CHAPTER 1

ARCHITECTURE AND PRINCIPLES OF

DESIGN USED FOR MASONRY OTHODOX
CHURCHES
 THE ORTHODOX CHURCH ARCHITECTURE

Broadly speaking, Orthodox churches designed for the regular celebration

of the Liturgy fall into two types: the basilica and the cruciform. The basilica is
the earlier design, and is a rectangular structure. It usually has a curved apse in
the eastern end. It may or may not have two or four rows of columns running
down its length. The isles formed by these columns have roofs lower than the
main body of the church, and windows in the exposed upper wall, called the
clerestory. The roof is most commonly of a hip design and of timber, and the
ceiling is sometimes painted with
designs. In some cases there is a stone barrel vaulted roof. More rarely, there can
be one or more domes.
The basilica was basically adopted with little adaptation from a Roman
secular building type, used variously for such purposes as law court, council
chamber, covered market and gymnasium. The similarity of secular and liturgical
basilica is such that it is sometimes difficult for archaeologists to tell them apart.
The word basilica means royal, and so by extension the
building was a city building. This fitted in with the Church’s sense of itself being
the City of God. In any case, the basilica was the only building of the pagan
Roman empire which was suitable for large Christian assemblies, since the
interiors of pagan temples were designed only for the priests and the sacrifices,
not for the worshipping public. Another early symbolic reading
of the basilica relates it to a ship. According to the “Apostolic Constitutions” (c.
400 A.D.) “the house of the believers is long in shape like a ship [hence nave from
the Latin navis] and directed towards the east.” Here the emphasis is on the
transitory nature of our present life, of our movement towards the heavenly city
to come. The basilica is primarily, therefore, a church plan which emphasises
action, motion. By contrast the more centrally orientated churches favoured in the
east emphasise contemplation or vision. To this type we now turn. The basic form
of the cruciform type is a cross floor plan with a dome over the centre. With time
this basic cruciform shape tended to be set within a square floor plan, the areas
between the arms having been filled in to make subsidiary spaces. Such a type is
called a cross-in-square church or a square ambulatory church. The latter
description sees the church as a square within a square, a central square with an
ambulatory running around it.
The central dome of the cruciform church can be supported on a drum or
may sit directly on the nave walls. The drum can be supported by columns or can
rest directly on the walls and squinches or pendatives, which fill the upper corners
of the square nave. Variations on the theme involve the number of domes (five is
common), the type of roof over the interior dome
(domical, pyramidal, conical etc.), the roof shape of the cross arms (curved,
hipped), the proportions, the geometric shapes given emphasis (the onion shaped
dome in Russia, for example, or the steep cone and heightened drum of some
Georgian and Armenian churches), and of course, the materials used.
The cruciform style was more purpose-designed as a church than the
basilica, and is therefore generally considered to be a richer and fuller expression
of the Church’s experience. It was probably conceived out of a combination of
the basilica (with its west to east movement), and centrally oriented mausolea and
baptisteries (which were circular, octagonal, or variations thereof, and usually
domed). There is much discussion among scholars as to the historical origins of
this church-type, but since the purpose of this essay is the practical one of assisting
contemporary design, it is not necessary to outline these various theories.
On the one hand the cruciform church’s east-west arms offer the basilica’s
forward movement, with its sense of pilgrimage from the fallen world (the west)
towards the age to come (the east). On the other hand its dome (with its emphasis
on the interior) and its more or less cubic nave, intimately proportioned, create a
sense of being present now in paradise, of
God being present among the congregation. Pilgrimage and immanence are thus
combined.
Another element of the cross-in- square which is symbolically rich is the transition
from square to cross to circle (or cube to cross to dome) as we move up the church.
This affirms the union of earth (symbolised by the square) with heaven (the circle)
through the cross of Christ.
The cruciform church also offers a rich symphony of interior surfaces well suited
to wall painting and mosaic. Its more complex floor plan also provides a richer
“stage” for liturgical movements than does the basilica. The chief disadvantage of
the cruciform church is its expense of construction relative to the basilica. There
are arches and domes to construct, and the floor plan is more complex and the
walls therefore more time-consuming of labour. The chief advantage of the
basilica is its cheapness of construction relative to the cruciform, due to its
simplicity of shape - basically four walls with a simple hipped roof. Its potential
disadvantages are its aesthetic plainness of shape, and the fact that the
congregation can feel distanced from the liturgical activities at the east end due to
the elongation of the nave.
 This last disadvantage is of course obviated with small basilicas. And the
plainness can in part be overcome with wall paintings or mosaics, as for example
in the church of St Apollinari Nuovo in Ravenna. For small chapels the basilican
rectangular shape is quite adequate; its very smallness is sufficient to create that
intimacy and interiority which tends to get lost as size
increases.
The predilection in western Europe has been for the basilica design, in later
centuries modified with the addition of transepts towards the east end with a tower
over the crossing, and/or one or sometimes two towers at the west end. Domes
and centrally orientated churches are a rarity. In the Gothic period the rounded
Romanesque arch was abandoned in favour of the pointed arch, and interior
surfaces which had been painted or covered in mosaic were abandoned in favour
of geometric patterns created by structural elements such as clustered columns,
vaulting ribs and fan vaulting.
From the Gothic onwards, the dominant trend in British and Northern
European church design has been for long and high naves, their verticality further
emphasised by the pointed arch and thin columns. Many of the Anglican churches
available to the Orthodox in Britain are such churches, either Victorian creations
or neo-Gothic remodellings. The intuition of the Orthodox Church seems to be
that this has created a church type which, for all its particular beauty, has an
atmosphere which tends to be too impersonal, and not incarnational enough for
its adoption. This is not to denigrate the great accomplishments of cathedrals such
as Chartres or York Minster, but simply says that many aspects of their design are
not appropriate to the Orthodox Church . When looking for ideas in western
architecture we would therefore be inclined to look to the earlier Anglo-Saxon
and Romanesque periods (little survives of Celtic churches).
ARCHITECTURAL CHURCH STYLES ON ROMANIAN TERRITORY
The styles used for building of churches in Romania were of all kinds,
beginning with the basilicas style dating since IV century and coming to an end
with the byzantine style in all kinds and forms which were used for Romanian
church architecture.

