Advertisement

Meccanica

, Volume 54, Issue 3, pp 525–547 | Cite as

A non-smooth-contact-dynamics analysis of Brunelleschi’s cupola: an octagonal vault or a circular dome?

  • Valentina Beatini
  • Gianni Royer-CarfagniEmail author
  • Alessandro Tasora
Article
  • 215 Downloads

Abstract

The cupola (dome) of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence was ingeniously constructed by Brunelleschi using a conical bricklaying, radial-oriented toward a focus point on the central axis. Therefore, the dome is built as a surface of revolution but with parts cut away to leave the octagonal cluster vault form. This circular arrangement is compared with an octagonal horizontal corbelling in models where the dome is schematized as an assembly of rigid-blocks in frictional contact, analyzed with a Non-Smooth-Contact-Dynamics approach. The high indeterminacy of the contact reactions implies considerable difficulties in their determination, which are faced via a regularization procedure by adding a compliance at the contact points in representation of the deformability of the mortar joints. Numerical experiments, performed with a custom software, highlight the uniform flow of forces in the Brunelleschi arrangement, but evidence the disturbances induced by the herringbone spirals, mainly used for construction purposes, which are overloaded along the meridians and very weak in the direction of the parallels. This is due to the vertical narrow disposal of the blocks, which increases the stiffness in meridional direction, but diminishes the capacity of the friction-induced forces to equilibrate the hoop stress.

Keywords

Dome Masonry Friction Brunelleschi Rigid body mechanics Non-smooth contact dynamics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Professor Silvia Briccoli Bati (University of Florence) for inspiring discussion during the preparation of this work. GRC acknowledges the support of the Italian Ministry of University under grant MIUR-PRIN voce COAN 5.50.16.01 code 2015JW9NJT and of the Italian Civil Protection Department, Presidency of the Council of Ministers, under project ReLUIS-DPC 2014-2018.

