deliverable d61

PERPETUATE PERformance-based aPproach to Earthquake proTection of cUlturAl

heriTage in European and mediterranean countries FP7 - Theme ENV.2009.3.2.1.1 ENVIRONMENT

Grant agreement n: 244229

DELIVERABLE D6 Review of innovative techniques for the knowledge of

cultural assets

Date of preparation: 10/2010 Delivery date: 12/2010

PERPETUATE Proposal n 244229 Deliverable D6 31/10/2010

2/114

AUTHORS: Bosiljkov V., V. Bokan-Bosiljkov, B. Strah, J. Velkavrh, P. Coti (UL)

CONTRIBUTORS: Cattari S., Lagomarsino S. (UNIGE) Ginanni Corradini R., Piovanello, V. (CENACOLO)

Lead Beneficiary: UL

Reviewer in charge: Stylianidis Kosmas C. (AUTH)

WP: 4 Task: 4.1 Definition of the complete records (sets of information) for the

seismic assessment of cultural assets. Nature: R Dissemination Level: PU

SUMMARY The document presented herein contains review of innovative techniques for the knowledge of cultural assets and sets of information related to definition of the complete records for the seismic assessment of cultural assets. In the first part review of different methodologies (Italian guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage, ICOMOS, European Council) for collecting data regarding the knowledge of cultural heritage assets are summarized and presented. On the basis of these reviews, sets of information related to particular architectonic or cultural asset are proposed in the form of tables. Following this, review of different methodologies/techniques for in-situ testing of masonry structures are presented, where for each method scope of testing, principle of test, figure of test set-up, test procedure and measurements, results, notes for the interpretation of results together with code provisions and references are presented. Particular attention is focused to the application of NDT/MDT and DT methodologies regarding their intrusiveness and effectiveness for the assessment of both AA (architectonic asset) and CA (cultural or artistic asset). In the last chapter guidelines for the design of interventions are given with attention on planning in-situ investigation, applicability of different testing technique as well as their cost.


3/114

INDEX 1 Recording, documentation and information management of cultural heritage ................ 5

2 State-of-art of international recommendations on recording of monuments ................... 5 2.1 ICOMOS charters [14, 15] ................................................................................................... 6

2.1.1 Principles for the recording of monuments, groups of buildings and sites [14] ................. 6 2.1.1.1 The Reasons for Recording ..................................................................................... 6 2.1.1.2 Responsibility for Recording .................................................................................... 7 2.1.1.3 Planning for Recording ............................................................................................ 7 2.1.1.4 Content of Records .................................................................................................. 8 2.1.1.5 Management, Dissemination and Sharing of Records .............................................. 9

2.1.2 Recommendations for the analysis, conservation and structural restoration of architectural heritage [15] .......................................................................................................... 10

2.1.2.1 General criteria ...................................................................................................... 10 2.1.2.2 Acquisition of data: information and investigation ................................................... 11 2.1.2.3 Structural behaviour ............................................................................................... 13 2.1.2.4 Diagnosis and safety evaluation............................................................................. 16

2.2 Core data index to historic buildings and monuments of the architectural heritage [12] ..... 20 2.2.1 Names and references .................................................................................................. 20 2.2.2 Location ......................................................................................................................... 21 2.2.3 Protection/legal status ................................................................................................... 21 2.2.4 Persons and organisations associated with the history of the building ........................... 21 2.2.5 Dating (allows for precise dating when it is known, or date ranges or periods when it is imprecise) ................................................................................................................................. 21

2.3 Recording for conservation purposes [18] ......................................................................... 22 2.4 Recording according to Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage [13] .................................................................................................................................. 24 3 Set of information necessary for the application of the PERPETUATE methodology for the seismic assessment ............................................................................................................. 26

4 State-of-the-art of techniques for survey and investigation of architectonic and artistic assets .......................................................................................................................................... 36 4.1 Metric surveying and recording. ......................................................................................... 37

4.1.1 Manual Survey Techniques ........................................................................................... 37 4.1.1.1 Hand Survey .......................................................................................................... 37 4.1.1.2 Sketch Diagram ..................................................................................................... 37

4.1.2 Instrument Survey Tools ................................................................................................ 37 4.1.2.1 Total Station Theodolite ......................................................................................... 38 4.1.2.2 Laser Scanning ...................................................................................................... 38 4.1.2.3 Global Positioning System (GPS) .......................................................................... 38

4.1.3 Image-Based Documentation Methods .......................................................................... 39 4.1.3.1 Pictorial Imagery .................................................................................................... 39 4.1.3.2 Rectified Photography ............................................................................................ 39 4.1.3.3 Photogrammetry .................................................................................................... 40


4/114

4.1.4 Data Management ......................................................................................................... 40 4.1.4.1 Computer-Aided Design and Drafting (CAD) .......................................................... 41 4.1.4.2 Computer Modelling ............................................................................................... 41 4.1.4.3 Databases ............................................................................................................. 41 4.1.4.4 Geographic Information System (GIS) ................................................................... 41

4.2 Diagnostic Surveying and Recording. ................................................................................ 42 4.2.1 Basic principles of planning an NDT/MDT/DT investigation ........................................... 43 4.2.2 General classification and description of the methods ................................................... 44 4.2.3 Description of the methods for the evaluation of architectonic assets ............................ 47

4.2.3.1 Active Thermography (N1) ..................................................................................... 48 4.2.3.2 Geoelectrical Tomographies (N2) .......................................................................... 52 4.2.3.3 Impact-echo (N3) ................................................................................................... 55 4.2.3.4 Pachometer (Magnetometry) (N4) .......................................................................... 58 4.2.3.5 Pulse Sonic Test (N5) ............................................................................................ 59 4.2.3.6 Radar (echo method) (N6) ..................................................................................... 62 4.2.3.7 Ultrasonics (echo and through transmission) (N7) ................................................. 67 4.2.3.8 Hardness test (N8) ................................................................................................. 71 4.2.3.9 Transducer Movement Sensing (N9) ..................................................................... 72 4.2.3.10 Coring and sampling (including local in depth inspection) (M1) .............................. 75 4.2.3.11 Hole Drilling Method (M2) ...................................................................................... 77 4.2.3.12 Optical and Digital Endoscopy/Boroscopy (M3) ..................................................... 78 4.2.3.13 PNT-G method (M4) .............................................................................................. 79 4.2.3.14 Single Flat Jack Test (M5) ..................................................................................... 81 4.2.3.15 Double Flat Jack Test (M6) .................................................................................... 84 4.2.3.16 In-situ compressive tests (D1) ................................................................................ 87 4.2.3.17 In-situ shear tests (D2) ........................................................................................... 89 4.2.3.18 In-situ diagonal tests (D3) ...................................................................................... 92 4.2.3.19 In-situ shear test with Flat Jack (D4) ...................................................................... 94 4.2.3.20 In-situ shear test Shove test (D5) ........................................................................ 96

