Advertisement

Materials and Structures

, 51:99 | Cite as

First results on the combination of laser scanner and drilling resistance tests for the assessment of the geometrical condition of irregular cross-sections of timber beams

  • Manuel Cabaleiro
  • Jorge M. Branco
  • Hélder S. Sousa
  • Borja Conde
Original Article
  • 47 Downloads

Abstract

Old timber structures often present damaged elements with irregular cross-sections, hidden surfaces and even with loss of material due to decay. Within that scope, in this paper, a new methodology based on the combination of laser scanner and drilling resistance tests is proposed and developed with the aim of analyzing the apparent and resistant sections of timber beams with hidden surfaces and irregular cross-section affected by decay. The proposed methodology was initially calibrated with tests made on a timber beam within a laboratory environment and, then, its feasibility was tested on a case study regarding the timber roof of the Guimarães Castle keep. The results confirm the suitability of this methodology for assessment of the present geometrical properties of timber elements with an average error of 1.5 and 4.5%, respectively, in the calculation of the apparent section area and inertia.

Keywords

Resistant section LIDAR Deterioration degree Wood Timber structures 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been partially supported by the European Association of International Cooperation Galicia-North of Portugal, program IACOBUS IV through a stay at the University of Minho to M. Cabaleiro (IACOBUS IV-35563149). This work has been partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Interior (Grant SPIP2017-02122), Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness (Grant: EUIN2017-87598), and Xunta de Galicia through grant ED431C2016‐038. This work was partly financed by FEDER funds through the Competitivity Factors Operational Programme—COMPETE and by national funds through FCT Foundation for Science and Technology within the scope of the project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007633. This research was partially supported by ProTimber research project (PTDC/ECM-EST/1072/2014) financed by the FCT Foundation for Science and Technology.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Lourenço PB, Sousa HS, Brites RD, Neves LC (2013) In situ measured cross section geometry of old timber structures and its influence on structural safety. Mater Struct 46(7):1193–1208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tang P, Huber D, Akinci B, Lipman R, Lytle A (2010) Automatic reconstruction of as-built building information models from laser-scanned point clouds: a review of related techniques. Autom Constr 19(7):829–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Xiong X, Adan A, Akinci B, Huber D (2013) Automatic creation of semantically rich 3D building models from laser scanner data. Autom Constr 31:325–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cabaleiro M, Riveiro B, Arias P, Caamaño JC, Vilán JA (2014) Automatic 3D modelling of metal frame connections from LiDAR data for structural engineering purposes. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 96:47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jung J, Hong S, Jeong S, Kim S, Cho H, Hong S, Heo J (2014) Productive modeling for development of as-built BIM of existing indoor structures. Autom Constr 42:68–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wang C, Cho YK, Kim C (2015) Automatic BIM component extraction from point clouds of existing buildings for sustainability applications. Autom Constr 56:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Biagini C, Capone P, Donato V, Facchini N (2016) Towards the BIM implementation for historical building restoration sites. Autom Constr 71:74–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Balado J, Díaz-Vilariño L, Arias P, Soilán M (2017) Automatic building accessibility diagnosis from point clouds. Autom Constr 82:103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Conde B, Díaz-Vilariño L, Lagüela S, Arias P (2016) Structural analysis of Monforte de Lemos masonry arch bridge considering the influence of the geometry of the arches and fill material on the collapse load estimation. Constr Build Mater 120:630–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Riveiro B, Morer P, Arias P, De Arteaga I (2011) Terrestrial laser scanning and limit analysis of masonry arch bridges. Constr Build Mater 25(4):1726–1735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sánchez-Aparicio LJ, Riveiro B, Gonzalez-Aguilera D, Ramos LF (2014) The combination of geomatic approaches and operational modal analysis to improve calibration of finite element models: a case of study in Saint Torcato Church (Guimarães, Portugal). Constr Build Mater 70:118–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Conde B, Villarino A, Cabaleiro M, Gonzalez-Aguilera D (2016) Geometrical issues on the structural analysis of transmission electricity towers thanks to laser scanning technology and finite element method. Remote Sens 7(9):11551–11569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castellazzi