to study the complete reaction of the structure under loading, starting from elastic range, going through cracking phase and finishing by failure mechanism [64]. It is very complicated to carry out a non-linear analysis for a massive masonry structure. A mistake can be easily done which may 126

lead to wrong analysis results. Non-linear analysis for masonry structures is better to be carried out by experts. A correct non-linear analysis will give the most realistic results in between other idealizations unless any mistake is done during long modeling period. Figure 4.5 shows general load-displacement diagrams for the discussed structural analysis types.

It should not be forgotten that the materials creating the masonry structure exhibits different properties in various regions of the structure. This is an important factor that is decreasing the reliability of the analysis. A more sophisticated analysis may give more accurate results. But the effect of variation of material properties for different parts of the masonry also has a noteworthy effect on the accuracy of the analysis.

Figure 4.5: General load-displacement diagram for a structural analysis [69]

The selection of structural behavior should be done according to the availability of data about the materials and the expected results. For example, if only stress 127

distribution of the structure is going to be investigated, it will be unnecessary to use non-linear analysis. Linear analysis will be enough to give the expected results with less time and simple modeling advantages. Figure 4.6 compares the analysis types with respect to available material data and expected results.

Figure 4.6: Comparison of analysis methods, according to available material data and expected results [64]

4.6 Finite Element Method

Finite Element Analysis is a computer-based numerical technique for calculating the strength and behavior of engineering structures. It can be used to calculate deflection, stress, vibration, buckling behavior and many other phenomena. It can analyze elastic deformation, or plastic deformation [70]. 128

In the finite element method, a structure is broken down into many small sized elements. These are called finite elements and their connection points are named as nodes. A lot of different finite element computer programs have been introduced during the history. Some of them are Sap 2000, Etabs, Ansys, Abaqus, Adina, Castem 2000, Afena and etc. [70, 72].

To use finite element method for the analysis of a structure, some stages should be considered. The order of steps may change according to the finite element program used. The steps are described as follows:

1) Specifying Geometry: First the geometry of the structure to be analyzed is defined. This can be done by entering the geometric information in the finite element package through the keyboard or mouse. 2) Specify Element Type and Material Properties: Next, the material properties are defined. In an elastic analysis of an isotropic solid these consist of the Young's modulus and the Poisson's ratio of the material. 3) Mesh the Object: Then, the structure is broken (or meshed) into small elements. This involves defining the types of elements into which the structure will be broken, as well as specifying how the structure will be subdivided into elements (how it will be meshed). This subdivision into elements can either be input by the user or, with some finite element programs can be chosen automatically by the computer based on the geometry of the structure (this is called auto meshing). 4) Apply Boundary Conditions and External Loads: Next, the boundary conditions (e.g. location of supports) and the external loads are specified. 5) Generate a Solution: Then the solution is generated based on the previously input parameters. 129

6) Post processing: Based on the initial conditions and applied loads, data is returned after a solution is processed. This data can be viewed in a variety of graphs and displays. 7) Refine the Mesh: Finite element methods are approximate methods and, in general, the accuracy of the approximation increases with the number of elements used. The number of elements needed for an accurate model depends on the problem and the specific results to be extracted from it. Thus, in order to judge the accuracy of results from a single finite element run, you need to increase the number of elements in the object and see if or how the results change. 8) Interpreting Results: This step is perhaps the most critical step in the entire analysis because it requires that the modeler use his or her fundamental knowledge of mechanics to interpret and understand the output of the model. This is critical for applying correct results to solve real engineering problems and in identifying when modeling mistakes have been made (which can easily occur) [71].

The below advantages makes the finite element modeling most suitable for the analysis of masonry structures:

The shapes having irregular boundaries can be modeled by using bent edged elements.

Finite element analysis makes it possible to use different material properties within the same structural element which is composed of two or more different materials. Any idealization of structural behavior is applicable. Complex geometrical shapes and load conditions can be modeled. 130

 The element sizes used for creating the model can be decided by the user. By this way the critical regions can be modeled by using small elements for a more accurate analysis while bigger elements may be used for other parts in order to make the process faster [66].

131

Chapter 5

CASE STUDY: FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF ST. PETER AND ST. PAUL CATHEDRAL (SINAN PASHA MOSQUE)

St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral (Sinan Pasha Mosque) is analyzed by using Sap 2000 computer program under both static and dynamic loads in this chapter. The resistance of masonry materials against the applied loads is checked and critical locations are established. The structural behavior of the building against a possible earthquake is studied and the effects of the flying buttresses during an earthquake (also without an earthquake) are established with the help finite element analysis. The above argument is carried out by analyzing the structure with and without flying buttresses using Sap 2000 computer program. Also, displacements which appear after static and dynamic analysis, with and without buttresses are established. Finally, by referring the analysis results and visual inspections of the original structure, an appropriate repair strategy is offered.

5.1 Location and History of the Building

The Church of St. Peter and St. Paul was placed inside the city walls of Famagusta. At the north side of the church, just about five meters apart, there exist the remains of Venetian Royal Palace. A text panel on its wall says that, the church was built in 1360 by a wealthy merchant of Famagusta, Simone Nostrano, who was a Syrian and

132

originally dedicated to St. Catherine. The writing also points out that the church was made with the profit of a single business trip done by Simone Nostrano to Syria.