5 Guidelines for the design of investigations ...................................................................... 98 5.1 Planning diagnostic in-situ investigation ............................................................................ 98 5.2 Applicability of different testing technique depending on the mechanical model .............. 100 5.3 Use of different testing technique depending on the classification of architectonic and artistic assets .............................................................................................................................. 102 5.4 Cost of different testing tecniques ................................................................................... 103 5.5 Definition of confidence factors (according to [13]) .......................................................... 105 6 References ......................................................................................................................... 107

7 APPENDIX: Collection of data according to Italian guidelines ...................................... 110


5/114

1 Recording, documentation and information management of cultural heritage Heritage records must clearly and accurately identify and locate the heritage places and their setting, and note the sources of all related information. They must also include metric, quantitative, and qualitative information about the assets, their values and significance, their management, their condition, their maintenance and repairs, and the threats and risks to their safekeeping. Recording and other heritage information activities should be undertaken to an appropriate level of detail to provide information for sensitive and cost-effective planning and development; for efficient research, seismic assessment, conservation work, site management, and maintenance; and for creating permanent records. The selection of the appropriate scope, level, and methods of recording requires that the methods of recording and type of documentation produced are appropriate to the type of architectonic asset, importance of the heritage place, applied model of analysis and the resources available. Regarding the seismic assessment of architectonic assets, the sets of information may depends regarding the scale of the numerical analysis (territorial or particular object) and should encompass wide range of data related to geometry of the asset, technological detail, historical information, material properties, typology of the foundation system, topographic relief characteristics, etc. For each sets of information methodology for its evaluation differs. However, due to the nature and sensitivity of architectonic and cultural assets, particular attention is focused to the application of NDT methodologies and to the complementary use of different techniques depending from their intrusiveness.

2 State-of-art of international recommendations on recording of monuments The topic of investigation of monumental buildings is handled by different documents, that state the importance of a deep knowledge with proper techniques, taking into account the conservation of the cultural heritage asset.

General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings can be followed through the codes issued by the European Technical Committee CEN TC 250 Structural Eurocodes [10]. Hence, seismic assessment of existing buildings made of the more commonly used structural materials: concrete, steel, and masonry is regulated in more details by Eurocode 8-3 [11]. However, in the same document CEN TC 250 clearly stated that although the provisions of this Standard are applicable to all categories of buildings, the seismic assessment and retrofitting of monuments and historical buildings often requires different types of provisions and approaches, depending on the nature of the monuments.

The European Technical Committee - CEN TC 346 - Conservation of Cultural Property is preparing a set of standards on the survey and visual inspection of movable and immovable heritage, as well as on terminology and definitions in the field of conservation of cultural property. These standards are still under development..

There is no standardized method for the collection of data needed for the seismic assessment of architectonic and artistic assets. Apart from the methodology developed through Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage [12], among other documents that that may be directly related to PERPETUATE methodology in the following also principles and guidelines according to ICOMOS (International Scientific Committee for Analysis and Restoration


6/114

of Structures of Architectural Heritage) [14,15], Council of Europe [12] and Getty Conservation Institute [8] are summarized and presented. In this chapter documents from four main sources are briefly summarized and presented:

- The document Principles for the recording of monuments, groups of buildings and sites ratified by the 11thICOMOS General Assembly in Sofia, October 1996 [14] as well as Recommendations for the analysis, conservation and structural restoration of architectural heritage ((Part I- Principles according to the document ratified by the ICOMOS General Assembly in Zimbabwe, October 2003; Part II-Guidelines approved in the meeting held by the committee at Barcelona,2005). ) [15];

- Guidance on Inventory and Documentation of the Cultural Heritage , Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, 2001 [12];

- Recording, Documentation, and Information Management for the Conservation of Heritage Places Guiding Principles, The Getty Conservation Institute, 2007 [18] and

- Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage (Italian Ministry of Cultural Heritage, 2008) [13]

2.1 ICOMOS charters [14, 15] 2.1.1 Principles for the recording of monuments, groups of buildings and sites [14] 2.1.1.1 The Reasons for Recording The recording of the cultural heritage is essential:

a) to acquire knowledge in order to advance the understanding of cultural heritage, its values and its evolution;

b) to promote the interest and involvement of the people in the preservation of the heritage through the dissemination of recorded information;

c) to permit informed management and control of construction works and of all change to the cultural heritage;

d) to ensure that the maintenance and conservation of the heritage is sensitive to its physical form, its materials, construction, and its historical and cultural significance.

Recording should be undertaken to an appropriate level of detail in order to: a) provide information for the process of identification, understanding, interpretation and

presentation of the heritage, and to promote the involvement of the public;

b) provide a permanent record of all monuments, groups of buildings and sites that are to be destroyed or altered in any way, or where at risk from natural events or human activities;

c) provide information for administrators and planners at national, regional or local levels to make sensitive planning and development control policies and decisions;


7/114

d) provide information upon which appropriate and sustainable use may be identified, and the effective research, management, maintenance programs and construction works may be planned.

Recording of the cultural heritage should be seen as a priority, and should be undertaken especially:

a) when compiling a national, regional, or local inventory; b) as a fully integrated part of research and conservation activity; c) before, during and after any works of repair, alteration, or other intervention, and when

evidence of its history is revealed during such works;

d) when total or partial demolition, destruction, abandonment or relocation is contemplated, or where the heritage is at risk of damage from human or natural external forces;

e) during or following accidental or unforeseen disturbance which damages the cultural heritage;

f) when change of use or responsibility for management or control occurs. 2.1.1.2 Responsibility for Recording

1. The commitment at the national level to conserve the heritage requires an equal commitment towards the recording process.

2. The complexity of the recording and interpretation processes requires the deployment of individuals with adequate skill, knowledge and awareness for the associated tasks. It may be necessary to initiate training programs to achieve this.

3. Typically the recording process may involve skilled individuals working in collaboration, such as specialist heritage recorders, surveyors, conservators, architects, engineers, researchers, architectural historians, archaeologists above and below ground, and other specialist advisors.

4. All managers of cultural heritage are responsible for ensuring the adequate recording, quality and updating of the records.

2.1.1.3 Planning for Recording Before new records are prepared, existing sources of information should be found and examined for their adequacy.

a) The type of records containing such information should be searched for in surveys, drawings, photographs, published and unpublished accounts and descriptions, and related documents pertaining to the origins and history of the building, group of buildings or site. It is important to search out recent as well as old records;

b) Existing records should be searched for in locations such as national and local public archives, in professional, institutional or private archives, inventories and collections, in libraries or museums;


8/114

c) Records should be searched for through consultation with individuals and organizations who have owned, occupied, recorded, constructed, conserved, or carried out research into or who have knowledge of the building, group of buildings or site.

Arising out of the analysis above, selection of the appropriate scope, level and methods of recording requires that:

a) The methods of recording and type of documentation produced should be appropriate to the nature of the heritage, the purposes of the record, the cultural context, and the funding or other resources available. Limitations of such resources may require a phased approach to recording. Such methods might include written descriptions and analyses, photographs (aerial or terrestrial), rectified photography, photogrammetry, geophysical survey, maps, measured plans, drawings and sketches, replicas or other traditional and modern technologies;

b) Recording methodologies should, wherever possible, use non-intrusive techniques, and should not cause damage to the object being recorded;

c) The rationale for the intended scope and the recording method should be clearly stated; d) The materials used for compiling the finished record must be archivally stable.

