VESHO PhD final presentation UNIFE by PH.D. Nikolla Vesho

International Doctorate in Architecture and Urban Planning Cycle XXXIV Curriculum Architecture/Urban Planning (ICAR 19) Topic: Restoration, Modelling and Seismic simulations, H-BIM

A methodology for the treatment of the issue of Cultural Heritage Restoration in Tirana, period 1920-40’ Using BIM tools, seismic simulations and theoretical interpretations

PhD Candidate:

Nikolla VESHO

POLIS Supervisor: DA Supervisor:

Dr. Doc. Merita GURI Prof. Riccardo DALLA NEGRA Prof. Marco ZUPPIROLI

Context: Cultural heritage of Tirana, between 1919 to 1940 /Italian Architecture influence • The aim of the thesis is an integrated multi-scalar methodology to address the theme of cultural heritage in Albania, supported by the use of technologies in the field of Heritage BIM, numerical simulations and Seismic F.E.M modelling

• Combination of BIM with FEM, MEP, etc. • Correlation and equivalence of models • Creating a multidisciplinary database

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ❑ The objective of this study is the optimization of cultural heritage restoration and increase the efficiency of this issue in Albania, Through BIM tools, numerical models & F.E.M modelling, controlled by several algorithms to reduce the gap between architects, engineers and other experts in the field of restoration.

❑ Through this research, the announced target was to find GAPs and limitations of retrofitting interventions in cultural heritage buildings ❑ Including seismic simulations within the architectural restoration process, as well as the study of collapse mechanism scenarios, before an intervention; ❑ Long-term objective, Continuous monitoring of buildings and equipping buildings with automated sensors, focusing on seismic performance and operation of technological networks inside the building, controlled through BIM and MEP models

RESEARCH LIMITATION 1. B.I.M. most powerful feature is considered to be integration of data between software’s. The main problem is metadata handling and their partial loss; 2. During the manually copy of External database content inside BIM spreadsheets, any external databases change their language information, so BIM spreadsheet will not be synchronized correctly; 3. Limitations of data obtained after seismic analysis, mainly pushover simulations compared to time-history analysis; 4. Limitations related to the difficulties of interventions in old buildings through innovative technologies and finding a fixed cure for a successful intervention.

Research questions

❖ “How to find a mathematical non-linear connection to link engineering F.E.M. simulations and BIM tools with

architectural restoration theories / principles?” ❖ How can we optimize the process of restoration, through a connection of this models by different environment and to

reduce the gap between them? ❖ Since in these buildings the main problem is matching the aesthetic image with the structure, then how can we make

interventions in these objects when the structure matches the image? So, should a Restoration project be based on this principle?

❖ How to renovate the structure of these complex typologies without affecting their aesthetics, which carries historical

value?

If the question is better re-formulated, the main problem appears in the fact, how to make interventions in the facades without damaging its aesthetics and architecture, how to integrate buildings with additions made in different periods?

❖ It’s always argued that great designers of the past “have realized the perfect structural and architectural building.. but, is

enough this conservative view enough, in the actual reality, not to intervene with a genuine seismic retrofit” in these buildings?

Italian vision for Tirana for the transformation of city into a metropolis

The main designers in that period, who left traces are: Gherardo Bosio, Armando Brasini, Florestano di Fausto ec. ( Source: Mengini 2012 )

Diagram showing the 1st part of the boulevard central axis and the buildings of the Italian period The object of this study are cultural heritage buildings in Tirana, designed by Italian Architect of the period 1920-1939

2nd part of the diagram, focused on the boulevard central axis and the buildings of the Italian period Along the boulevard there are about 16 objects of cultural monuments of this period, mainly with the function of state institutions. While spread in the city a larger number of villas

Polytechnic University of Tirana

Organize parameters and data

Keep BIM, Remove MEP

Processing data before creating final layout

*PROPOSED METHODOLOGY Through BIM Tools

(_C-P)

METHODOLOGY

PROPOSED SOLUTION

General diagram on the research method proposed in one of the cases selected for analysis of this study