When the Ottomans captured the island, they converted the Church of St. Peter and St. Paul into a mosque and named it as Sinan Pasha Mosque. A minaret was added to the building and started to be used as a mosque afterwards. During the British territory, it was used as a grain store. This function of the building caused it to have the nickname of Wheat Mosque or Buday Cami in Turkish.

The function of the building was converted again in 1964 to the town hall of Famagusta, following the conversion to Famagustas public library. Also, some plays and recitals took place within this fine place.

During the history of the building, some alterations were made on it. The entrance door and two of the windows at the south facade were closed with stones. The original window glasses were broken because of the natural events and different glasses were placed. Also the frescoes at the interior walls were plastered as the control of the building was shifted from one sovereignty to another. Also additional buttressing system was constructed later (probably after 16th century earthquakes) at the south side which are hold by the ground in order to increase the structural stability. The main buttresses which were built during the original construction of the building at the upper levels are hold by the walls of the church. During the middle of 20th century, some restoration works took place such as water proofing the roof and apses by using lime-concrete. Also the voids at the west faade were filled to have a clear surface [75].

133

During the past history of the building, it served to several usages such as being a church, a barn, a grain store, a petroleum reservoir, a town hall, and a library [14, 75]. But, it has now been disused for some time, keeping closed and waiting for its new active role, except from standing alone with its beautiful historical appearance and reflecting the graceful construction texture of 14th century.

5.2 Geometrical Description of the Building

The building was constructed during the Lusignan period; hence it contains the structural elements which are identified with Lusignan constructions. These are flying buttresses, rib vaults and pointed arches. Using these elements helps the constructor to create tall buildings with large spans (open spaces) and relatively thin walls. The church of St. Peter and St. Paul is tall but its walls are not thin. Also, the window openings are not very large but they are plenty in number.

These thick walls create a little bit of disarrangement with the Lusignan construction techniques and aesthetics [75]. Keeping in mind that, there isnt a rule such as all the Lusignan buildings are going to be made up of thin walls, using thick walls in St. Peter and St. Paul Church is beneficial at the point of increasing the structural stability. Also, in spite of the quite massive walls and buttresses of the building which causes it to lose the light appearance, the overall exterior view of the building is impressive with the general type and layout of its structural elements. When the exterior view of the building is integrated with the pure but fascinating interior, an extremely effective structure appears. 5.2.1 Exterior The west faade of the church contains 3 entrance doors, one at the middle and two at the sides of it. Dimensions of the middle door are larger than the other two. The

134

large window above the middle entrance door lets the light penetrate into the church, especially afternoons when the sunlight directly passes through it, providing the interior a brighter atmosphere. At the sides of the large window, there are two small windows which do not provide any light for the interior because of geometrical appearance of the church. The doors and the windows at the west faade are supported with pointed arches except from the small windows lying at the south side of the faade. The location of water drainage canals can be observed at the top of the west faade by the help of stones tailing out of the faade. These water drainage stones are also taking place at the top of other three faades. At the south corner of the west faade, there is a minaret taking place, which was added to the original building during Ottoman period. The upper part of the minaret is damaged and almost half of it was destroyed. The stairs which are positions along the interior of the minaret can be used to move on the top of the building. Figures 5.1 and 5.2 show the pictures of west faade.

135

Figure 5.1: West faade of St. Peter and Paul Church I

Figure 5.2: West faade of St. Peter and Paul Church II

136

There is a big entrance door at the north faade of the building whose materials are brought from another place since the stone columns and the ceiling of the north door are made up of a different stone type [75]. Actually, there are two faades at the north side of the building. First one contains the entrance door and five windows. Second one is placed a few meters away, towards the south of first wall. Second wall is higher than the first one and supported with flying buttresses which are resting on (hold by) the first wall and carry the thrust coming from the taller second wall to the shorter first wall (see Figures 5.3 and 5.4). The second wall lies on the columns while the first wall lies on the ground. There are five separate flying buttresses joining the two walls at the north side of the building and also five windows are placed at each of the walls on the north facade. Totally, there are ten windows at the north side of the building. All of the windows and door at the north side are supported with pointed arches as in other windows and doors placed at various parts of the building.

Figure 5.3: North faade of St. Peter and Paul Church I 137

Figure 5.4: North faade of St. Peter and Paul Church II

The east faade contains a triple apse. The one at the middle is larger in size and has three windows while each of the smaller ones has only one window. Above the middle apse, there exists a rounded window which is not very large. The flying buttresses resting at the north and south walls can be seen from east side while only the buttresses resting on ground at the south side can be seen from west side because of the geometrical appearance of the building. There are no entrance doors at the east faade of the building as shown in Figures 5.6 and 5.7.

138

Figure 5.5: North and east faades of St. Peter and Paul Church

Figure 5.6: East faade of St. Peter and Paul Church I

139

Figure 5.7: East faade of St. Peter and Paul Church II

The geometry of the south faade is similar with the north faade. There are few variations between them. First one is that there is no entrance door at the south faade. Although there was an entrance door in the original construction of the south faade, it was then closed. Also two of the window openings at the upper wall of the south faade were closed, causing the south faade to have two windows less than the north faade. Lastly, there are extra flying buttresses at the south faade. It is thought that these buttresses were added to the original construction after some time (possibly after the 16th century earthquakes) to increase the stability of the building [75]. They are not present at the north faade, since the Venetian palace takes place at few meters away from the building. As described in north faade, there are two separate walls at the south faade. They are joined each other with flying buttresses, which carry the thrust from the higher wall to the lower one. But the effects of the additional buttresses take place at this point. They are fixed to the lower wall and

140

extend to the ground, carrying the thrust of the weight coming from the above walls to the ground (see Figures 5.8 and 5.9).