2.1.1.4 Content of Records Any record should be identified by:

a) the name of the building, group of buildings or site; b) a unique reference number; c) the date of compilation of the record; d) the name of the recording organization; e) cross-references to related building records and reports, photographic, graphic, textual or

bibliographic documentation, archaeological and environmental records.

The location and extent of the monument, group of buildings or site must be given accurately. This may be achieved by description, maps, plans or aerial photographs. In rural areas a map reference or triangulation to known points may be the only methods available. In urban areas an address or street reference may be sufficient.

1. New records should note the sources of all information not obtained directly from the monument, group of buildings or site itself.

2. Records should include some or all of the following information: a) the type, form and dimensions of the building, monument or site; b) the interior and exterior characteristics, as appropriate, of the monument, group of buildings

or site;

c) the nature, quality, cultural, artistic and scientific significance of the heritage and its components and the cultural, artistic and scientific significance of:


9/114

the materials, constituent parts and construction, decoration, ornament or inscriptions,

services, fittings and machinery,

ancillary structures, the gardens, landscape and the cultural, topographical and natural features of the site;

d) the traditional and modern technology and skills used in construction and maintenance; e) evidence to establish the date of origin, authorship, ownership, the original design, extent,

use and decoration;

f) evidence to establish the subsequent history of its uses, associated events, structural or decorative alterations, and the impact of human or natural external forces;

g) the history of management, maintenance and repairs; h) representative elements or samples of construction or site materials; i) an assessment of the current condition of the heritage; j) an assessment of the visual and functional relationship between the heritage and its setting; k) an assessment of the conflicts and risks from human or natural causes, and from

environmental pollution or adjacent land uses. 3. In considering the different reasons for recording different levels of detail will be required.

All the above information, even if briefly stated, provides important data for local planning and building control and management. Information in greater detail is generally required for the site or building owners, managers or users purposes for conservation, maintenance and use.

2.1.1.5 Management, Dissemination and Sharing of Records 1. The original records should be preserved in a safe archive, and the archives environment

must ensure permanence of the information and freedom from decay to recognized international standards.

2. A complete back-up copy of such records should be stored in a separate safe location.

3. Copies of such records should be accessible to the statutory authorities, to concerned professionals and to the public, where appropriate, for the purposes of research, development controls and other administrative and legal processes.

4. Up-dated records should be readily available, if possible on the site, for the purposes of research on the heritage, management, maintenance and disaster relief.

5. The format of the records should be standardized, and records should be indexed wherever possible to facilitate the exchange and retrieval of information at a local, national or international level.

6. The effective assembly, management and distribution of recorded information requires, wherever possible, the understanding and the appropriate use of up-to date information technology.


10/114

7. The location of the records should be made public.

8. A report of the main results of any recording should be disseminated and published, when appropriate.

2.1.2 Recommendations for the analysis, conservation and structural restoration of architectural heritage [15]

The Recommendations are in two sections: Principles, where the basic concepts of conservation are presented, and Guidelines, where the rules and methodology that a designer and others should follow are discussed. Only the Principles have the status of an approved/ratified ICOMOS document. Guidelines are divided in sub-chapters:

1. General criteria,

2. Acquisition of data (information and investigation), 3. Structural behaviour,

4. Diagnosis and safety evaluation and

5. Decisions on interventions.

Apart from these sub-chapters additional Annex related to the structural damage, material decay and remedial measures depending from the type of material is provided.

Since the 5th sub-chapter is out of scope of this deliverable, in the following only first four sub-chapters are presented.

2.1.2.1 General criteria A combination of both scientific and cultural knowledge and experience among those involved is indispensable for the study and care of architectural heritage. Only in this context can these guidelines help towards better conservation, strengthening and restoration of buildings and other structures.* The purpose of all studies, research and interventions is to safeguard the cultural and historical value of the building as a whole. Structural engineering involves the scientific support necessary to obtain this result. These guidelines have been prepared to assist this work and facilitate communication between those involved.

Any planning for structural conservation requires both qualitative data, based on the direct observation of material decay and structural damage, historical research etc., and quantitative data based on specific tests and mathematical models of the kind used in modern engineering. This combination of approaches makes it very difficult to establish rules and codes. While the lack of clear guidelines can easily lead to ambiguities and arbitrary decisions, codes prepared for the design of modern structures are often inappropriately applied to historic structures. For example, the rigid application of seismic and geotechnical codes can lead to drastic and often unnecessary measures that fail to take account of real structural behaviour. Engineering judgement is an essential element in this work imposing a responsibility on those making such judgements. The subjective aspects in the study and the safety assessment of an historic building, the uncertainties in the data assumed and the difficulties of precise evaluation of phenomena, may lead to conclusions of uncertain reliability. It is important, therefore, to show all these aspects clearly, noting particularly in an EXPLANATORY REPORT the care taken in the development of


11/114

the study and the reliability of the results. This report requires a careful and critical analysis of the safety of the structure in order to justify any intervention measures. It will facilitate the decisions to be taken and the final judgement on the safety of the structure. The evaluation of a building requires a holistic approach considering the building as a whole rather than just the assessment of individual elements. 2.1.2.2 Acquisition of data: information and investigation The investigation of the structure requires an interdisciplinary approach that goes beyond simple technical considerations because historical research may explain aspects of structural behaviour while structural behaviour may answer some historical questions. Therefore it is important that an investigating team be formed that incorporates a range of skills appropriate to the characteristics of the building and which is directed by someone with adequate experience.

Knowledge of the structure requires information on its conception, on its constructional techniques, on the processes of decay and damage, on changes that have been made and finally on its present state. This knowledge can usually be reached by the following steps:

a description of the structures geometry and construction;

definition, description and understanding of the buildings historic and cultural

significance;

a description of the original building materials and construction techniques;

historical research covering the entire life of the structure including both changes to

its form and any previous structural interventions;

description of the structure in its present state including identification of damage,

decay and possible progressive phenomena, using appropriate types of test;

description of the actions involved, structural behaviour and types of materials;

a survey of the site, soil conditions and environment of the building.

A pre-survey of both the site and the building should guide these studies.

Because these can all be carried out at different levels of detail, it is important to establish a cost-effective plan of activities proportional to the structures complexity and architectural value, which takes into account the benefit to be obtained from the knowledge gained. In most cases it is appropriate to undertake these studies in stages beginning with the simplest and broadest, moving on to the more detailed.

Historical and architectural investigations

The purpose of the historical investigation is to understand the conception and the significance of the building, the techniques and the skills used in its construction, the subsequent changes in both the structure and its environment and any events that may have caused damage. Such events include and additions or changes of use, failures, reconstructions and restoration work or structural modifications that might have been recorded.