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Part.1 Part.2

Unreinforced Masonry Buildings (URM):◄ Seismic Behaviour and Failure Mechanisms Seismic retrofitting techniques: Overview and challenges

Two basic out-of-plane failure modes - depending on the wallto-floor connections

Cantilever mode (weak connection)

Beam flexural mode (strong connection)

Source: Ken Elwood (2011) Three basic In-Plane Shear Failure Mechanisms

1. Diagonal tension shear failure

Source: Tomaževič (1999)

2. Stair-stepped joint shear failure

3. Sliding shear failure

Source: FEMA 306 (1998) 10/40

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Part.1 Unreinforced Masonry Buildings (URM):◄ Seismic Behaviour and Failure Mechanisms Part.2 Seismic retrofitting techniques: Overview and challenges ◄ A: Reinforced Concrete (RC) Tie Beams (Ring Beams)

I: Bracings systems and Isolators

B: Fiber Reinforced Polymer FRP strips, FRCM Reinforced Plaster, C: Tension and Shear Wall Anchors

W: Wall Enhancement Methods: W1: Reinforced concrete (shotcrete) overlays W2: Surface coatings (reinforced plaster)

Objectives I. Enhance the overall building integrity (box action) C. Secure wall-to-floor/roof connections W. Increase the in-plane and out-of-plane wall resistance (lateral load-resisting capacity)

Source: Bothara and Brzev (2011) Shotcrete is sprayed concrete or mortar

Source: Brzev and Begaliev (2018)

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK F.E.M. MODEL as a Mathematical model and Failure Mechanisms 3MURI MODEL

STATIC MODEL

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK A – SEISMIC Limit states boundaries B – SEISMIC Advanced analysis: ** Static Non-linear Analysis Pushover ** Dynamic Time-History Analysis

Inter-story drifts / three limit states:

Drift concept

EQ. Accelerograms Response spectra

LS2 – Minor structural damage, dr = 0.1%” LS3 – Major structural damage, dr = 0.3%” LS4 – Complete collapse, dr = 0.5%”.

Sa-Sd diagram/ Performance point

Sa-Sd diagram/ LS Fragility curves

3 Damages states Seismic performance levels + Target displacement

13/40

0.8 0.7 0.6 EC-8 spectre

Sa (g)

0.5 0.4

KTP spectre

0.3

November earthquake

0.2 0.1 0 0

0.5

1.5

2.5

T (s)

PROCESSING AN EARTHQUAKE Durres 2019 Earthquake data 14/40

3.5

4.5

H-BIM Levels

BIM – Theoretical Framework

The first level of HBIM consists of surveying and digitization of archival projects through CAD format. The second level of BIM consists of creating the basic model with IFC format in the Revit and creating the data files. Equivalences are made within this level, while through plugins or software simulations are performed in many disciplines, producing many analyzes to evaluate the scenarios.

In the 3rd level of BIM, it is tried to parameterize the restoration intervention, which should be retrofit intervention, seismic reinforcement, adaptation or just maintenance. At this stage the building must be monitored with sensors for many aspects and in both phases, in the process of intervention as well as in the use of the building.

SITE WORK AND SURVEY TEAM

The application of the given methodology was realized in 2 phases. The first phase of groups specializing in instruments, for Lasserscanner and photogrammetry. The second phase with the student teams, engaged in the subject of restoration, who performed measurements, sketched the facades, architectural elements, details, also inspected the buildings in the exterior and interior, creating a good database necessary for the enrichment of BIM models.

16/40

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 01 A1. INVESTIGATION ON-SITE A2. ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY A3. PHOTOGRAMMETRY /Laser Scanning B1. DATA PROCESSING B2. DIGITALIZATION C1. BIM MODEL (@REVIT) C2. MEP MODEL

The first Case building is the Municipality of Tirana Designed by Florestano di Fausto in 1929, the building has a C-shape in plan and is in symmetry with respect to other buildings in central square. The structure is URM building with 2 wall thicknesses of 74 and 56cm, while in 2001 an addition was made with RC frames which is separated by a seismic joint that is not distinguished from the outside.