Figure 5.8: South Faade of St. Peter and Paul Church I

Figure 5.9: South faade of St. Peter and Paul Church II

141

5.2.2 Interior By the help of 25 window openings which are placed all around the building, the interior has a brighter look since they penetrate a great amount of sunlight from outside. By this way, the beautiful appearance of the interior can be inspected more easily at daytime. The impressive interior includes rib-vaulting system which is supported by 12 pieces of rounded columns and quite thick walls at the sides. The triple apse at the east part of the interior completes the fascinating atmosphere surrounding inside of the building. Different symbols at the centers of the some rib vaults are damaged while some of them can be clearly seen. The original glasses of the windows were broken down through the history and the original paintings (frescoes) on the walls were plastered. The figures below show some interior views of the building in order to facilitate the visualization of the interior atmosphere.

Figure 5.10: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (rib-vaults)

142

Figure 5.11: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (windows and pointed arches)

Figure 5.12: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (rounded columns)

143

Figure 5.13: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (rib-vaults at different levels)

Figure 5.14: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (view from top) I

144

Figure 5.15: Interior of St. Peter and Paul Church (view from top) II

5.2.3 Plans The dimensions of St. Peter and St. Paul Church are measured by using a classical meter and a laser meter. All of the elevations, thicknesses and horizontal dimensions which are needed for creating the Sap 2000 computer model are identified. The plans and some pictures while taking the measurements are shown below. All of the dimensions shown are in meters. Figure 5.16 shows the plan of the interior.

145

Figure 5.16: Interior plan of the St. Peter and Paul Church

The four figures shown below contain only the elevations at different facades of the building;

146

Figure 5.17: Elevations on north facade

Figure 5.18: Elevations on south facade

147

Figure 5.19: Elevations on east facade

Figure 5.20: Elevations on west facade

148

The horizontal dimensions of the four facades of the building are shown as follows at the same time with the elevations;

Figure 5.21: Horizontal dimensions of north faade

Figure 5.22: Horizontal dimensions of south facade

149

Figure 5.23: Horizontal dimensions of east faade

Figure 5.24: Horizontal dimensions of west faade 150

The following figures show some of the pictures while taking the measurements of the dimensions, both at the interior and exterior of the St. Peter and St. Paul Church;

Figure 5.25: Pictures while measuring the dimensions

151

Figure 5.26: Pictures while measuring the dimensions

5.3 Determination of Material Properties

Real material properties will be used in the analysis. Therefore, destructive testing technique is used to obtain the properties of the masonry which is the most reliable testing method. For this purpose, examples of stones are taken from the site with the permission of Directorate of Historical Works and tested in the laboratory of EMU Civil Engineering Department. By this way the real material properties that will be 152

used in the analysis part are decided. Compression and tension tests are applied to the samples of stones as described in sections 5.3.1 and 5.3.2. The samples are tested in three different conditions, which are fully saturated; oven dried, and kept in room temperature for 48 hours. By this way, the variations in the strength of the building materials according to the moisture conditions would be observed. Also, the unit weights of the samples are decided in the laboratory. 5.3.1 Compressive Strength Test This experiment is carried out according to TS 699 [85] and 12 cubic samples of stones are cut by using the stone saw machine. Maximum number of cubic samples is prepared for the test, considering the available materials which were taken from the site. The average compressive strength for each condition is decided. Four cubic samples of 70x70x70 mm are tested for each condition. Oven dried condition is named as C, fully saturated is named as B and kept in room temperature for 48 hours is named as A. The following formula is used to calculate the compressive strength of natural building stones [87];

fb= Pk/A

(5.1)

where; fb = Compressive strength of stone (MPa) Pk = Failure load (N) A = Cross-sectional area (mm2)

Table 5.1 shows the datas, calculations and the results of the compressive strength test which is applied to the building stone of St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral.

153

Table 5.1: Compressive strength test results

Condition Sample No 1 A 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 a (mm) 70,1 72,8 73,3 72,1 70,26 70,76 71,4 73,6 69,5 72,5 70,1 72,3 b (mm) 72,4 68,8 73,8 72,6 71,9 70,9 72,8 72,1 73,8 72,5 73,8 71,1 A (mm^2) 5075,24 5008,64 5409,54 5234,46 5051,694 5016,884 5197,92 5306,56 5129,1 5256,25 5173,38 5140,53 Pk (N) 49500 35600 22700 28000 45200 23000 29800 18100 92000 41200 45600 37300 f b (MPa) 9,75 7,11 4,20 5,35 8,95 4,58 5,73 3,41 17,94 7,84 8,81 7,26 f b average(MPa)

6,60

5,67

10,46

The reason of selecting three different conditions (A, B and C) is to see the variation of material properties against changing weather conditions. The results show that the strength of tested materials decreased as their moisture content increased. 5.3.2 Flexural Strength Test This experiment is carried out according to ASTM C 348 [86] and 12 cubic samples of stones are cut by using the stone saw machine. The average flexural strength for each condition is decided. Four cubic samples of 40x40x160 mm are tested for each condition. Oven dried condition is named as C, fully saturated is named as B and kept in room temperature for 48 hours is named as A. The following formula is used to calculate the flexural strength of natural building stone [87];

feq = (3Pkl) / (2bh2)

(5.2)

where; feq = Flexural strength of stone (MPa) Pk = Failure load (N) l = length between two supports (mm) b = width of the sample (mm) 154

h = height of the sample (mm)

Table 5.2 shows the datas, calculations and the results of the flexural strength test which is applied to the building stone of St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral.