Figure 1 – Orthodox Church, loc. Vicovu de Sus county Suceava

The byzantine style used for church architecture – is an evolution of the
basilica style specific to the first Christian churches; the basilicas style taking
simple nave forms maintained during the ages in Occident, while in the East
begins to be replaced with a new form of art, since VI century, the byzantine art,
with its first architectural monuments (for example sanctuaries from Asia Minor
and Sf. Sofia from Constantinople) which are in fact basilicas with domes. The
byzantine style is the result from mixing the classical Hellenistic elements and
the oriental ones in the art of construction, which came from Syria and Asia
Minor and from Persia, Mesopotamia and Armenia, where, specific types of
buildings are on a central plane (polygonal, cross-shaped, round ) and these kind
of buildings have domes. The straight line for the horizontal and vertical plane
and the right angles are replaced with the curves meaning perfect circles or
semicircles, specific in oriental architecture. The curved line and the rounded
walls which appear in basilicas only at the sanctuary apsis and at the arches
which connect the ends of the interior columns are multiplied as follows: the
straight walls are mixed with the rounded walls (apsis) or cylindrical walls
(hemicycle) and not only for sanctuary but for long lateral walls too and the flat
ceiling system is replaced with the rounded roof or vaulted roof in form of
cylindrical vaults supported by arches, in form of half spheres or in form of a
dome placed in the center of the edifice (Nave), and supported by walls with the
help of pendants (meaning the four spherical triangles between the sustaining
arches).
In time the vault limits its dimensions and it gets above the roof with the help of
the capstan (cylindrical or polygonal) which is pierced by windows and will take
the denomination of turret. The apparition of the turret will modify the general
plan of the churches, because it will mark the cross point of the longitudinal
nave with the transversal nave and from its intersection results a Greek cross
(with equal braces) or Latin cross (with a longer western brace). In this way
appears the central cross frame, which becomes the main characteristic for the
Byzantine architecture.
The nave-shape church, of the basilica plane, becomes the cross-shape church of
the new style, and it appeals the sacred instrument of the resurrection: the cross.
When the transversal brace of the cross doesn’t extend the lateral walls it
remains in the interior part of the church, but when it crosses the lateral walls,
the cross-shape plan becomes visible. If the transversal walls have rounded sides
then this shape create the three-apsidal plane which like I said above it will
become specific for the Byzantine style (This form dates back from VI century
located first in Israel country which belonged at that time of the Byzantine
Imperium). The interior surface is now devised in three sectors, the sanctuary,
the nave and the prior-nave. The nave and the sanctuary is divided by the
iconostasis and between the nave and pre-nave it will be elevated a wall with
three doors which will replace the anterior columns which will remain only as
sustaining bars of the vault or they will confine the lateral walls. As a conclusion
the features of this style are the cross-shape form and the three-apsidal plane
(nave, prior-nave and sanctuary).
 PRINCIPLES OF DESIGN OF MASONRY CHURCH
STRUCTURES
SUMMARRY:

Masonry churches are particularly prone to damages and partial or global

collapses when subjected to horizontal actions. High seismic vulnerability of these
ancient buildings can be associated both to the particular configuration of this type
of constructions and to the mechanical properties of the masonry “material”.
Basilica churches have been selected in this study because of this typology is
widely spread all over the national territory and is characterized by the presence
of typical constituting elements so that a generalization of results obtained from a
small group of study cases to a larger sample of religious buildings is possible.

SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF MASONRY CHURCHES

Basilica structures are usually constituted by a façade, a hall (with one or
more naves), a presbytery and an apse; besides, a transept, a dome, the lateral
chapels can be added; often, a bell tower or a sail is present. More in general,
churches are characterized by the presence of large wall panels of (both in length
and in height) without internal thorn walls, slenderness of some vaulted structures
(folded vaults), presence of thrusting elements of large span (arches, vaults and
domes), lack of intermediate connection, degradation due to the scarce use and
maintenance of some parts (bell towers). Furthermore, ancient constructions
generally show several sources of seismic vulnerability. More specifically, the
horizontal inertial forces can provoke the loss of equilibrium, especially in the
slender and not connected elements (spires, sails, bad connected parts). Besides,
the lack of rigid horizontal elements allows an autonomous dynamic vibration of
the different parts of the structure. Churches, more than other typologies, show
the absence of box behavior with the consequent partial collapse possibility.
Moreover, almost all the churches have undergone deep transformations during
their life, which eventually turn out in:
- uncertain characterization of the mechanical properties (large variability
of the mechanical properties due to the making and working process, and use of
naturals elements); - lacking of the knowledge of the original construction; -
construction steps like plan increasing, raisings, masonry wall insertion in the hall,
realization of new buildings leaning on the old structure;
- damaging (soil movements, damaging of the materials);
 - permanent or progressive strains, cracking, physical or chemical
degradation of the materials (mainly due to traffic jam, wind and thermal loads);
- induced damages from previous interventions (earthquakes, fires,
thunderbolts) that have induced cracking in the walls (cracking states) through
which tension stresses cannot be transmitted anymore;
- non applicability of the code provisions;
DAMAGES IN MASONRY CHURCHES
Generally, the seismic collapse of masonry constructions occurs for the
equilibrium loss of some structural parts, rather than the overcoming of a limit
stress state of strength. Masonry walls are subjected to compression vertical
stresses, to which bi-dimensional stress in the plane of the wall, close to the
openings or pointed loads, and flexural stresses, if horizontal loads due to the
presence of arches and vaults are present, are superimposed. The collapse
mechanisms related to the action induced by vertical loads are:
- local crushing of constituting elements: it occurs in the mortar when it is
particularly poor and the thickness of the joints is high; or in the units if poor or
very degraded. Furthermore an irregular composition of the stone elements can
determine stresses concentration so that local crushing phenomena can occur.
- instability of the walls: it is dependent on:
1) insufficient thickness of the walls compared to the internal core;
2) lack of diatoms or other type of toothing able to guarantee the
monolithicity of the wall;
3) strongly eccentric load condition. In the wall loaded out of the plane,
Rondelet (1802) individuated three collapse modes as a function of the geometry
and constraint conditions. In all three mechanisms, a loss of equilibrium of the
collapsing portion occurs: the static vertical loads have a stabilizing effect, whilst
the horizontal action implies a bending moment with respect to the rotation axes.
If the horizontal action acts in the plane of the wall, two types of mechanisms
dependent on the geometry, constraint conditions, the compression state, the wall
composition are individuated. In stocky walls the sliding of the superior parts on
the inferior ones is ruled by the friction coefficient. In slender walls the
overturning of a part of wall around a hinge point will occur. Referring to
churches, some particular collapse mechanisms have been individuated after
seismic events; in the following they will be summarized as a function of the
constituting elements of the structure.