12/114

Documents used for this should be noted and the sources assessed for their reliability as a means of reconstructing the history of construction. Their careful interpretation is essential if they are to produce reliable information about the structural history of a building. It should be remembered that documents that might be available were usually prepared for purposes other than structural engineering and may therefore include technical information which is incorrect and/or may omit or misrepresent key facts or events which are structurally significant. Assumptions made in the interpretation of historical material should be made clear.

Investigation of the structure

Direct observation of the structure is an essential phase of the study, usually carried out by a qualified team to provide an initial understanding of the structure and to give an appropriate direction to the subsequent investigations. The main objectives include:

identifying decay and damage,

determining whether or not the phenomena have stabilised,

deciding whether or not there are immediate risks and therefore urgent measures to be undertaken,

identifying any ongoing environmental effects on the building.

The study of structural faults begins by mapping visible damage. During this process interpretation of the findings should be used to guide the survey, and the expert already developing an idea of the possible structural behaviour so that critical aspects of the structure may be examined in more detail. Record drawings should map different kinds of materials, noting any decay and any structural irregularities and damage, paying particular (but not exclusive) attention to crack patterns and crushing phenomena.

Geometric irregularities can be the result of previous deformations, or can merely indicate the junction between different building phases or alterations to the fabric. It is important to discover how the environment may be damaging a building, since this can be exacerbated by poor original design and/or workmanship (e.g. lack of drainage, condensation, rising damp), the use of unsuitable materials, and/or inadequate (or nonexistent) maintenance. For example, observation of areas where damage is concentrated as a result of high compression (zones of crushing) or high tensions (zones of cracking or the separation of elements) and the direction of the cracks, together with an investigation of soil conditions, may indicate the causes of this damage. This may be supplemented by information acquired by specific tests.

Field research and laboratory testing

The schedule of tests should be based on a clear preliminary view of which phenomena are the most important to understand. Tests usually aim to identify the various mechanical, physical and chemical characteristics of the materials, the stresses and deformations of the structure and the presence of any discontinuities within it. The first of these will include the materials strength and elastic properties the second such characteristics as their porosity.

As a rule, the schedule of tests should be divided into stages, starting with the acquisition of basic data, followed by a more detailed examination with tests based upon an assessment of the


13/114

implications of the initial data. However, testing should not be undertaken until its need has been established.

Non-destructive tests should be preferred to those that involve alterations to a structure. If these are not sufficient, it is necessary to assess the benefit to be obtained by opening up the structure in terms of reduced structural intervention against the loss of culturally significant material (a cost-benefit analysis). Tests should always be carried out by skilled persons able to gauge their reliability correctly and the implications of test data should be very carefully assessed. If possible different methods should be used and the results compared. It may also be necessary to carry out tests on selected samples taken from the structure.

Monitoring

Structural observation over a period of time may be necessary, not only to acquire useful information when progressive phenomena is suspected, but also during a step-by- step procedure of structural renovation. During the latter, the behaviour is monitored at each stage (observational approach) and the acquired data used to provide the basis for any further action. A monitoring system usually aims to record changes in deformations, cracks, temperatures, etc. Dynamic monitoring is used to record accelerations, such as those in seismic areas. Monitoring can also act as an alarm bell.

As a general rule, the proposed adoption of a monitoring system should be subjected to a cost-benefit analysis so that only data strictly necessary to reveal progressive phenomena are gathered. The simplest and cheapest way to monitor cracks is to place a tell-tale across them. Some cases require the use of computerised monitoring systems to record the data in real time.

2.1.2.3 Structural behaviour The behaviour of any structure is influenced by three main factors:

a) the construction, i.e. the structural form, its quality and the connections between structural elements;

b) the construction materials and c) both the mechanical actions (forces, accelerations and deformations) and the chemical and

biological actions.

The structural scheme and damage

The real behaviour of a building is usually too complex to fully model so that it is necessary to represent it with a simplified 'structural scheme', i.e. an idealisation of the building, which shows, to the required degree of precision, how it resists the various actions.

The structural scheme shows how the building transforms actions into stresses and deformations and ensures stability. A building may be represented under varying actions by different schemes with different complexity and different degrees of approximation to reality. The scheme used in the structural analysis is usually a compromise between one close to reality but too complex for calculation and one easy to calculate but too far from the reality of the building. Judgement is essential in choosing an appropriate scheme.


14/114

The original structural behaviour may have changed as a result of damage (cracks, etc.), reinforcements, or other modifications of the building. The scheme used has to take into account any alterations and weakening, such as cracks, disconnections, crushing, leaning, etc., which may significantly influence the structural behaviour. These alterations may be produced either by natural phenomena or by human interventions. The latter includes the making of openings, niches, etc.; the elimination of arches or other structural elements, which create unbalanced forces; increases in height of the structure, which increase weights; excavations, galleries, nearby buildings, etc., which reduce the soil bearing capacity and induce movements.

The scheme should consider to an appropriate degree the interaction of the structure with the soil, except on those cases where it is judged to be irrelevant. Structural damage occurs when the stresses produced by one or more action exceed the strength of the materials, either because the actions themselves have increased or because strength has been reduced. Substantial changes in the structure, such as partial demolition, may also be a source of damage. Manifestation of damage is related to the kinds of actions and construction materials. Brittel materials will fail with low deformations while ductile materials will exhibit considerable deformation before failure.

The appearance of damage, and in particular cracks, is not necessarily an indication of risk of failure in a structure because cracks may relieve stresses that are not essential for stability and may, through changes in the structural system, allow a beneficial redistribution of stresses. Damage may also occur in non-structural elements, such as cladding or internal partitions, as a result of stresses developed within those elements due to deformations or dimensional changes within the structure.

Material characteristics and decay processes

Material characteristics (particularly strength and stiffness), which are the basic parameters for any calculation, may be reduced by decay caused by chemical, physical or biological action. The rate of decay depends upon the properties of the materials (such as porosity) and the protection provided (roof overhangs, etc.) as well as maintenance. Although decay may manifest itself on the surface, and so be immediately apparent from superficial inspection (efflorescence, increased porosity, etc.), there are also decay processes that can only be detected by more sophisticated tests (termite attack in timber, etc.). Material decay is brought about by chemical, physical and biological actions and may be accelerated when these actions are modified in an unfavourable way (e.g. by pollution). The main consequences are the deterioration of surfaces, the loss of material and a reduction of strength. Stabilisation of material characteristics is therefore an important task for the conservation of historic buildings. A programme of maintenance is an essential activity because, while preventing or reducing the rate of change may be possible, it is often difficult or even impossible to recover lost material properties.

Actions on the structure and the materials

'Actions' are defined as any agent (forces, deformations, etc.) which produce stresses and strains in the structure and any phenomenon (chemical, biological, etc.) which affects the materials, usually reducing their strength. The original actions, which act from the beginning of construction and the completion of the building (dead loads, for example), may be modified during its life, and it is often these changes that produce damage and decay.


15/114

Actions have very different natures with very different effects on both the structure and the materials.