TIRANA City Hall Building

Archival Project 17/40

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 01 A1. INVESTIGATION ON-SITE A2. ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY A3. PHOTOGRAMMETRY /Laser Scanning B1. DATA PROCESSING B2. DIGITALIZATION C1. BIM MODEL (@REVIT) C2. MEP MODEL

◄ ◄ ◄ ◄

ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY - This phase is crucial, as it helps to enhance the understanding of the building with all its components

18/40

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 01 Programming DYNAMO

A1. INVESTIGATION ON-SITE A2. ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY A3. PHOTOGRAMMETRY /Laser Scanning B1. DATA PROCESSING ◄ B2. DIGITALIZATION C1. BIM MODEL (@REVIT) ◄ C2. F.e.m./BIM MODEL ◄

FEM Model ETABS BIM Model 3MURI

Materials / Laboratory test Nr.

Parameter

Value

Unit

19.75

Mpa

294

Compressive strength – digimax

Failure load

Compressive strength – direct

18.66

Mpa

Failure load

71.7

Compressive strength – direct

15.13

Mpa

Failure load

230

15837

MPa

1811 0.15

MPa

1 2 3

Elastic modulus E (The Young's Modulus) Shear modulus G Poisson's ratio υ

Type of test performed Compression test results for the red brick cubic sample-1

Figure

Compression test results for the white brick cubic sample-1

Compression test results for the white brick cubic sample-2

BIM Model MATERIALS Data & Tests

FEM Model 3MURI

19/40

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 02 A1. MATERIALS A2. LABORATORY TESTS B1. F.E.M MODEL (correlated with the BIM model) B2. SEISMIC ANALYSIS (MODAL) B3. INVESTIGATION & SIMULATIONS C1. NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS C2. PUSHOVER /TIME-HISTORY

◄ ◄ ◄ ◄

Case

Mode

Period sec

SumUX

SumUY

SumRX

SumRY

Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0.347 0.185 0.108 0.085 0.07 0.063 0.051 0.049 0.044 0.037 0.037 0.036

0.0046 0.3388 0.4508 1.1274 0.002 0.0011 0.006 0.0001 0.0298 0.0011 0.0001 0.0181

0.7411 0.0181 0.0005 0.0003 0.0003 0.0127 0.0015 0.0815 0.0002 0.0048 0.0009 0.0006

0.0046 0.3434 0.7942 0.7942 0.7962 0.7974 0.8033 0.8035 0.8332 0.8343 0.8344 0.8525

0.7411 0.7591 0.7596 0.7598 0.7602 0.7728 0.7744 0.8559 0.8561 0.8608 0.8617 0.8623

0.3605 0.0172 0.0052 0.0001 0.0006 0.0316 0.0071 0.2134 0.0001 0.0116 0.0027 0.0048

0.0025 0.1851 0.1528 0.0041 0.0114 0.0017 0.0223 0.0002 0.0914 0.0042 0.0023 0.0847

0.3605 0.3777 0.3829 0.383 0.3836 0.4152 0.4223 0.6356 0.6357 0.6473 0.6499 0.6547

0.0025 0.1876 0.3405 0.3446 0.356 0.3577 0.38 0.3802 0.4715 0.4757 0.478 0.5627

MODE -01

T1=0.347s > [T]

MODAL Analysis ETABS

Crack & fractures Investigations

SEISMIC Displacement Δx-x & Δy-y

MODE -02

MODE -03

DYNAMO Script

◄ ◄ ◄ ◄ Stress-Strain Simulations σ-ε distribution

Shear force and Story DRIFTS

24-Step Analysis and Vulnerability index

◄ ◄ ◄ ◄

f.e.m Non-linear model 3MURI

24-Scenarios and capacity curves

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 02

DYNAMO Script

A1. MATERIALS A2. LABORATORY TESTS B1. F.E.M MODEL (correlated with the BIM model) B2. SEISMIC ANALYSIS (MODAL) B3. INVESTIGATION & SIMULATIONS C1. NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS C2. PUSHOVER /TIME-HISTORY

◄ ◄ ◄ ◄ NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS PUSHOVER

600000

X - direction

600000

500000

400000

C.01 +X /Uniform L.