 1. façade: typical collapse mechanisms of this macro-element are generally
due to the interaction with the orthogonal elements, the presence of openings or
thrusting roof structures, the shear failure in stocky elements. More in detail, when
the tympanum on the top, lacking a good connection with the roof, undergoes the
maximum oscillations, its overturning out of the plane around a horizontal or a
diagonal axis could occur. Furthermore since the presence of openings is a
weakening factor of the wall texture, the overturning of the element at the height
of the openings can develop. The horizontal thrust of vaults and arches on the
lateral walls with tension stresses in the panel could imply the formation of
vertical cracks in the middle of the panel as well as the shear effect can be detected
with diagonal crossed cracks. Finally, the rotation out of plane of the corner is due
to the interaction of the forces acting on orthogonal walls.
2. triumphal arch: vertical loads involve symmetrical mechanisms in the
element like sliding in the abutments (which implies some cracks in the arch) or
five hinges kinematics. These mechanisms could cause the collapse as a function
of the material, the constructive way, the presence of niches or dimensions of the
blocks. The horizontal action represents, on the contrary, an asymmetric system
so that the collapse occurs for the overturning of one or both the abutments if
slender piers are present. Non symmetrical cracks can happen because of the
presence of some rotational restraints. Another mechanism with discordant
rotation of the piers has been noticed when a chain is present on the top of the
arch.
3. lateral walls: the collapse mechanisms of perimetrical walls in churches
are function of the trusses constraint to the piers and the presence of openings. In
lacking or small openings walls the formation of horizontal cracks at a low level
(close to the foundation) could occur. When some openings are present, a more
complex distribution of the damages will be detected. A frequent mechanism is
the formation of horizontal cracks at the base of the holes and vertical in
correspondence of the architrave determining the formations of rotating blocks
outside. Due to the interaction of the roof, this mechanism can also occur in
association with the expulsion of the truss beam support and the rotation out of
the plane of the façade.
4. apse: its failure depends mainly on the shape, presence of openings and
truss constraints. In case of circular apses or chapels, the localization of the crack
lines starting from the top at the intersection with the hall until low quotes in the
middle is the most recurrent mechanism. Cracks are characterized by a V opening,
bigger on the top and decreasing toward the bottom. The presence of vaults or
struts which thrusts are not absorbed by beams or steel hoopings or openings in
the panels can determine preferential crack patterns. In case these forces are
absorbed, the mechanisms transforms in diagonal cracks with the typical shear
behaviour.
MATERIAL
Historical or traditional materials such as earth, brick or stone masonry and
wood are characterized by very complex mechanical and strength phenomena still
challenging our modeling abilities. In particular, masonry is characterized by its
composite character (it includes stone or brick in combination with mortar or day
joints), a brittle response in tension (with almost null tensile strength), a frictional
response in shear (once the limited bond between units and mortar is lost) and
anisotropy (for the response is highly sensitive to the orientation of loads). In spite
of the very significant effort invested to characterize and mathematically describe
masonry mechanics and strength, the accurate and efficient simulation of masonry
response is still a challenge in need of further experimental and theoretical
developments. Historical materials, including brick or stone masonry, are
normally very heterogeneous even in a single building or construction member.
Moreover, historical structures often show many additions and repairs done with
different materials. Material characterization is constrained by due respect to the
monument and original material.
MORPHOLGY
A more significant problem lays in the characterization and description of
the internal morphology of structural members and their connections. Structural
members are often non-homogeneous and show complex internal structures
including several layers, filling, material, cavities, metal insertions and other
possible singularities. Connections are singular regions featuring specific
geometric and morphological treats. The transference of forces may activate
specific resisting phenomena (contact problems, friction, eccentric loading).
Modeling morphology and connections in detail may be extremely demanding
from a computational point of view.

