This paper aims to illustrate and compare different approaches for the limit analysis of masonry domes of revolution with an oculus at the top. It specifically focuses on the influence of the limited compressive and tensile strength of masonry on the bearing capacity of the dome. The first assessment is conducted through a semi-analytical formulation that revisits Durand-Claye’s method within the framework of the lower bound theorem of limit analysis. The second investigation is performed using a kinematic approach, which allows for closed-form solutions by exploiting the upper bound theorem of limit analysis and the virtual work theorem. These approaches are applied to a case study that was experimentally tested, involving a hemispherical dome with an oculus. The dome is subjected to its self-weight and a vertical load at the crown. Parametric investigations are presented to compare the results obtained through the proposed methods with those derived from the classical limit analysis of masonry structures, based on Heyman’s hypotheses.
OppenheimIJGunaratnamDJAllenRH.Limit state analysis of masonry domes. J Struct Eng ASCE1989; 115(4): 868–882.
2.
BlockPOchsendorfJ.Thrust network analysis: a new methodology for three-dimensional equilibrium. J Int Assoc Shell Spat Struct2007; 48(3): 167–173.
3.
NodargiNABisegnaP.Generalized thrust network analysis for the safety assessment of vaulted masonry structures. Eng Struct2022; 270: 114878.
4.
ParisVPizzigoniAAdriaenssensS.Statics of self-balancing masonry domes constructed with a cross-herringbone spiraling pattern. Eng Struct2020; 215: 110440.
5.
GrillandaNChiozziAMilaniG, et al. Collapse behavior of masonry domes under seismic loads: an adaptive NURBS kinematic limit analysis approach. Eng Struct2019; 200: 109517.
6.
PavlovicMRecciaECecchiA.A procedure to investigate the collapse behavior of masonry domes: some meaningful cases. Int J Archit Herit2016; 10(1): 67–83.
7.
ZiziMCacaceDRouhiJ, et al. Automatic procedures for the safety assessment of stand-alone masonry arches. Int J Archit Herit2022; 16(9): 1306–1324.
8.
VarmaMNGhoshS.Finite element thrust line analysis of axisymmetric masonry domes. Int J Mason Res Innov2016; 1(1): 59–73.
9.
ForgácsTSarhosisVBagiK.Influence of construction method on the load bearing capacity of skew masonry arches. Eng Struct2018; 168: 612–627.
10.
HeymanJ.Equilibrium of shell structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977.
11.
SinopoliACorradiMFoceF.Modern formulation for preelastic theories on masonry arches. J Eng Mech ASCE1997; 123(3): 204–213.
12.
MilaniEMilaniGTralliA.Limit analysis of masonry vaults by means of curved shell finite elements and homogenization. Int J Solids Struct2008; 45: 5258–5288.
13.
HeymanJ.The safety of masonry arches. Int J Mech Sci1969; 11: 363–385.
14.
Durand-ClayeA.Note sur la vérification de la stabilité des voûtes en maçonnerie et sur l’emploi des courbes de pression. Ann Ponts Chaussées1867; 13: 63–93.
15.
Durand-ClayeA.Note sur la vérification de la stabilité des arcs métalliques et sur l’emploi des courbes de pression. Ann Ponts Chaussées1868; 15: 109–144.
16.
Durand-ClayeA.Vérification de la stabilité des voûtes et des arcs: applications aux voûtes sphériques. Ann Ponts Chaussées1880; 19(1): 416–440.
17.
AitaDBarsottiRBennatiS.Equilibrium of pointed, circular and elliptical masonry arches bearing vertical walls. J Struct Eng ASCE2012; 138(7): 880–888.
18.
AitaDBarsottiRBennatiS. A modern reinterpretation of Durand-Claye’s method for the study of equilibrium conditions of masonry domes. In: AscioneLBerardiVFeoL, et al. (eds) AIMETA 2017—proceedings of the XXIII conference of the Italian association of theoretical and applied mechanics. Milano: Gechi Edizioni, 2017, pp. 1459–1471.
19.
AitaDBarsottiRBennatiS.Looking at the collapse modes of circular and pointed masonry arches through the lens of Durand-Claye’s stability area method. Arch Appl Mech2019; 89: 1537–1554.