G, D’Altri AM, de Miranda S, Ubertini F (2017) An innovative numerical modeling strategy for the structural analysis of historical monumental buildings. Eng Struct 132:229–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhang C, Arditi D (2013) Automated progress control using laser scanning technology. Autom Constr 36:108–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mosalam KM, Takhirov SM, Park S (2014) Applications of laser scanning to structures in laboratory tests and field surveys. Struct Control Health Monitor 21(1):115–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jaafar HA, Meng X, Sowter A, Bryan P (2017) New approach for monitoring historic and heritage buildings: using terrestrial laser scanning and generalised procrustes analysis. Struct Control Health Monitor 24(11):e1987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Balletti C, Berto M, Gottardi C, Guerra F (2013) Ancient structures and new technologies: survey and digital representation of the wooden dome of SS. Giovanni e Paolo in Venice. ISPRS Ann Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inform Sci 5(W1):25–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oreni D, Brumana R, Georgopoulos A, Cuca B (2013) HBIM for conservation and management of built heritage: towards a library of vaults and wooden bean floors. ISPRS Ann Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inform Sci 5:W1Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fregonese L, Taffurelli L (2009) 3D model for the documentation of cultural heritage: the wooden domes of St. Mark’s Basilica in Venice. ISPRS Arch 38:5Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alessandri C, Mallardo V (2012) Structural assessments of the church of the nativity in Bethlehem. J Cult Herit 13(4):e61–e69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cabaleiro M, Lindenbergh R, Gard WF, Arias P, van de Kuilen JWG (2017) Algorithm for automatic detection and analysis of cracks in timber beams from LiDAR data. Constr Build Mater 130:41–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cabaleiro M, Riveiro B, Arias P, Caamaño JC (2016) Algorithm for the analysis of the geometric properties of cross-sections of timber beams with lack of material from LIDAR data. Mater Struct 10(49):4265–4278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brites RD, Neves LC, Machado JS, Lourenço PB, Sousa HS (2013) Reliability analysis of a timber truss system subjected to decay. Eng Struct 46:184–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sousa HS, Branco JM, Lourenço PB (2014) Characterization of cross sections from old chestnut beams weakened by decay. Int J Archit Herit 8(3):436–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sousa HS, Sørensen JD, Kirkegaard PH, Branco JM, Lourenço PB (2013) On the use of NDT data for reliability-based assessment of existing timber structures. Eng Struct 56:298–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nowak TP, Jasieńko J, Hamrol-Bielecka K (2016) In situ assessment of structural timber using the resistance drilling method: evaluation of usefulness. Constr Build Mater 102:403–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tannert T, Anthony RW, Kasal B, Kloiber M, Piazza M, Riggio M, Yamaguchi N (2014) In situ assessment of structural timber using semi-destructive techniques. Mater Struct 47(5):767–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lechner T, Nowak T, Kliger R (2014) In situ assessment of the timber floor structure of the Skansen Lejonet fortification, Sweden. Constr Build Mater 58:85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rinn F, Schweingruber FH, Schär E (1996) Resistograph and X-ray density charts of wood. Comparative evaluation of drill resistance profiles and X-ray density charts of different wood species. Holzforsch Int J Biol Chem Phys Technol Wood 50(4):303–311Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Liao C, Zhang H, Wang X, Li D (2015) Condition assessment of wood structural members at Yu Tomb of the Ming Dynasty, China. Mater Struct 48(10):3259–3267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Branco JM, Sousa HS, Tsakanika E (2017) Non-destructive assessment, full-scale load-carrying tests and local interventions on two historic timber collar roof trusses. Eng Struct 140:209–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gonzalez-Jorge H, Riveiro B, Armesto J, Arias P (2012) Procedure to evaluate the accuracy of laser-scanning systems using a linear precision electro-mechanical actuator. IET Sci Meas Technol 6(1):6–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cabaleiro M, Riveiro B, Arias P, Caamaño JC (2015) Algorithm for beam deformation modeling from LiDAR data. Measurement 76:20–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Beer FP, Johnston ER, Dewolf JT, Mazurek DF (2012) Mechanics of materials, vol 6. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Materials Engineering, Applied Mechanics and Construction, School of Industrial EngineeringUniversity of VigoVigoSpain
  2. 2.ISISE, Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of MinhoGuimarãesPortugal

Personalised recommendations