C.05 +Y /Uniform L.

C.02 +X /Static L.

C.06 +Y /Static L.

C.03 -X /Uniform L. C.04 -X /Static L. C.09 +X /Uniform L.

300000

C.10 +X /Uniform L. C.11 +X /Static L. C.12 +X /Static L.

200000

C.13 -X /Uniform L.

Base Shear Force [daN]

500000

Y - direction

400000

C.07 -Y /Uniform L. C.08 -Y /Static L. C.17 +Y /Uniform L.

300000

C.18 +Y /Uniform L.

C.19 +Y /Static L. C.20 +Y /Static L.

200000

C.21 -Y /Uniform L.

C.14 -X /Uniform L. C.15 -X /Static L.

100000

C.16 -X /Static L.

0.5

1.5

Capacity curves for 24Simulations /EQ X-Driection

2 2.5 3 Roof displacement [cm]

3.5

4.5

C.22 -Y /Uniform L. C.23 -Y /Static L.

100000

C.24 -Y /Static L.

3 Roof displacement [cm]

Capacity curves for 24Simulations /EQ Y-Driection

CASE STUDY 1 STEP – 03

A2. GLOBAL COLLAPSE MECHANISM ◄ A3. LOCAL FAILURE MECHANISM ◄ No

Seism dir.

-Y

Seismic load

Static forces

α NC

α SD

α DL

1.065

1.047

1.106

dm/d t NC 1.081

Seism dir.

-X

Seismic load

Static forces

α NC

α SD

α DL

0.949

0.890

1.582

dm/d t NC 0.951

Capacity Curve Capacity curve 04 / Analysis no.04 / -X dir./Eccenticity 0cm

Capacity Curve Capacity curve 24 / Analysis no.24 / -Y dir./Eccenticity -235

dt=2.88cm [NC] dt=2.73cm [NC] Analysis-24/Mechanism P.22 /Internal masonry /seismic dir.-Y/seismic load =static

dm=2.95cm [NC]

T*=0.520s

Analysis-24/Mechanism P.32 /Internal masonry /seismic dir.-Y/seismic load =static

3MURI Local mechanisms

dm=2.74cm [NC]

Not satisfied verification

T*=0.548s

Analysis-04/Mechanism P.1 /Main façade masonry /seismic dir.-X/seismic load =static

Analysis-04/Mechanism P.17 /Internal hall masonry /seismic dir.-X/seismic load =static

Analysis-04/Mechanism P.15 /2nd Internal hall masonry /seismic dir.-X/seismic load =static

Analysis-04/Mechanism P.08 /Back façade masonry /seismic dir.-X/seismic load =static

24/40

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 03 A1. THEORETICAL INTERPRETATIONS A2. GLOBAL COLLAPSE MECHANISM A3. LOCAL FAILURE MECHANISM B1. RETROFITTING STRATEGY B2. PARTIAL INTERVENTIONS C1. RE-CALCULATION C2. PROPOSALS

◄ ◄ ◄ ◄ ◄

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 03 A1. THEORETICAL INTERPRETATIONS A2. GLOBAL COLLAPSE MECHANISM A3. LOCAL FAILURE MECHANISM B1. RETROFITTING STRATEGY ◄ B2. PARTIAL INTERVENTIONS ◄ C1. RE-CALCULATION ◄ C2. PROPOSALS ◄

Steel bracing system + Kerakoll FRCM layers

Frabric-data Trefolo 3x2 ottenuto unendo fra loro 5 filamenti, di cui 3 rettilinei e 2 in avvolgimento con elevato angolo di torsione Atrefolo area effettiva di un trefolo 3x2 (5 fili) 0,538 mm2 n° trefoli/cm 3,14 trefoli/cm massa (comprensivo di termosaldatura) ≈ 1200 g/m2 carico di rottura a trazione di un trefolo > 1500 N resistenza a trazione del nastro, valore caratteristico > 3000 MPa σnastro resistenza a trazione per unità di larghezza > 4,72 kN/cm Enastro modulo di elasticità normale del nastro > 190 GPa deformazione a rottura del nastro, valore caratteristico > 1,5% εnastro tf spessore equivalente ≈ 0,169 mm

