Evaluation of static and dynamic long-term structural monitoring for monumental masonry structure
- 13 Downloads
This paper presents the comparative results of the static and dynamic monitoring of damaged masonry macro-elements. The structural health monitoring (SHM) has been carried out over 3 years. The crack opening displacement of the main shear cracks of the overturning mechanisms of the façade, of the bottom walls of transept and the cracks of the arches was monitored using extensometers. Moreover, dynamic sensors for measuring accelerations were used and through the registration of each major seismic vibration event, a modal identification of output-only systems was carried out; the main frequencies were identified. This work highlights the structural damage detection methodology and shows the differences between global and local damage detection techniques. The static monitoring presents the displacement trend of each monitored main crack with its respective temperature–time history. The results of both long-term monitoring systems are compared to develop the reliability and the correlation of the static and dynamic parameters over 3 years. Static and dynamic monitoring are useful to check both the level of damage and the degradation of the cracking survey, to evaluate the interaction with the safety measures, and also to analyze the stability of signals by varying the intrinsic and environmental conditions such as temperature. This research reveals a good reliability between the static and dynamic results, particularly on the detection of the effect of a safety intervention. Moreover, the results highlight the limits and merits of each monitoring system.
KeywordsStructural health monitoring Long-period monitoring Static monitoring Dynamic identification Reliability
The authors thank the technical staff of LabSCo (Laboratory of Strength of Materials) of IUAV University of Venice for their support during the installation and monitoring phases. Financial support by the research project AQ DPC/ReLUIS 2014–2018_UR IUAV-DPPAC_RS 4_ “Seismic observatory of structures and monitoring” is gratefully acknowledged by the authors.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.Masciotta MG, Ramos LF, Lourenço PB (2017) The importance of structural monitoring as a diagnosis and control tool in the restoration process of heritage structures: a case study in Portugal. J Cultural Heritage 27:36-47. doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2017.04.003Google Scholar
- 4.Ceravolo R, De Marinis A, Pecorelli ML, Zanotti Fragonara L (2017) Monitoring of masonry historical constructions: 10 years of static monitoring of the world's largest oval dome. Struct Control Health Monit. https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.1988
- 5.Dal Cin A, Russo S (2016) Annex and rigid-box diaphgram effect in failure analysis of historic churches hit by earthquake. Eng Failure Anal 59:122–139Google Scholar
- 7.Podestà S, Riotto G, Marazzi F (2008) Reliability of dynamic identification techniques connected to structural monitoring of monumental buildings. Struct Control Health Monit 15(4):622–641. https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.219
- 12.Wu H, Zonta D, Pozzi M, Zanon P, Corrà M (2010) Historic buildings: long term stability evaluation using wireless sensor networks. Adv Mater Res 133–134(2010):235–240. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.133-134.235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Inaudi D, Glišiæ B (2008) Overview of fibre optic sensing applications to structural health monitoring. In: Proceedings of the symposium on geodesy for geotechnical and structural engineering, LisbonGoogle Scholar
- 14.Lopez-Higuera JM, Rodriguez Cobo L, Quintela Incera A, Cobo A (2015) Fiber optic sensors in structural health monitoring. J Lightwave Technol. https://doi.org/10.1109/JLT.2011.2106479
- 17.Mesas-Carrascosa FJ, Santano DV, Meroño de Larriva JE, Cordero RO, Fernández REH, García-Ferrer A (2016) Monitoring heritage buildings with open source hardware sensors: a case study of the Mosque-Cathedral of Córdoba. Sensors (Basel) 16(10):1620. https://doi.org/10.3390/s16101620 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Mesquitaa E, Arêdea A, Pinto N, Antunesb P, Varum H (2018) Long-term monitoring of a damaged historic structure using a wireless sensor network. Eng Struct 161:108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.02.013
- 19.S. Russo (2013) On the monitoring of historic Anime Sante church damaged by earthquake in L’Aquila. Struct Control Health Monit 20(9):1226–1239. https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.1531
- 21.Boscato G, Ceravolo R, Fragonara LZ, Russo S (2015) Global sensitivity-based model updating for heritage structure. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng 30(8):620–635Google Scholar
- 22.DIANA (2010) DIANA user’s manual release 9.4.2. TNO, DelftGoogle Scholar
- 24.LMS Test.Lab: Siemens PLM software. https://www.lmsintl.com