Often more than one action (or, change to the original actions), will have affected the structure and these must clearly be identified before selecting the repair measures.

Actions may be divided into mechanical actions that affect the structure and chemical and biological actions that affect the materials. Mechanical actions are either static or dynamic the former being either direct or indirect.

Mechanical actions acting on the structure produce stresses and strains in the material possibly resulting in visible cracking, crushing and movement. This can be static or dynamic.

i) Static actions can be of two kinds: a) Direct actions i.e. applied loads such as dead loads (weight of the building, etc.) and live loads

(furniture, people, etc.). Changes in loads - mainly increases - are sources of increased stresses and thus of damage to the structure. However reductions in load can also be a source of damage to the structure.

b) Indirect actions are either deformations imposed on the boundaries of the structure, such as soil settlements, or produced within the body of the materials, such as thermal movements, creep in timber, shrinkage in mortar, etc. These actions, which may vary continuously or cyclically, only produce forces if deformations are not free to develop. The most important and often most dangerous of all indirect actions are soil settlements (produced by change in the water table, excavations, etc.) which may create large cracks, leaning, etc.

A number of indirect actions are cyclic in nature. These include temperature changes and some ground movements due to seasonal variation in ground water levels. The effects are usually cyclic too, but it is possible for there to be progressive deformation or decay if each cycle produces some small but permanent change within the structure.

The temperature gradient between external surfaces and the internal body may cause differential strains in the material and therefore stresses and micro-cracks, which further accelerate decay. Indirect actions can also be produced by the progressive reduction of the stiffness of elements of an indeterminate (hyperstatic) structure resulting in a redistribution of stresses. ii) Dynamic actions are produced when accelerations are transmitted to a structure, due to earthquakes, wind, hurricanes, vibrating machinery, etc.

The most significant dynamic action is usually caused by earthquakes. The intensity of the forces produced is related to both the magnitude of the acceleration and to the natural frequencies of the structure and its capacity to dissipate energy. The effect of an earthquake is also related to the history of previous earthquakes that may have progressively weakened the structure.

Physical, chemical, and biological actions are of a completely different nature from those described above and act on the materials changing their nature, often resulting in decay and in particular affecting their strength. These actions may be influenced and accelerated by the presence of water (whether in the form of rain, humidity, ground water), by wetting and drying cycles, organic growth, variations in temperature (causing expansion and contraction) frost action,


16/114

etc.). They may also be affected by microclimatic conditions (pollution, surface deposition, changes in wind speeds due to adjacent structures, etc.). Fire can be considered as an extreme change of temperature producing both rapid and permanent changes in the materials. While this might not result in immediate structural distress it may leave latent weaknesses.

Material properties may also change over time due to natural processes characteristic of the material, such as slow hardening of lime mortar or slow internal decay. While chemical changes may occur spontaneously because of the inherent characteristics of the material they may also be produced as a result of external agents, such as the deposition of pollutants, or the migration of water or other agents through the material.

A very common action is the oxidation of metals. This may be visible on the surface or may be occurring to metal reinforcing placed inside another material (such as concrete) and therefore only apparent through secondary effects, such as splitting and spalling of the other material. Biological agents in timber, i.e. rot and insect attack, are often active in areas not easily inspected.

2.1.2.4 Diagnosis and safety evaluation General principles

Diagnosis and safety evaluation of the structure are two consecutive and related stages undertaken to determine the need for and extent of treatment measures. If these stages are performed incorrectly, the resulting decisions will be arbitrary; poor judgement may result in either conservative, and therefore heavy-handed conservation measures, or conversely, inadequate safety levels.

Evaluation of the safety of the building should be based on both qualitative methods, based on documentation and observation of the structure, and quantitative methods based on experimental and mathematical techniques that take into account the effect of the various phenomena on structural behaviour.

Any assessment of safety is influenced by two types of problem:

the uncertainty attached to data describing actions, resistance and deformations, and the laws, models and assumptions used in the research;

the difficulty of representing real phenomena in a precise way with an adequate mathematical model.

It therefore seems reasonable to try different approaches, each providing its own contribution, but which when combined produce the best possible verdict based on the data at our disposal.

When assessing safety, it is necessary to include some indication, even if only qualitative, of the reliability of the assumptions made, and hence of the results, and of the degree of caution implicit in the proposed measures.

Modern legal codes and professional codes of practice adopt a conservative approach involving the application of safety factors to take into account the various uncertainties. This is appropriate for new structures where safety can be increased with modest increases in member size and cost. However, such an approach is not appropriate in historic structures where requirements to improve


17/114

the strength may lead to the loss of historic fabric or to changes in the original conception of the structure. A more flexible and broader approach, where calculations are not the only means of evaluation, needs to be adopted for historic structures to relate the remedial measures more clearly to the actual structural behaviour and to retain the principle of minimum intervention while

avoiding risk to human life.

The verdict on a structure's safety is based on an evaluation of the results obtained from the three diagnostic procedures that will be discussed below. This acknowledges that the qualitative approach plays a role, which is as important as the quantitative approach.

It also has to be noted that the safety factors established for new buildings take into account the uncertainties of construction. In existing buildings these uncertainties are often reduced because the real behaviour of the structure can be observed and monitored. If more reliable data can be obtained, theoretically reduced factors of safety do not necessarily correspond to a real reduced safety. However there are cases where the contrary is true and data are more difficult to obtain for historic structure.

Identification of the causes (diagnosis) Diagnosis identifies the causes of damage and decay, on the basis of the acquired data. This comes under three headings:

Historical analysis

Qualitative analysis

Quantitative analysis, which includes both mathematical modelling and testing.

Diagnosis is often a difficult phase, since the data available usually refer to the effects, while it is the cause or, as it is more often the case, the several contributary causes that have to be determined. This is why intuition and experience are essential components in the diagnostic process. A correct diagnosis is indispensable for a proper evaluation of safety and a rational decision on the treatment measures to be adopted.

Safety evaluation

The problem of safety evaluation

Safety evaluation is the next step towards completion of the diagnostic phase. Whilst the object of diagnosis is to identify the causes of damage and decay, safety evaluation must determine whether or not the safety levels are acceptable, by analysing the present condition of both structure and materials. The safety evaluation is therefore an essential step in the project of restoration because this is where decisions are taken on the need for and the extent of any remedial measures.

However, safety evaluation is also a difficult task because methods of structural analysis used for new construction may be neither accurate nor reliable for historic structures and may result in inappropriate decisions. This is due to such factors as the difficulty in fully understanding the complexity of an ancient building or monument, uncertainties regarding material characteristics, the unknown influence of previous phenomena (for example soil settlements), and imperfect knowledge of alterations and repairs carried out in the past. Therefore, a quantitative approach


18/114

based on mathematical models cannot be the only procedure to be followed. As with the diagnosis, qualitative approaches based on historical research and on observation of the structure should also be used. An approach based on specific tests may also be useful in some situations.