KERAKOLL Material FRCM GeoSteel G1200

3MURI Database

26/40

3MURI Materials database

* Positioning of the panels where the intervention was applied, ** Data on their geometric configuration

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 03 A1. THEORETICAL INTERPRETATIONS A2. GLOBAL COLLAPSE MECHANISM A3. LOCAL FAILURE MECHANISM B1. RETROFITTING STRATEGY B2. PARTIAL INTERVENTIONS C1. RE-CALCULATION C2. PROPOSALS Bracing system application and configuration in panel no.16 of the internal masonry

Parameters simulated in BIM ◄ ◄ ◄ ◄

Bracing system application and configuration in panel no.11 of the façade masonry

Before application / seismic parameters Analysis no.24 -Y/Static load No

Seism. dir. -Y

Seism. α NC α SD load 24 Static 1.075 1.037 forces dt=2.73cm [NC] dm=2.95cm[NC]

α DL 1.160

1.081

T*=0.520s

Panel verified mechanism model / panel no.11

1- INSIDE PANEL 2- SIDE PANEL

dm/d t NC

After reinforcement application / seismic parameters Analysis no.24 -Y/Static load No

Seism. dir. -Y

Seism. α NC α SD load 24 Static 1.741 1.671 forces dt=2.59cm [NC] dm=4.77cm[NC]

α DL

1.671

T*=0.466s

Panel verified mechanism model / panel no.11

27/40

dm/dt NC 1.842

CASE STUDY 1 STEP - 03 A1. THEORETICAL INTERPRETATIONS A2. GLOBAL COLLAPSE MECHANISM A3. LOCAL FAILURE MECHANISM B1. SEISMIC PERFORMANCE ◄ B2. CAPACITY CURVES ◄ C1. RE-CALCULATION ◄ C2. PROPOSALS ◄ Capacity curve /Simulation no.24 PUSHOVER Analysis Eq. Y-direction Before /After intervention

500000

450000

400000

350000

300000

250000

C.04 -Xdir. Static

200000

C.04 -Xdir -Reinforced

150000

Base Shear Force [daN]

Capacity curve /Simulation no.04 PUSHOVER Analysis Eq. X-direction Before /After intervention

300000 250000

150000 100000

50000

50000 0 0

0.5

1.5

2.5

Roof displacement [cm]

3.5

4.5

C.24 +Ydir. Static

200000

100000

C.24 +Ydir. Static /Reinforced

Roof displacement [cm]

CASE STUDY 2 STEP - 01 A1. INVESTIGATION ON-SITE ◄ A2. ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY A3. PHOTOGRAMMETRY /Laser Scanning◄ B1. DATA PROCESSING ◄ B2. DIGITALIZATION C1. BIM MODEL (@REVIT) C2. MEP MODEL

PHOTOGRAMMETRY Processing data on-site

CASE STUDY 2 STEP - 02 A1. BIM MODEL ◄ A2. MEP MODEL ◄ B1. F.E.M MODEL (correlated with the BIM model) ◄ B2. SEISMIC ANALYSIS (MODAL) C1. NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS C2. PUSHOVER /TIME-HISTORY

BIM + MEP + FEM Model

Programming DYNAMO

B.I.M.

f.e.m. ETABS BIM collecting Data

Structure Revit

MEP - REVIT

30/40

CASE STUDY 2 STEP - 02 A1. MATERIALS A2. LABORATORY TESTS B1. F.E.M MODEL (correlated with the BIM model) B2. SEISMIC ANALYSIS (MODAL) C1. NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS ◄ C2. PUSHOVER /TIME-HISTORY ◄

The Soft-Story Phenomenon, captured in 3Muri Software

Seism dir. +X

Seismic load Static forces

α NC

α SD

α DL

dm/dt NC 1.129

Capacity curves

Analysis-11/Mechanism no.1 /Main façade masonry 11 1.129 1.033 0.910 /seismic dir.+X/seismic load =static