20.
AitaDBarsottiRBennatiS.Studying the dome of Pisa Cathedral via a modern reinterpretation of Durand-Claye’s method. J Mech Mater Struct2019; 14(5): 603–619.
21.
ComoM.Statics of historic masonry constructions (Springer series in solid and structural mechanics, Vol. 5). Cham: Springer, 2016.
22.
HeymanJ.The stone skeleton. Int J Solids Struct1966; 2(2): 249–279.
23.
AitaD.Revisiting classic methods for the equilibrium analysis of masonry arches and domes. In: MilaniGSarhosisV (eds) From corbel arches to double curvature vaults (Research for development). Cham: Springer, 2022, pp. 123–168.
24.
CasapullaCPortioliF.Experimental and analytical investigation on the frictional contact behavior of 3D masonry block assemblages. Const Build Mater2015; 78: 126–143.
25.
BeatiniVRoyer-CarfagniGTasoraA.The role of frictional contact of constituent blocks on the stability of masonry domes. Proc Math Phys Eng Sci2018; 474(2209): 20170740.
26.
ChiozziAMilaniGTralliA.A genetic algorithm NURBS-based new approach for fast kinematic limit analysis of masonry vaults. Comput Struct2017; 182: 187–204.
27.
MilaniG.Closed form solutions in limit analysis for masonry cloister vaults and domes subjected to concentrated vertical loads applied at the top crown. Int J Mason Res Innov, in press. DOI: 10.1504/IJMRI.2023.10058815.
28.
ForaboschiP.Strengthening of masonry arches with fiber-reinforced polymer strips. J Compos Construct ASCE2004; 8(3): 191–202.
29.
FaccioPForaboschiPSivieroE.Volte in muratura con rinforzi in FRP. L’Edilizia1999; 7/8: 44–58.
30.
FaccioPForaboschiPSivieroE.Volte in muratura rinforzate con F.R.P.: analisi del collasso. In: Atti del Convegno: Strutture in composito. Tecnologie, applicazioni e verifiche sperimentali. XXVII Convegno ATE (Associazione Tecnologi per l’Edilizia), Milano, 21 giugno1999, pp. 24–25. Brescia: ATE.
31.
FaccioPForaboschiPSivieroE.Masonry vaults strengthened using FRP reinforcements. In: GalanEZezzaF (eds) Protection and conservation of the cultural heritage of the Mediterranean cities: lectures, short papers and enlarged abstracts of the 5th international symposium on the conservation of monuments in the Mediterranean Basin, Seville, 5–8 April 2000, pp. 276–277. Seville: Kronos.
32.
FaccioPForaboschiP.Experimental and theoretical analysis of masonry vaults with FRP reinforcements. In: HumarJLRazqpurAG (eds) Advanced composite materials in bridges and structures: 3rd international conference, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 15–18 August 2000, pp. 629–636. Montréal, QC, Canada: The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering.
33.
FaccioPForaboschiP.Masonry Cloist-Vault: collapse behavior and rehabilitation with composite materials. In: ThompsonG (ed.) Proceedings of the British masonry society: sixth international masonry conference, London, 4–6 November 2002, Vol. 9, pp. 121–131. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.
34.
ForaboschiP.Prove al collasso di strutture in muratura. In: Atti del Convegno Nazionale Sperimentazione su Materiali e Strutture, Venice, 6–7 December 2006. DCA & LabSCo, pp. 289–298.
35.
ForaboschiP. Strutture in muratura armate esternamente con nastri di composito fibro-rinforzato: prove al collasso. In:
Atti del Convegno Nazionale Sperimentazioni su Materiali e Strutture, Venice, 6–7 December 2006.
36.
MilaniE.A F.E. Upper bound limit analysis model for masonry curved and 3D structures, with and without FRP-reinforcement (Tutors: TralliAMilaniG). PhD Thesis, Ciclo XXII, Università degli Studi di Ferrara, Ferrara, 2009.
37.
MilaniGChiozziATralliA. Homogenization models for nonlinear and limit analysis of FRP-strengthened masonry. In: GhiassiBMilaniG (eds) Numerical modeling of masonry and historical structures. From theory to application. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2019, pp. 585–627.