Each of these approaches, which are discussed below, can inform the safety evaluation, but it is the combined analysis of the information obtained from each of them, which may lead to the 'best judgement'. In forming this judgement both quantitative and qualitative aspects should be taken into account having been weighed on the basis of the reliability of the data and the assumptions made. All this needs to be set out in the EXPLANATORY REPORT already referred to.

It must be clear, therefore, that the architect or engineer charged with the safety evaluation of an historic building should not be legally obliged to base his decisions solely on the results of calculations because, as already noted, they can be unreliable and inappropriate. This is a matter for building regulations and control and again highlights the need for experience and judgement. Similar procedures have to be followed to evaluate the safety levels after the design of any proposed interventions in order to assess their benefits and to ensure that their adoption is appropriate, neither insufficient nor excessive.

Historical analysis

Knowledge of what has occurred in the past can help to forecast future behaviour and can be a useful indication of the level of safety provided by the present state of the structure. History is the most complete, life-size, experimental laboratory. It shows how the type of structure, building materials, connections, joints, additions and human alterations have interacted with different actions, such as overloads, earthquakes, landslides, temperature variations, atmospheric pollution, etc., perhaps altering the structure's original behaviour by causing cracks, fissures, crushing, movement out-of-plumb, decay, collapse, etc. The structural task is to discard superfluous information and correctly interpret the data relevant to describing the static and dynamic behaviour of the structure.

Although satisfactory behaviour shown in the past is an important factor for predicting the survival of the building in the future, it is not always a reliable guide. This is particularly true where the structure is working at the limit of its bearing capacity and brittle behaviour is involved (such as high compression in columns), when there are significant changes in the structure or when repeated actions are possible (such as earthquakes) that progressively weaken the structure.

Qualitative analysis

This approach is based on the comparison between the present condition of the structure and that of other similar structures whose behaviour is already understood. Experience gained from analysing and comparing the behaviour of different structures can enhance the possibility of extrapolations and provide a basis for assessing safety.

This approach (known in philosophical terms as inductive procedure) is not entirely reliable because it depends more upon personal judgement than on strictly scientific procedures. Nonetheless, it can be the most rational approach where there are such uncertainties inherent in the structure that other approaches only give the appearance of being more rigorous and reliable but are not so in fact.


19/114

Having observed the behaviour of different structural types in varying stages of damage and decay caused by different actions (earthquakes, soil settlement, etc.), and having acquired experience of their soundness and durability, it is possible to extrapolate this knowledge to predict the behaviour of the structure under examination. The reliability of the evaluation will depend on the number of structures observed and, therefore, on the experience and skills of the individuals concerned. Reliability can be increased by an appropriate programme of investigation and monitoring of progressive phenomena.

The quantitative analytical approach

This approach uses the methods of modern structural analysis which, on the basis of certain hypotheses (theory of elasticity, theory of plasticity, frame models, etc.), draws conclusions based on mathematical calculations. In philosophical terms it is a deductive procedure. However, the uncertainties that can affect the representation of the material characteristics, and the imperfect representation of the structural behaviour, together with the simplifications adopted may lead to results that are not always reliable and may even be very different from the real situation. The essence of the problem is the identification of meaningful models that adequately depict both the structure and the associated phenomena with all their complexity, making it possible to apply the theories at our disposal. Naturally the complexity of the model used is likely to depend upon the scale and importance of the monument.

Structural analysis is an indispensable tool commonly using mathematical models. Models describing the original structure, if appropriately calibrated, allow comparison of the theoretical damage produced by different kinds of action with the damage actually surveyed, providing a useful tool for identifying their causes. Mathematical models of the damaged, and the subsequently reinforced structure, will help to evaluate present safety levels and to assess the benefits of proposed interventions.

Even when the results of calculations and analysis cannot be precise, they can indicate the flow of the stresses and possible critical areas. But mathematical models alone are usually not able to provide a reliable safety evaluation. Grasping the key issues, and correctly setting the limits for the use of mathematical techniques, depends upon the expert's use of his scientific knowledge. Any mathematical model must take into account the three aspects described in section 3: the structural scheme, the material characteristics and the actions to which the structure is subjected. The experimental approach

Specific tests (such as test loading a floor, a beam, etc.) will provide a direct measure of safety margins, even if they are applicable only to single elements rather than to the building as a whole. However one, or even a few test may not necessarily be representative of the behaviour and hence the adequacy of the overall building.

Judgement on safety

Judgements about a structure's safety are based on the results of the three (or four) main approaches described above (the fourth having a limited application). If analysis shows inadequate safety levels, it should be checked to see if it is based on either insufficiently accurate data or excessively conservative assumptions. This might lead to the conclusion that more investigation is necessary before an assessment can be made.


20/114

As safety is of a probabilistic nature, the greater the uncertainties the more severe will be the level of intervention. As methods of investigation and structural analysis improve one would expect the analytical approach to become more reliable and so play a more prominent part in safety evaluation. Nevertheless, other methods will remain indispensable for a full understanding of the structural behaviour of the monument.

Note that time factors may be an important aspect of safety and deadlines may have to be set for decisions on interventions. The factors affecting any deadline will depend on three types of phenomena:

continuous processes (for example decay, slow soil settlements, etc.) which will eventually reduce safety levels to below acceptable limits. Measures must be taken before that occurs;

phenomena of cyclical nature (variation in temperature, moisture content, etc.) that produce increasing deterioration;

unpredictable events (such as earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.). The probability of these occurring at any defined level increases with the passage of time, so that the required degree of safety can theoretically be linked to the life expectancy of the structure. (That the one hundred year storm is more severe than the fifty-year storm is true for other phenomenon such as earthquakes and floods.)

2.2 Core data index to historic buildings and monuments of the architectural heritage [12] In the document prepared by the ad hoc group for inventory and documentation within the Technical Co-operation and consultancy Program published by Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg [12] for the purpose of collecting data of cultural heritage asset at Republic of Kosovo, a complete overview on principles and the state of the art in the field of inventory of built heritage is presented. The volume is a compilation and an update of work carried under programs of the Council of Europe since the 1990s. It is based on the Core Data Index adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in 1995. Herein, an extract regarding the data for the purpose of PERPETUATE project are presented. 2.2.1 Names and references

a) Name of the building (a free-text field which record the name by which a building is known)

b) Unique reference number (the number of charters, which uniquely identifies each building by responsible organisation)

c) Cross-reference to related building records (this enables cross-referencing to related record, enabling, for example, the relating of a building record to its wider complex record)

d) Cross-reference to records of fixtures and fitting (the same related to stained glass, wall paintings, sculptural decoration etc., which relate to the building)

e) Cross-reference to documentation (photographic, graphic, textual, bibliographic) f) Cross-reference to archaeological records g) Cross-reference to environmental records


21/114

2.2.2 Location a) Administrative location (State, Geo-political unit, State administrative division,

administrative sub-division etc.) b) Address (postal name, number of the street/road, locality, town/city, postal code) c) Cartographic reference d) Cadastral reference/land unit (enables cross-reference to the land unit/parcel)

2.2.3 Protection/legal status a) Type of protection b) Grade of protection c) Date at which protection was granted

2.2.4 Persons and organisations associated with the history of the building a) Person or organisation b) Role in the history of the building