Table 5.2: Flexural strength test results

Condition Sample No b (mm) 1 39,9 A 2 37,5 3 40,1 4 42,1 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 39,1 40,3 39,6 41,3 40,4 38,8 39,7 41,8 h (mm) 39,8 42,1 42,2 38,6 40,8 40,7 40,4 40,5 41,2 38,5 39,7 42,1 l (mm) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Failure Load (N) feg (MPa) feg average(MPa) 980 2,33 1110 2,51 1970 4,14 1680 4,02 3,25 1210 1370 1550 1380 1520 2225 1810 2620 2,79 3,08 3,60 3,06 3,32 5,80 4,34 5,30

3,13

4,69

5.3.3 Unit Weight Test

For this experiment, cubic samples of 70x70x70 mm are used. These samples are tested in three different conditions which are oven dried condition C, fully saturated condition B and kept in room temperature for 48 hours condition A. Electronic balance is used to measure the weights of the samples and average unit weights are calculated as follows:

Condition A = 19 kN/m3 Condition B = 20.5 kN/m3 Condition C = 17.5 kN/m3 155

The following figures reflect some scenes of the laboratory works done during the determination of material properties;

Figure 5.27: Stone saw machine used to cut the samples into specified sizes

Figure 5.28: Samples of stones cut into specified sizes

156

Figure 5.29: Compressive strength testing machine

157

Figure 5.30: Flexural strength testing machine

5.4 Idealizations and Assumptions

The geometrical model is created with using both solid and shell elements. Idealization of structural behavior is linear elastic, which is decided by considering the expected results and available material data. Also, due to the complexity of the materials, the structure is assumed to be made up of an equivalent single material. To decide the properties of this material, stone units are tested in laboratory as described in Chapter 5.3. The obtained material properties are assumed to be the same for every part of the structure. Also, modulus of elasticity and Poissons ratio tests couldnt be carried out because of lack of samples, but the formula used in EC6 is used to calculate the elastic modulus as described in chapter 3.2.4 and 0,15 is selected as Poissons ratio value where it generally varies between 0,1 and 0,2 for historical masonry. The highest (0,2) and the lowest (0,1) possible values for the 158

Poissons ratio value are tried in the analysis and observed that they dont have a noteworthy effect on the stress levels obtained.

Also, the mortar and units could be tested separately and the results could be joined by various homogenization formulas, to be used as unique material property for every part of the structure as described in Chapter 4.4.2.1, if there were enough opportunities. But, even if the common material properties were found by this way, the correctness of material properties considering the whole structure would not be surely increased. This is because, as mentioned before, the materials and their properties show variations through the structure and is not the same in every part of the building. Since it is not possible to take samples from each unit and mortar, it is not possible define 100% correct material properties throughout the structure. Therefore, the effect of finding the common material properties, either by using only the unit or by combining the mortar and unit, is much less then the effect of variation of materials in different parts of the structure, on the outcomes of the analysis.

5.5 Modeling and Analysis

Macro-modeling strategy, as described in chapter 4.4.2.1, is used to create the model of the structure in Sap 2000 computer program. Both solid and shell elements are used to form the structure in Sap 2000. Two different models are created to be able of establishing the effect of buttresses as well as comparing the strength demand and capacity of the materials and checking the possible deflections, with and without an earthquake. For this purpose, a model with all the buttresses is created which resembles to the original building and another model without buttresses is created, which undergo static and dynamic analysis. The model which reflects the structural behavior of the original building that is with all buttresses is made up of 96242 solid

159

elements, 20002 shell elements and 145026 joints while the model without buttresses is made up of 77292 solid elements and 18042 shell elements. Material properties of the oven dried samples are used in the models, considering the weather condition of Cyprus, which are:

Modulus of elasticity, E =10500 MPa Poissons ratio, = 0.15 Unit weight = 17.5 kN/m3 Compressive strength = 10.5 MPa Flexural strength = 4.7 Mpa

The Sap 2000 models of the original structure with all buttresses are shown as follows;

Figure 5.31: 3D view from east

160

Figure 5.32: 3D view from west

Figure 5.33: 3D view from north

161

Figure 5.34: 3D view from south

Figure 5.35: 3D view of interior I

162

Figure 5.36: 3D view of interior II

The figure below shows the Sap 2000 model of the structure without buttresses.

Figure 5.37: 3D view without buttresses

163

5.5.1 Static Analysis Linear elastic analysis is used as mentioned earlier for both models. They undergo dead loads coming from the construction materials own weight. Stresses and deflections are found for each model. The stress demand is compared with the capacity of the material. Also the stresses and deflections of the two models are compared with each other for establishing the effect of buttresses. The deflected shapes of the models are shown as follows.

164

Figure 5.38: Deflected shapes of the building with all buttresses

165

Figure 5.39: Deflected shapes of the building without buttresses

The following table includes the comparison of deflections at some specified locations of the building with and without buttresses after static analysis under dead loads.