ACTIONS
Church structures may have experienced (and keep on experiencing)
actions of very different nature, including the effects of gravity forces in the long
term, earthquake, environmental effects (thermal effects, chemical or physical
attack), and anthropogenic actions such as architectural alterations, intentional
destruction, inadequate restorations. Many of these actions are to be characterized
in historical time. Some are cyclic and repetitive (and accumulate significant
effect in the long term), some develop gradually in very long time periods, and
some are associated to long return periods. In many cases, they may be influenced
by historical contingency and uncertain (or at least, insufficiently known)
historical facts.
ADVANTAGES AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOADBEARING MASONRY
The basic advantage of masonry construction is that it is possible to use the
same element to perform a variety of functions, which in a steel framed building,
for example, have to be provided for separately, with consequent complication in
detailed construction. Thus masonry may, simultaneously, provide structure,
subdivision of space, thermal and acoustic insulation as well as fire and weather
protection. As a material, it is relatively cheap but durable and produces external
wall finishes of very acceptable appearance. Masonry construction is flexible in
terms of building layout and can be constructed without very large capital
expenditure on the part of the builder. In the first half of the present century brick
construction for multi storey buildings was very largely displaced by steel- and
reinforced concrete-framed structures, although these were very often clad in
brick. One of the main reasons for this was that until around 1950 loadbearing
walls were proportioned by purely empirical rules, which led to excessively thick
walls that were wasteful of space and material and took a great deal of time to
build. The situation changed in a number of countries after 1950 with the
introduction of structural codes of practice which made it possible to calculate the
necessary wall thickness and masonry strengths on a more rational basis. These
codes of practice were based on research programmes and building experience,
and, although initially limited in scope, provided a sufficient basis for the design
of buildings of up to thirty storeys. A considerable amount of research and
practical experience over the past 20 years has led to the improvement and
refinement of the various structural codes. As a result, the structural design of
masonry buildings is approaching a level similar to that applying to steel and
concrete
As masonry has relatively low strength in tension, this imposes certain
restrictions on its field of application. Concrete is, of course, also a brittle material
but this limitation is overcome by the introduction of reinforcing steel or by
prestressing. The corresponding use of these techniques in masonry construction
is not new but, until recently, has not been widely adopted. This was partly due to
the absence of a satisfactory code of practice, but such codes are now available so
that more extensive use of reinforced and prestressed masonry may be expected
in future. By the adoption of reinforced or prestressed construction the scope of
masonry can be considerably extended. An example is the use of prestressed
masonry walls of cellular or fin construction for sports halls and similar buildings
where the requirement is for walls some 10 m in height supporting a long span
roof. Other examples include the use of easily constructed, reinforced masonry
retaining walls and the reinforcement of laterally loaded walls to resist wind or
seismic forces. In appropriate cases, reinforced masonry will have the advantage
over concrete construction of eliminating expensive shuttering and of producing
exposed walls of attractive appearance without additional expense.
Reinforcement can be introduced in masonry elements in several ways. The most
obvious is by placing bars in the bed joints or collar joints, but the diameter of
bars which can be used in this way is limited. A second possibility is to form
pockets in the masonry by suitable bonding patterns or by using specially shaped
units. The steel is embedded in these pockets either in mortar or in small aggregate
concrete. The third method, suitable for walls or beams, is to place the steel in the
cavity formed by two leaves of brickwork which is subsequently filled with small
aggregate concrete. This is known as grouted cavity construction. Elements built
in this way can be used either to resist in-plane loading, as beams or shear walls,
or as walls under lateral loading. In seismic situations it is possible to bond
grouted cavity walls to floor slabs to give continuity to the structure. Finally,
reinforcement can be accommodated in hollow block walls or piers, provided that
the design of the blocks permits the formation of continuous ducts for the
reinforcing bars. Pre-stressed masonry elements are usually post-tensioned, the
steel, in strand or bar form, being accommodated in ducts formed in the masonry.
In some examples of cellular or diaphragm wall construction the pre-stressing
steel has been placed in the cavity between the two masonry skins, suitably
protected against corrosion. It is also possible to pre-stress circular tanks with
circumferential wires protected by an outer skin of brickwork built after pre-
stressing has been carried out.