Analysis-11/Mechanism no.4 /Back façade masonry Capacity curve no.11 / analysis no.11 / +X dir. /seismic dir.+X/seismic load =static

Analysis-11/Mechanism no.1 /Main façade masonry /seismic dir.+X/seismic load =static

Analysis-11/Mechanism no.4 /Back façade masonry /seismic dir.+X/seismic load =static

Collapse scenarios through; Non-linear model/ETABS The Soft-Story Phenomenon, captured in ETABS Software Generation of capacity curve in V-Δ format according to push-x load, Collapse scenarios of the building – through soft-story failure phenomena

Beam hinge parameters and data

31/40

CASE STUDY 2 STEP - 02 A1. MATERIALS A2. LABORATORY TESTS B1. F.E.M MODEL (correlated with the BIM model) B2. SEISMIC ANALYSIS (MODAL) C1. NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS ◄ C2. PUSHOVER /TIME-HISTORY ◄

Hysteretic curves, Most significative Column and beam hinge response diagrams, according to pushover-X and Y load

32/40

CASE STUDY 2 STEP - 02 A1. MATERIALS A2. LABORATORY TESTS B1. F.E.M MODEL (correlated with the BIM model) B2. SEISMIC ANALYSIS (MODAL) B3. INVESTIGATION & SIMULATIONS C1. NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS C2. PUSHOVER /TIME-HISTORY

◄ ◄ ◄ ◄ NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS PUSHOVER 500000

450000

X - direction

Y - direction

450000

400000 400000 C.01 +X /Uniform L. C.02 +X /Static L.

300000

C.03 -X /Uniform L

C.04 -X /Static L.

250000

C.09 +X /Uniform L. C.10 +X /Uniform L.

200000

C.11 +X /Static L. C.12 +X /Static L.

150000

C.13 -X /Uniform L. C.14 -X /Uniform L. C.15 -X /Static L.

100000

C.16 -X /Static L.

50000 0

C.05 +Y /Uniform L.

350000

Base Shear Force [daN]

350000

C.06 +Y /Static L.

C.07 -Y /Uniform L.

300000

C.08 -Y /Static L. C.17 +Y /Uniform L.

250000

C.18 +Y /Uniform L. C.19 +Y /Static L.

200000

C.20 +Y /Static L. C.21 -Y /Uniform L.

150000

C.22 -Y /Uniform L. C.23 -Y /Static L.

100000

C.24 -Y /Static L.

50000

Capacity curves for 24-Simulations /EQ X-Driection

3 4 Roof displacement [cm]

4 5 Roof displacement [cm]

Capacity curves for 24Simulations /EQ Y-Driection

CASE STUDY 3 STEP - 01 A1. INVESTIGATION ON-SITE A2. ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY A3. PHOTOGRAMMETRY /Laser Scanning B1. DATA PROCESSING B2. DIGITALIZATION C1. BIM MODEL (@REVIT) C2. MEP MODEL

◄ ◄ ◄ ◄ ◄ BIM /Model

F.E.M. Model

Analysis & Simulations

ETABS Model

3MURI Model

Revit Model 34/40

CASE STUDY 3 STEP - 02 A1. MATERIALS A2. LABORATORY TESTS B1. F.E.M MODEL (correlated with the BIM model) B2. SEISMIC ANALYSIS (MODAL) C1. NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS ◄ C2. PUSHOVER /TIME-HISTORY ◄

700000

X - direction

600000

Y - direction

600000 C.01 +X /Uniform L.

C.03 -X /Uniform L. C.04 -X /Static L.

400000

C.09 +X /Uniform L. C.10 +X /Uniform L.

300000

C.11 +X /Static L. C.12 +X /Static L.

C.13 -X /Uniform L.

200000

C.14 -X /Uniform L.

C.05 +Y /Uniform L.

500000

C.02 +X /Static L.

Base Shear Force [daN]

500000

C.06 +Y /Statik L. C.07 -Y /Uniform L. C.08 -Y /Statik L.

400000

C.17 +Y /Uniform L. C.18 +Y /Uniform L. C.19 +Y /Statik L.

300000

C.20 +Y /Statik L. C.21 -Y /Uniform L.