166

Table 5.3: Displacements at specified locations

STATIC ANALYSIS (Displacements) With Buttresses West Facade Top Center (mm) Top-Left Corner (mm) Top-Right Corner (mm) U1= 0,300 U1= 0,084 U1= 0,100 U2= 0,001 U2=-0,060 U2= 0,066 U3=-0,400 U3=-0,300 U3=-0,300 East Facade Top Center (mm) Top-Left Corner (mm) Top-Right Corner (mm) U1=-0,050 U1=-0,080 U1=-0,080 U2=-0,010 U2= 0,030 U2=-0,035 U3=-0,700 U3=-0,700 U3=-0,600 North Facade Top Center (mm) Top-Left Corner (mm) Top-Right Corner (mm) U1= 0,050 U1=-0,080 U1= 0,200 U2=-0,020 U2=-0,035 U2=-0,020 U3=-0,900 U3= 0,600 U3=-0,400 South Facade Top Center (mm) Top-Left Corner (mm) Top-Right Corner (mm) U1= 0,050 U1= 0,300 U1=-0,080 U2= 0,010 U2= 0,030 U2= 0,020 U3=-0,800 U3=-0,500 U3=-0,700 Without Buttresses West Facade Top Center (mm) Top-Left Corner (mm) Top-Right Corner (mm) U1= 0,300 U1= 0,080 U1= 0,100 U2=-0,007 U2=-0,064 U2= 0,064 U3=-0,400 U3=-0,300 U3=-0,300 East Facade Top Center (mm) Top-Left Corner (mm) Top-Right Corner (mm) U1=-0,050 U1=-0,075 U1=-0,074 U2=-0,020 U2= 0,040 U2=-0,038 U3=-0,700 U3=-0,700 U3=-0,600 North Facade Top Center (mm) Top-Left Corner (mm) Top-Right Corner (mm) U1= 0,060 U1=-0,074 U1= 0,200 U2=-0,036 U2=-0,038 U2=-0,021 U3=-0,900 U3=-0,600 U3=-0,400 South Facade Top Center (mm) Top-Left Corner (mm) Top-Right Corner (mm) U1= 0,060 U1= 0,300 U1=-0,075 U2= 0,070 U2= 0,030 U2=-0,040 U3=-0,900 U3=-0,500 U3=-0,700

167

The stress diagrams, appeared after the static analysis, are shown below for both models.

Figure 5.40: Stress diagrams of solid elements for the model with buttresses from different views

168

Figure 5.41: Stress diagrams of shell elements for the model with buttresses from different views

169

Figure 5.42: Stress diagrams of solid elements for the model without buttresses from different views

170

Figure 5.43: Stress diagrams of shell elements for the model without buttresses from different views

The results of static analysis show that the stress demands are much lower than the capacity of the construction material. The stresses appeared throughout the structure are generally about 20-30 times less than the capacity of the material. This shows that the structure has a big factor of safety under its own weight after performing static analysis.

171

Comparison of the two models, which are with and without buttresses, after static analysis shows that there isnt a noteworthy difference between the stress demands. The stresses appeared are almost the same between the two models. There is only 0.1 MPa increase in the tensile stresses at the model without buttresses. The deflected shapes of the both models in x and z directions are also similar, but there is a little increase of deflections in y direction at the model without buttresses. The buttresses are used to support the structure in y direction, so removing them, results in an increase of deflection in y direction.

It was expected that the effect of buttresses will not be noteworthy because the walls of the structure are very thick. After performing the static analysis, it was proved that the stress demands of the structure with and without buttresses are almost the same while there is only a few millimeters difference in deflections.

It is also observed that tensile stresses appeared at the locations of cracks at the east faade of the structure as shown in Figure 5.44. This argument supports the reliability of the Sap 2000 model.

172

Figure 5.44: Appearance of tensile stress at crack location

Although, the tensile stress demand does not exceed the capacity of the material which is tested in the laboratory, cracks are present at the structure. This may be the result of poor joint connection or variation of material properties. 5.5.2 Dynamic Analysis As mentioned earlier, linear static analysis case is used while performing the dynamic analysis. A specified response spectrum is applied to the structure in the weak direction (y-direction), where buttresses are placed for increasing the stability. The behavior of the building against the specified response spectrum is obtained with the help of Sap 2000 computer program. Two models are defined and analyzed under the dynamic loads as it was in static analysis section. These are; the model with buttresses and the model without buttresses. The reason is to compare the structural behavior with and without buttresses, and observe the difference. Stress demands, 173

deflections and periods of the two models are compared with each other and also the stress demands of the original building is compared with the capacity of the construction material.

The response spectrum, which is used in the dynamic analysis according to the Turkish Earthquake Code, is shown in Figure 5.45.

Response Spectrum
3,000 2,500 Acceleration 2,000 1,500 1,000 0,500 0,000 0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

Period

Figure 5.45: Response spectrum diagram

The other parameters which are used in the dynamic analysis are shown in Table 5.4 where the effective ground acceleration factor is determined by referring to Eurocode 8 (see Figure 5.46). Building importance factor, local site class and structural behavior factor are decided by considering Turkish earthquake code 2007. For the modal analysis 4 modes are considered. The stress demands, deflections and periods, which appeared after dynamic analysis, are shown with the help of graphical outputs in Figures 5.47 - 5.54.