2.2.5 Dating (allows for precise dating when it is known, or date ranges or periods when it is imprecise) a) Period b) Century c) Date range d) Absolute date

1. History of building a. Historical summary b. Descriptive summary

2. Functional type 3. Illustrations

a. Extract from map b. Ground plan c. Photograph(s)

4. Building materials and techniques a) Main materials and structural techniques (main walling materials, morphology etc.) A

controlled vocabulary is desirable. b) Covering materials

5. Physical condition a. Condition priority (related to the integrity of the building - demolished, ruined,

remodelled, restored) b. Condition quality (related to its state good, fair, poor, or bad)


22/114

2.3 Recording for conservation purposes [18] In the document for Recording, Documentation, and Information Management for the Conservation of Heritage Places produce under umbrella of the Getty Conservation Institute, is stated that the conservation process of cultural heritage places cannot be expressed as yet in terms of an international standard of practice. International heritage conservation organizations and institutions have not come to an agreement on such a standard. A consensus has been reached among them, however, concerning important steps, activities, and products or outputs of the conservation process (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Diagram showing the phases and required outputs of the conservation process [18]. In the contemporary world of new-building construction, the project management process is well understood. In the cultural heritage field, things are different. Conservation professionals have to do all of the above, but because they deal with cultural heritage placesarchaeological sites, buildings, and city neighbourhoods they need to spend more time and resources to understand the site and to assess its physical condition.

Figure 2 illustrates the central role of heritage information and summarizes the types of records and documents that are acquired or generated during each phase of the conservation process.


23/114

Figure 2: Diagram showing the conservation process and related project information activities [18].

Following the process for the conservation purposes, for the purpose of seismic assessment of AA and following the proposed methodology of PERPETUATE project, this approach may be extended as presented in Figure 3:


24/114

Figure 3: Chart showing different aspects regarding the evaluation of seismic assessment of architectonic assets.

2.4 Recording according to Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage [13]

According to the proposed methodology formulated in document Guidelines for evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage [13], in the section Knowledge of the Building, the path to knowledge is broken into following activities:

The identification of the building, its location in relation to particular risk areas, and the rapport of the same within its surrounding urban context; the analysis consists in an initial schematic survey of the building and in the identification of eventual noteworthy elements (decorated fixed to the walls, antique furniture) that may condition the level of risk;

The geometric relief of the building in its actual state, intended as the complete stereo metric description of the structure including eventual cracking and deforming phenomena;

The identification of the evolution of the building, intended as the sequence of the phases of constructive transformation, from the hypothetical original configuration to the present state;

The identification of the elements which make up the resistance organisms, in the material and constructive acceptance with particular attention turned to construction techniques to construction details and their connections to the other elements;

Seismicassessment ofarchitectonic

assets

Management&

Mainentanceplanning/

Monitoring

Identifyingstructure

Seismichazard

HistoricalResearch

Engineering(materials,

structural el., damage)

Architecture ,

geometric

surveying

Archeological

Research

Artistic Research

Scientific

research

Geotechnical/

Geological/

Landscape


25/114

The identification of material, their state of decay and their mechanical properties;

The knowledge of the foundation and its structures with reference to variations which occurred over time and relative instability as well.

In order to acquire this knowledge integral approach is suggested through:

Identifying structures correct and complete identification of the structure, its localisation in territorial scale and identification of the sensibility of the structure with respect to different risks.

Functional characteristics of the building information for understanding structural and geometric modifications of the structure during its life time.

Geometric survey principles of geometric and crack pattern survey, identification of the source of damage, identifying boundary conditions for numerical models, territorial and urban context of the structure etc.

Historical analysis of earthquakes and of subsequent interventions on the building identification of the entire history of construction and later modifications over its life time

Survey of construction materials and conservation states complete identification of resistance mechanisms of the structure considering the quality and the state of preservation of the materials and construction elements. The focus is on the evaluation of the quality of the masonry including the geometric and material characteristics of each component, as well as masonry as assemblage with accent on:

The presence of transverse elements (stones or bricks) which connect the wall leaves; the shape, type and size of the elements;

The acknowledgement of the regular placement and practically horizontal courses (or, alternatively, the presence of regularly stepped bordering);

The good composition, obtained by way of the mesh of the elements (number and range of contacts, presence of scales) and the regular staggering of the joints;

The nature of the lime mortar and its state of preservation.

Considering the notable variety of materials and techniques, both on a geographic and historic level, it is useful to define local rules of thumb for the quality judgement reference of a wall. The recording of a scheme of structural functionality of the building necessitates knowledge of constructive details and the characteristic of unions between the various elements:

Typology of walls (in brick, squared-off stone, rough-hewn stone, split, pebbly or mixed, unique parameter, or with two or more parameters) and constructive characteristics (regular or irregular texture; with or without transverse joints, etc..);

The quality of the unions between vertical walls (clamping in the corners and in the hammers, tie rods, etc.);

The quality of the lateral joints (ceilings, arches and roof coverings) and walls, with surveys of the eventual presence of in-plane stringcourses or other connecting systems (tie rods, etc.);


26/114

Elements of discontinuity determined by cables, chimneys, etc.

Typology of horizontal structures (ceilings, arches, roof coverings) with particular reference to their in-plane stiffness;

Typology and effectiveness of the architraves above openings;

The presence of structurally efficient elements chosen to balance any eventual thrusts present;

The presence of highly vulnerable but not necessarily structural elements.

Mechanical properties of materials knowledge regarding resistance and deformation characteristics of masonry gained through in-situ or laboratory testing of masonry assemblage and its constituents as well as considering already available test results from different databanks.

Terrain and foundations apart from general knowledge of the type and dimensions of foundation system including also the knowledge related to geotechnical characterisation of the foundations and methods for their evaluation.

Monitoring related to state of preservation and planning of maintenance operations, including monitoring program, visual and instrumental monitoring as well as dynamic characterisation of the structure.

3 Set of information necessary for the application of the PERPETUATE methodology for the seismic assessment

The PERPETUATE methodology is aimed to the preservation of cultural heritage assets, both architectonic and artistic, in seismic areas. To this end different phase of investigation can be considered: a) a first census of the cultural heritage assets in the Region (in order to know the conscious of the consistency of the heritage); b) the evaluation of the vulnerability and risk at territorial scale - WP6 (in order to single out the assets which are in worst safety conditions); c) the detailed seismic assessment on each single building - WP5; d) the design of strengthening interventions, in order to plan mitigation actions for the protection of the cultural heritage.

The aim of this chapter is to list the set of information required to the survey and investigation techniques for the application of the methodology.