References

  1. 1.
    King R (2000) Brunelleschi’s dome. How a renaissance genius reinvented architecture. Chatto & Windu, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Di Pasquale S (2002) Brunelleschi. La costruzione della cupola di Santa Maria del Fiore. Marsilio, VeniceGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alberti LB (1485) Leonis Baptistae Alberti florentini viri clarissimi De re aedificatoria. N. Laurentus, FlorenceGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Godard A (1965) The art of Iran. Praeger, WestportGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sanpaolesi P (1977) La Cupola di Santa Maria del Fiore. Il Progetto la Costruzione. Edam, IstanbulGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Antonio M (1985) Filippo Brunelleschi: sa vie, son oeuvre. Ecole nationale superieure des Beaux-Arts, ParisGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bartoli L (1977) Filippo Brunelleschi. Nardini, FlorenceGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pizzigoni A (2015) Brunelleschi’s bricks. J Int Assoc Shell Spat Struct 56(2):137–148Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Corazzi R (2012) The loxodromic curve and the herringbone. Disegnarecon 5(9):85–92Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moreau J-J (1988) Unilateral contact and dry friction in finite freedom dynamics. In: Moreau JJ, Panagiotopoulos PD (eds) Nonsmooth Mech Appl. Springer, Vienna, pp 1–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moreau J-J (1999) Numerical aspects of the sweeping process. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 177(3–4):329–349ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beatini V, Royer-Carfagni G, Tasora A (2017) A regularized non-smooth contact dynamics approach for architectural masonry structures. Comput Struct 187:88–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chetouane B, Dubois F, Vinches M, Bohatier C (2005) Nscd discrete element method for modelling masonry structures. Int J Numer Methods Eng 64(1):65–94MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lancioni G, Gentilucci D, Quagliarini E, Lenci S (2016) Seismic vulnerability of ancient stone arches by using a numerical model based on the non-smooth contact dynamics method. Eng Struct 119(Supplement C):110–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rafiee A, Vinches M, Bohatier C (2008) Application of the nscd method to analyse the dynamic behaviour of stone arched structures. Int J Solids Struct 45(25):6269–6283CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dubois F, Jean M (2006) The non-smooth contact dynamic method: recent lmgc90 software developments and application. In: Wriggers P, Nackenhorst U (eds) Analysis and simulation of contact problems. Springer, Berlin, pp 375–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Beatini V, Royer-Carfagni G, Tasora A (2018) The role of frictional contact of constituent blocks on the stability of masonry domes. Proc R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 474(2209), 20170740ADSCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beatini V, Royer-Carfagni G, Tasora A (2019) Modeling the shear failure of segmental arches. Int J Solids Struct 158:21–39CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Casapulla C, Maione A (2018) Modelling the dry-contact interface of rigid blocks under torsion and combined loadings: concavity vs. convexity formulation. Int J Non Linear Mech 99:86–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Casapulla C, Portioli F (2015) Experimental and analytical investigation on the frictional contact behavior of 3D masonry block assemblages. Constr Build Mater 78:126–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    van Zijl GPAG (2004) Modeling masonry shear-compression: role of dilatancy highlighted. J Eng Mech 130(11):1289–1296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    De Saxcé G, Feng Z-Q (1998) The bipotential method: a constructive approach to design the complete contact law with friction and improved numerical algorithms. Math Comput Model 28(4):225–245MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ambrosio L, Fusco N, Pallara D (2000) Functions of bounded variation and free discontinuity problems. Oxford University Press, OxfordzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Anitescu M, Hart GD (2004) A constraint-stabilized time-stepping approach for rigid multibody dynamics with joints, contact and friction. Int J Numer Methods Eng 60(14):2335–2371MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jean M (1999) The non-smooth contact dynamics method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 177(3):235–257ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Anitescu M, Tasora A (2010) An iterative approach for cone complementarity problems for nonsmooth dynamics. Comput Optim Appl 47(2):207–235MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Birgin EG, Martnez JM, Raydan M (2000) Nonmonotone spectral projected gradient methods on convex sets. SIAM J Optim 10(4):1196–1211MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Heyn Toby, Anitescu Mihai, Tasora Alessandro, Negrut Dan (2013) Using Krylov subspace and spectral methods for solving complementarity problems in many-body contact dynamics simulation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 95(7):541–561MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Anitescu M (2006) Optimization-based simulation of nonsmooth rigid multibody dynamics. Math Program 105(1):113–143MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tasora A, Anitescu M, Negrini S, Negrut D (2013) A compliant visco-plastic particle contact model based on differential variational inequalities. Int J Non Linear Mech 53(0):2–12 Multibody system dynamics: a selective perspectiveCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Michel J (2009) Numerical Simulation of granular materials. In: Cambou B, Jean M, Radjaï F (eds) Micromechanics of granular materials. ISTE-Wiley, Hoboken, pp 149–315Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Koziara T, Bićanić N (2011) A distributed memory parallel multibody contact dynamics code. Int J Numer Methods Eng 87(1–5):437–456CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Coumans E (2012) http://bulletphysics.org. Accessed 18 Feb 2019
  34. 34.
    Keerthi SS, Gilbert EG, Johnson DW (1988) A fast procedure for computing the distance between complex objects in three-dimensional space. Robot Autom 4(2):193–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Xiuzhi Q, Stucker B (2003) A 3D surface offset method for STL-format models. Rapid Prototyp J 9(3):133–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Coli M, Haines M, Bianchini P (2013) Le pietre della cupola del brunelleschi. In: D’Andrea M., Rossi R. (eds), 2015 –Quinto Congresso Nazionale Geologia e Turismo, Bologna, 6-7 giugno 2013, Atti, ISPRA, Roma, pp 226–236. ISBN  978-88-448-0721-4Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Heyman J (2010) Equilibrium of masonry arches. Proc Inst Civ Eng Eng Comput Mech 163:129–133Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Drucker DC (1954) Coulomb friction, plasticity and limit loads. J Appl Mech 21(1):71–74Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Architecture and Built EnvironmentNorthumbria UniversityNewcastle upon TyneUK
  2. 2.Department of Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of ParmaParmaItaly
  3. 3.Construction Technologies InstituteItalian National Research Council (ITC-CNR)San Giuliano Milanese, MilanItaly

Personalised recommendations