174

Table 5.4: Characteristics of building and soil condition Effective ground acceleration factor, A0 = 0,25 Building importance factor, I = 1,2 Local site class, Z2 Spectrum characteristic periods, TA = 0,15 and TB = 0,4 Structural behavior factor, R = 2

Figure 5.46: Seismic hazard zonation, Eurocode 8 (2007)

Figure 5.47: Stress diagrams of solid elements with buttresses 175

Figure 5.48: Stress diagrams of shell elements with buttresses

Figure 5.49: Stress diagrams of solid elements without buttresses

176

Figure 5.50: Stress diagrams of shell elements without buttresses

Figure 5.51: Deformed shape with buttresses

177

Figure 5.52: Deformed shape without buttresses

178

Figure 5.53: Mode shapes and periods of the building with buttresses

179

Figure 5.54: Mode shapes and periods of the building without buttresses

The comparison of stress demands and capacity of material after dynamic analysis results with a quite high factor of safety level for the structure. Although the stresses, appeared after dynamic analysis, are greater than the stresses appeared after static analysis, they are still lower than the capacity of the material.

180

When the models, with and without buttresses, are compared after dynamic analysis, the increase in stress values in some locations at the model without buttresses are observed. But this increase is not at a dangerous level when the capacity of the material is considered. It is also observed that the deflections at the model without buttresses are higher than the one with buttresses. The maximum deflection in ydirection increases from 1,1cm to 2,5cm when the model changes from with buttresses to without buttresses.

The effects of buttresses are more obvious in dynamic analysis case when compared with static analysis.

Considering the age and present condition of St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral, it is obvious that the structure is stable and the material strength is satisfactory against static and dynamic loads. The building survived through many earthquakes during its life in spite of some degradation of its materials. These shows how strong can historical masonry structures could be.

5.6 Critical Locations and Repair Techniques Offered

After performing both static and dynamic analysis, it is observed that the stress demands are lower than the capacity of the material. Therefore, the structure can be considered in the safe category assuming that the material property is unique at every part of it. But in real, material properties of historical masonry structures show variations throughout the structure caused by several factors. Although the analysis results show that the structure is stable with no critical locations, the site inspection results in some deteriorated parts and cracks on the east faade of the structure.

181

These may be because of bombardment during war times, degradation through time, variation of material properties or poor jointing.

Combining the analysis outcomes and visual inspections, the structure can be defined as stable. This means that there arent any places whose strength has to be increased. But the places which are quite worn away and the cracks at the east faade should be repaired with injection of appropriate lime based mortars as mentioned by Price (1996) [58], in order to prevent these deteriorated places getting worse and weaken the structure. The strengthening material should have similar properties with the original construction material to be able of adapting with the structure.

182

Chapter 6

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the analysis of St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral (Sinan Pasha Mosque), some conclusions are decided. It should be kept in mind that a unique material property is assumed for every part of the structure in the analysis. In real, material properties of historical masonry structures vary throughout the building, caused by various reasons. It is not possible to test every part of a historical masonry structure for finding different material properties and applying them in the analysis. Therefore, the results of the analysis may reflect the structural behavior with some margin of error. In spite of these errors, the outcomes of the analysis are satisfactory for the researcher in order to make comments on the structural behavior. The conclusion remarks which are decided after the analysis are as follows:

The building has a quite high factor of safety against both static and dynamic loads applied. The stress demands which appeared after the analysis are lower than the capacity of the material.

The effect of flying buttresses, in static analysis, on the structural behavior is only a little because of the thick walls of the structure. In spite of these thick walls, it is observed that the effect of flying buttresses is increased on the structural behavior when dynamic loads are applied. The deflections and stresses at some locations decreased with the help of flying buttresses, in dynamic analysis. 183

By combining analysis outcomes and visual inspections on the St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral, injection of lime based mortars, into the crack locations on the east faade and on to the deteriorated surfaces around the structure, as a repair approach is offered.

The structural elements, which were used during the architectural periods between 330-1571 AD in Cyprus, are studied in detail and compared with each other in order to show the differences of architectural styles used by the various historical periods. The comparison of a Gothic building and a Romanesque building in North Cyprus, which are St. Nicholas Cathedral and St. Barnabas Monastery, clearly reflects the variations between Lusignan and Byzantine periods in structural point of view. Also, the structural changes within the Gothic buildings located at different parts of the Europe and Cyprus, which is highlighted in this study, reflects the country effect on the Gothic Architecture.

Finally, the study is expected to create guidance for the civil engineers who will begin to study on the subject of historical buildings by providing essential points that should be considered during the inspection, analysis and strengthening of historical masonry structures.

It is hope to encourage other civil engineers to work on historical buildings and growing the awareness of cultural heritage.

184

REFERENCES

[1] Parthog, G. (1994). Byzantine and Medieval Cyprus: A Guide to the Monuments. Interworld publications.

[2] Altan, Z. (1998). Kuzey Kbrs Tanyalm Gezelim Grelim. Ate Matbaaclk Ltd.

[3] http://www.mcw.gov.cy/mcw/da/da.nsf/DMLchtable_en/DMLchtable_en? OpenDocument

[4] http://www.worldheritagesite.org/sites/choirokoitia.html

[5] http://www.aboutcyprus.com/cyprus_problem.htm

[6] Adam, J., P. (1994). Roman Buildings, Materials and Techniques. B.T. Batsford LTD, London.

[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_architecture

[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanesque_architecture

[9] http://www.archimon.nl/history/romanesque.html

[10] http://www.historylink101.com/lessons/art_history_lessons/ma/Romanesque _architecture.htm

185

[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprus_in_the_Middle_Ages#Byzantine_period

[12] http://www.cypnet.co.uk/ncyprus/history/lusignan/1guydelusignan.htm

[13] http://history-world.org/gothic_art_and_architecture.htm

[14] Enlart, C. (1987). Gothic Art and the Renaissance in Cyprus. Trigraph Limited, London.