200000

C.22 -Y /Uniform L. C.23 -Y /Statik L.

C.15 -X /Static L. C.16 -X /Static L.

100000

0.5

1.5 2 2.5 Roof displacement [cm]

3.5

C.24 -Y /Statik L.

100000

3 4 Roof displacement [cm]

35/40

RESULTS /OUTPUTS

Interconnection of systems, explained in data file networks, referring to the second case

Proposals

Creating 3D Model

Analysis & Simulations

Results

Summary diagram on the generated outputs for the 3 case studies, according to the methodology proposed in this thesis

Autodesk DYNAMO Script_/BIM

BIM/MEP & FEM model ___incl. Dynamo For optimization

RESULTS /OUTPUTS

Sensor monitoring and BIM automation, through interconnection and execution with DYNAMO. Monitoring, automated intervention and interdisciplinary data exchange

FINDINGS ❖ The first point of view for each Case was “the analysis of structural typology”, Considered as one of the most important features in

the study of heritage buildings in Tirana; ❖ The connection between HBIM and seismic simulations, has helped to reduce some redundant passages and has allowed in some

cases to integrate simulations results directly inside the HBIM environment, to facilitate their interpretation and accessibility by all actors of the process;* ❖ One of the findings of this study is the creation of a “standard methodology” for the investigation of structural problems, through a

delicate process including the architectural sensitivity of cultural heritage objects. Addressing the structural issue through a delicate process of identifying the values of buildings and attempting long-term intervention strategies, without affecting their aesthetics; * ❖ A good database, which tends to store as much data as possible about heritage buildings is conceived and designed by connecting to

the basic 3D models. The structure of the methodology is designed to be quite flexible for handling the large amount of data that is entered or intertwined towards the model, from multidisciplinary case studies. Choice to push the entire model data network with a central "model-BIM" database, where they interact with each other, information in the numerical and graphical database, or connection to satellite models; * ❖ The flexibility of collecting and managing data is essential in this methodology when it comes to handling cultural heritage buildings.

The principle of methodology is sensitive to specific case studies and in addition to data collection, does not provide standard intervention solutions for each case. An attempt has been made to create an input-output system adaptable to the specific treatment requirements of each case. ❖ The theoretical-applied platform created in the framework of optimization of the current methodology of the Restoration in Albania,

based on theoretical studies, investigations and analysis in relation to three selected case studies, establishes a theoretical basis on which it is possible to improve the integration of other cases. To create a full and functional digital archive based on multidisciplinary BIM modeling

CONCLUSIONS ❖ Based upon the analysis of examples presented in this study, it is obvious that applying both HBIM and seismic retrofit on heritage

buildings in Tirana is still limited and faces several challenges. Among these challenges are the unavailability of equipment, limited availability of professionals including BIM specialists, funding and financial-related challenges. This calls for the need of inviting different international entities that are concerned with conserving cultural heritage to share in training of expertise and funding such researches; * ❖ It is worth mentioning that the suggested framework presented in this thesis is still a theoretical outline, it has been applied only in

academic field. The goal was to integrate different sides of conservation in one framework that depends on a scientific background. This framework needs further evaluation and feedback from the operational perspective; * ❖ The proposed methodology offers a high level of integration of data was achieved showing that there is a great potential for further

developments of integrated and efficient management of cultural heritage issue and process improvement; * ❖ Due to the vulnerability and seismic risk of Albanian cultural heritage, any intervention related to it should be strictly related to the

context of the location, the principles of the restoration, its territory and a lot of analysis through BIM; ❖ The strategy of interventions and seismic readjustment of buildings is closely related to interdisciplinary research on materials, design

codes and old technologies used in the construction, repair and restoration of built heritage; ❖ The methodology developed and adapted for the Albanian case offers an experimental model and an opportunity for improvement or

reflection on the systematization of the required data, for the proper management of restoration processes, improvement of structural performance and adaptation of cultural heritage to future studies; ❖ Additional research will focus on the automatic transformation of the H-BIM model into an accurate 3D equivalent frame model

(EFM); *

Thank You