Following the synthesis of different methodologies for collecting data and building knowledge of particular architectonic asset, set of information related to general knowledge and data regarding seismic analysis is prepared according to methodology from Deliverable D4 [1]. The table is organized into four main categories:

Category of data (including sub-categories). What scope of collected data they are referring to. Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is

used. Phase of assessment (set of data depending from the required knowledge)

o Identification of asset basic information regarding the asset and identification of the type of the asset according to PERPETUATE methodology as proposed in D4


27/114

o Data for vulnerability evaluation collection of data aimed for simplified vulnerability evaluation as proposed in D5 and D8.

o Data for safety verification collection of data for performance based assessment of the asset according to the requirements from D7.

o Data for interventions (or mitigation interventions) Depending from the phase of the assessment collection data are identified as:

Essential Parameters are basic or indispensable for particular phase

Qualifying Data are not indispensable for the phase of assessment, though improve final output or are necessary but with a limited degree of accuracy

In the tables for the collection of data regarding general sets of information and information for the assessment of seismic resistance according to PERPETUATE methodology, following abbreviations were used: AA Architectonic Asset; CH Cultural Heritage; D4 Delivery D4 of PERPETUATE project; D5 Delivery D5 of PERPETUATE project. DT Destructive Technique; GIS - Geographic Information System; HoME Horizontal Macroelements; MDT Minor Destructive Technique; NDT Non Destructive Technique; SE Structural Element; StME Staircases Macroelement; VaME - Vaulted Macroelement; VeME Vertical Macroelements;

Category of data What Short description/details/method followed (standards, guidelines*) or specification of what is

used

Phase of assessment

I

d

e

n

t

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

o

f

a

s

s

e

t

V

u

l

n

e

r

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

e

v

a

l

u

a

t

i

o

n

S

a

f

e

t

y

v

e

r

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

P

r

e

v

e

n

t

i

v

e

i

n

t

e

r

v

e

n

t

i

o

n

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Architectonic asset

A 1 2 3 4 5

B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

C 1 2 3 4 5

D 1 2 3 4 4

E 1 2 3

F 1 2 3 4 5

G

Artistic asset P 1 2 3 4 Type of artistic asset according to PERPETUATE methodology

Q 1 2 3

R 1 2 3

Presence of valuable elements Presence of relevant valuable elements among those listed

Geographic situation

Address location Street, No., Town, Country

Land register identification Plot No., Cadastral territory

Unique reference number Reference number according to classification of national body responsible for the protection of CH.

Planimetric extract Extract of the cadastral map in 1:1000 or 1:2000 scale.

Adjacent properties Indicate all elements adjacent to the landmark.

Georeferencing of situation plans To define relation between raster or vector images and geographical coordinates using


29/114


used

Phase of assessment

I

d

e

n

t

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

o

f

a

s

s

e

t

V

u

l

n

e

r

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

e

v

a

l

u

a

t

i

o

n

S

a

f

e

t

y

v

e

r

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

P

r

e

v

e

n

t

i

v

e

i

n

t

e

r

v

e

n

t

i

o

n

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

reference points

GIS Set of tools for the capturing, storing, analyzing, managing, and presenting data that are linked to certain location

Historical research

Archive searches Searching on written and pictorial sources

Thematic researches Important persons (architects), historic occasions and events

Historic Structure Reports Reports following guidelines (mostly published by national heritage authorities)

Historical analysis of earthquakes and of subsequent interventions on the building

Conservation activities - Archive search of designs and projects

Standardized documentation

Archaeological research

Aerial prospection Photographs

Excavating Reports in a standard format

Building archaeology Recording and operative documentation guidelines

Geophysical methods NDT methods like Georadar, Radio emission, Geoelectrical survey etc.

Dating methods - Dendrochronology Reports in a standard format

Seismic action Identification of ground types

Peak ground acceleration

Importance category Depending from the level of exposure: Unused or rarely used, frequent, very frequent.

Earthquake hazard level Occurrence probability of return period, to be used for the verification of target performance level

Response spectrums

Site amplification effects soil amplification

Site amplification effects morphological amplification


30/114


used

Phase of assessment

I

d

e

n

t

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

o

f

a

s

s

e

t

V

u

l

n

e

r

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

e

v

a

l

u

a

t

i

o

n

S

a

f

e

t

y

v

e

r

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

P

r

e

v

e

n

t

i

v

e

i

n

t

e

r

v

e

n

t

i

o

n

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Micro-zoning

Geotechnical research

Orographic characteristics If the building is located in-plane or near crests, precipices,. Indicate the slope of the terrain.

Geo-morphologic characteristics If any other risk is also presented (mudslide).

Ground modifications Changes to water tables, flooding, breaking of aqueducts, droughts, excavations, surveys etc.

Definition of the underground waterways Positioning piezometers. Support by hydro geological studies.

Mechanical characteristics of the various deposits

Dynamic interaction of terrain, foundation and structure (shear resistance in draining and non-draining conditions, shear deformity modules and damping coefficient etc.) Susceptibility to liquefaction and the cyclic mobility

Verification of the stability of natural slopes.

Underground structures

Vulnerability general

Configuration Including data if the AA stands alone (urban context)

Geometric survey

Building height and number of stories Included regularity in elevation.

Distribution of structural elements

Non-structural elements Partition walls, balconies, overhangs

Codification of Macroelements

Vulnerability construction details

Connection between walls vertically

Connection between floors/ceilings and supporting elements

Spandrel walls connection

Lintels above openings

Presence of thrust elements within masonry elements

Usually wooden ties and pillars


31/114


used

Phase of assessment

I

d

e

n

t

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

o

f

a

s

s

e

t

V

u

l

n

e

r

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

e

v

a

l

u

a

t

i

o

n

S

a

f

e

t

y

v

e

r

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

P

r

e

v

e

n

t

i

v

e

i

n

t

e

r

v

e

n

t

i

o

n

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Vulnerability- Main structural elements

Vertical Macroelements (VeME) Piers, Columns and Pilars

Codification,

Morphology, typology, constructive techniques,

Typology of finishing elements (inside and outside).

Vertical Macroelements (VeME) Spandrels, Lintels, and Beams

Codification



Vertical Macroelements (VeME) Arches Codification



Horizontal Macroelement - HoME (Roofs, Floors) Rafters, Purlins, Struts, Wall Plates, Tie-beams

Codification,


Typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).

Horizontal Macroelement - HoME (Roofs, Floors) Joists, Beams

Codification, morphology, typology, constructive techniques, typology of finishing elements (top and bottom).



Horizontal Macroelement- HoME (Roofs, Floors) Boarding, Slabs

Codification,



Vaulted Macroelement- VaME (all types of vaults and domes) Abutments, Buttresses, Springing, Fill

Codification,



Vaulted Macroelement- VaME (all types of Codification,


32/114


used

Phase of assessment

I

d

e

n

t

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

o

f

a

s

s

e

t

V

u

l

n

e

r

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

e

v

a

l

u

a

t

i

o

n

S

a

f

e

t

y

v

e

r

i

f

i

c

a

t

i

o

n

P

r

e

v

e

n

t

i

v

e

i

n

t

e

r

v

e

n

t

i

o

n

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

vaults and domes) Arches, Transve

deliverable d61

Documents

ca cultural

recording of monuments

proposal n

complete records

test procedure

principle of test

aa architectonic asset

artistic asset