[15] Jeffery, G. (1983). Historical Monuments of Cyprus. Booksellers and Publishers, London.

[16] nay, A., . (2002). Tarihi Yaplarn Depreme Dayanm. O.D.T.. Mimarlk Fakltesi Basm lii, Ankara.

[17] Heyman, J. (1995).The Stone Skeleton; Structural Engineering of Masonry Architecture. Cambridge University Press, UK.

[18] http://aboutcivil.com/Stone%20Mortars.html

[19] Loureno, P., B. (1999) Historical Structures: Models and Modeling, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minho, Portugal.

[20] Armi, E. (1975). Orders and Continuous orders in Romanesque Architecture. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp173-188.

[21] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch 186

[22] Williams, K. (2007). Architecture and Mathematics. Nexus Network Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, Birkhuser Publication.

[23] Heyman, J. (1996). Arches, Vaults and Buttresses. Ashgate Publishing Limited, UK.

[24] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vault_(architecture)

[25] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic-art/54039/66137/Four-commontypes-of-vault

[26] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendentive

[27] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squinch

[28] http://www.sacred-destinations.com/turkey/istanbul-hagia-sophia.htm

[29] http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blxtn_constan-hagia10.htm

[30] http://www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/mtdavis/222/barrelvault.html

[31] http://www.athenapub.com/14gothic-architecture.htm

[32] http://www.historylink101.com/lessons/art_history_lessons/ma/

[33] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_architecture#Regional_differences

187

[34] Walsh, M. (2004). A Gothic Masterpiece in Levant: Saint Nicholas CathedralFamagusta- North Cyprus. Elsevier, Science Direct.

[35] Bull, J., W. (2001). Computational Modelling of Masonry, Brickwork and Blockwork Structures. Saxe-Coburg Publications, UK.

[36] Bayraktar, A. (2006). Tarihi Yaplarn Analitik ncelemensi ve Sismik Glendirme Metodlar. Beta Basm A.., stanbul.

[37] Laureno, P., B. (1996). Computational Strategies For Masonry Structures. Delft University Press, Netherlands.

[38] ener, ., N. (2004). An innovative Methodology and Structural Analysis for Relocation of Historical Masonry Monuments: A Case Study in Hasankeyf. MS Dissertation, METU, Ankara.

[39] zen, G., . (2006). Comparison of Elastic And Inelastic Behavior of Historical Masonry Structures At The Low Load Levels. MS Dissertation, METU, Ankara.

[40] Einsfeld, R., A. (2007). Mapping of Variables in FE Analysis of Arbitrary Cohesive Crack Propagation. Mechanics of Solids in Brazil 2007, Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering.

[41] Chan, O., B., Elwi, A., E., Grondin, G., Y. (2006). Simulation of Crack Propagation in Steel Plate with Strain Softening Model. Department of Civil and Enviromental Engineering, University of Alberta. 188

[42] FE Discrete Continuum Methods. http://nwialad.uibk.ac.at/Wp2/Tg3/Se4/Ss1/ #a2

[43] Nanakorn, P., Soparat, P. (2000). Finite Element Analysis of Cracking Localization: The Smeared Crack Approach With A Mixed Formulation. Thammasat Int. J. Sc. Tech., Vol5., No3., Thailand.

[44] Remmers, J., J., C., Needleman, A., Abellan, M., A. (2004). Discrete vs Smeared Crack Models For Concrete Fracture: Bridging the Gap. International Journal For Numerical And Analytical Methods In Geomechanics, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

[45] Tzamtzis, A.,D., Finite Element Modeling of Cracks and Joints in Discontinuous Structural Systems, Technological Educational Institute of Athens, Greece.

[46] Mola, F., Vitaliani, R. (1997). Analysis, Diagnosis and Preservation of Ancient Monuments: The St. Marks Basilica in Venice. Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions, CIMNE, Barcelona, Spain.

[47] Rossi, P., P. (1997). Possibilities of the Experimental Techniques For the Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions, Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions, CIMNE, Barcelona.

189

[48] Bani-Hani, K., Barakat, S. (2006). Analytical evaluation of repair and strengthening measures of Qasr al-Bint historical monumentPetra, Jordan. Science-direct, Elsevier Ltd.

[49] General masonry inspection. http://www.oldhouseweb.com/how-to-advice/ general-masonry-inspection.shtml

[50] Cracked Masonry Walls. http://www.ultimatehandyman.co.uk/ masonry_ crack_repair.htm

[51] Valluzzi, M., R., Binda, L., Modena, C. (2004). Mechanical behavior of historic masonry structures strengthened by bed joints structural repointing. Science-direct, Elsevier Ltd.

[52] Valluzzi, M., R., Porto, F., Modena, C. (2001). Behavior of multi-leaf stone masonry walls strengthened by different intervention techniques: Historical Constructions, P.B. Loureno, P. Roca (Eds.), Guimares, Portugal.

[53] Valluzzi, M., R., Binda, L., Modena, C. (2002). Experimental and analytical studies for the choice of repair techniques applied to historic buildings. Materials and Structures, Vol. 35, pp 285-292.

[54] Binda, L., Modena, C., Baronio, G., Abbaneo, S. (1997). Repair and Investigation Techniques for Stone Masonry Walls. Construction and Building Materials, Vol.11, pp133-142, Elsevier Science Ltd.

190

[55] Corradi, M., Borri, A., Vignoli, A. (2002). Strengthening techniques tested on masonry structures struck by the UmbriaMarche earthquake of 19971998. Construction and Building Materials, pp229-239, Elsevier Science Ltd.

[56] Suprenant, B., A. (1898). Restoring Old Stone. Publication #M890222, The Aberdeen Group.

[57] Marshall,

P.,

Masonry

Consolidants.

http://philipmarshall.net/Teaching/

rwuhp301/collins_consolidants.htm

[58] Price, C., A. (1996). Stone Conservation. The Getty Conservation Institute, United States of America.

[59] Riato, S., Nardini, I., Biscontin, G., Zendry, E. (2006). Characterization and reactivity of silicatic consolidants, Construction and Building Materials, Elsevier Science Ltd.

[60] Roca, P., Gonzalez, J. L., Mari, A.R., and Onate, E. (1977), Possibilities of Numerical and Experimental Techniques, Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions, CIMNE, Barcelona.

[61] Loureno, P., B. (2002). Guidelines for the analysis of Historical Masonry Structures. University of Minho, Department of Civil Engineering, Guimares, Portugal.

191

[62] Loureno, P., B. (2004). Structural Behavior of Civil Engineering Structures: Highlight In Historical and Masonry Structures. University of Minho, Department of Civil Engineering, Guimares, Portugal.

[63] nay, A., ., Toker, S. (2004). Mathematical Modeling and Finite Element Analysis of Masonry Arc Bridges. G.U. Journal of Science, Vol. 17(2):129139.

[64] en, B. (2003). Modeling and Analysis of the Historical Masonry Structures. MS Dissertation, METU, Ankara.

[65] Loureno, P., B. (1994). Analysis of Masonry Structures with Interface Elements: Theory and Applications. Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Netherlands.

[66] Ylmaz, P. (2006). Tarihi Yaplarn Modellenmesi ve Deprem Gvenliklerinin Belirlenmesi. Yksek lisans tezi, Sakarya niversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstits, Sakarya.

[67] Loureno, P.B. (2002). Computations on Historic Masonry Structures. Prog. Struct. Engineering Materials, Vol. 4: 301-319, John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

[68] Liscio, E. (2008). Guide to Taking Photographs for Photogrammetric Analysis. AI2 3D Animations, www.ai2-3d.com.

192

[69] Loureno, P., B. (2001). Analysis of historical constructions: From thrust-lines to advanced simulations. University of Minho, Department of Civil Engineering, Guimares, Portugal, pp. 91-116.

[70] Rao, S., S. (2004). The Finite Element Method in Engineering. ButterworthHeinemann.

[71]

http://www.me.cmu.edu/academics/courses/NSF_Edu_Proj/StrAnalysis_ ANSYS/FEM.html

[72] Carey, G., F., Patton, P., C. (1987). Toward Expert Systems in Finite Element Analysis. Computations in Applied Numerical Methods, Vol. 3, 527-533 (1987), John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

[73] Brebbia, C., Leftheris, A. (1995). Structural Studies of Historical Buildings IV: Architectural Studies. Materials and Analysis, Volume1, Computational Mechanics Publications.

[74] Brebbia, C., Leftheris, A. (1995). Dynamics, Repairs and Restoration. Structural Studies of Historical Buildings IV, Volume2, Computational Mechanics Publications.

[75] Walsh, M. (2004). Saint Peter and Paul Church (Sinan Pasha Mosque), Famagusta: A Forgotten Gothic Moment in Northern Cyprus. Article 5, Inferno Volume IX.

193

[76] Loureno, P., B., Zucchini, A. (2001). A Homogenization Model for Stretcher Bond Masonry. University of Minho, Department of Civil Engineering, Guimares, Portugal.

[77] Loureno, P., B. (2006). Structural Behavior of Civil Engineering Structures: Highligth in Historical and Masonry Structures. University of Minho, Department of Civil Engineering, Guimares, Portugal.

[78] nay, A., . (2000). Structural Wisdom of Architectural Heritage. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.

[79] http://wikimapia.org/15820/Larnaca

[80] zay, G., zay, N. (2004). Re-use of Historic Buildings in North Cyprus: The Sustainable City 2004, Third International Conference on Urban Regeneration and Sustainability, Wessex Institude of Technology, Siena Italy.

[81] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nave

[82] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisle

[83] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transept

[84] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apse

[85] Turkish Standards Institution. (1987). Methods of Testing for Natural Building Stones, TS 699.

194

[86] American Society for Testing and Materials. (1997). Standard Test Methods for Flexural Strength of Hydraulic-Cement Mortars, ASTM C 348.

[87] Bahal, M. (2002). Physical and Mechanical Properties of Natural Building Cut Stone of Cyprus. MS Dissertation, EMU, North Cyprus.

195

APPENDIX

196

Glossary for the Typical Cathedral Ground Plan (Romanesque and Gothic)

Nave is the long central section directly inside the main doors, where the public attends services [81]. Aisle is a passageway to either side of the nave that is separated from the nave by a row of pillars or columns [82]. Transept is the area set crosswise to the nave [83]. Apse is a semicircular recess covered with a hemispherical vault or semi-dome [84].

Nave (shown by the shaded area) [81]

Aisle (shown by the shaded area) [82]

197

Transept (shown by the shaded area) [83]

Apse (shown by the shaded area) [84]

198