Title: Report 4: Damage Identification of Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa.

Author(s): Evandro Araldi, Sonia Guerra, Luis Pea.

Unit: SA1

Institution: UNIVERSITAT POLITCNICA DE CATALUNYA

Date: November 07, 2016

Erasmus Mundus ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS

Programme: AND HISTORICAL CONSTRUCTIONS
Consortium UNIVERSITY OF MINHO, PORTUGAL
Institutions: CZECH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY IN PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC
UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA, ITALY
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF CATALONIA, SPAIN
Satellite Participant: INSTITUTE OF THEORETICAL AND APPLIED MECHANICS, CZECH
REPUBLIC
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

CONTENT

CONTENT.............................................................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 2
HISTORY ........................................................................................................................................................... 2
STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS ........................................................................................................................ 3
ACTUAL STATE OF DECAY AND DAMAGE OF THE STRUCTURE ....................................................... 3
DECAY OF MATERIALS ................................................................................................................................. 3
Delamination of Red Rocks ............................................................................................................. 3
Pulverization of Mortar .................................................................................................................... 4
Mechanical Decay on ground because of Public ............................................................................ 4
Vegetation (Biofilm) ......................................................................................................................... 4
Vegetation (Plants and Roots) and animals .................................................................................... 5
Graffiti .............................................................................................................................................. 5
STRUCTURAL DAMAGE ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Incompatibility of materials .............................................................................................................. 5
Buckling ........................................................................................................................................... 6
PREVIOUS INTERVENTIONS ......................................................................................................................... 7
History remarks ............................................................................................................................... 7
Possible extension of the bridge ..................................................................................................... 7
Filling of the Arch ............................................................................................................................. 7
Rendering ........................................................................................................................................ 8
Replacement of Bricks .................................................................................................................... 8
Steel ................................................................................................................................................ 9
Mesh ................................................................................................................................................ 9
CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 10
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................... 10

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 1
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

INTRODUCTION

The present work aims to identify damages, deformations and alterations in the Bridge of Sant Pere
through a visual inspection and its historical research. Thus, its possible to recognize the meaningful
aspects, features and characteristics that could be related to the existing damages and anthropological
alterations, such as previous interventions and structural problems that could possibly exist or appear in
the future, caused by the precarious construction and maintenance of the bridge.
The Bridge of Sant Pere is a singular bridge located in Terrassa, a city in the province of Barcelona,
distant about 20 kilometers from Barcelona city. Its construction designed and executed by Pere
Pomersi and Ramon Suris dates to the XVII century, and has as reference the churches of Sant Pere.
Initially, the following study leads us to the historical research, aiming to identify important events (fires,
earthquakes, and wars), architectural alterations (destruction, addition, insertions, modifications) and
previous repair or strengthening operations that may explain the identified damages. After the
introduction of the bridges structural components, the following work specifies details about the decay
of materials, structural damages observed during the visual inspection and previous interventions held
through the past years.
The main structural problems detected in the Bridge of Sant Pere were: 1) a crack because of the
incompatibility of materials used during its construction or the next reparation works and, 2) a buckling
along the longest wall, which is perceived by a noticeable curvature along the vertical direction in one
side of the cross section. Its important to keep a special attention to these structural observations, so
the bridge of Sant Pere can continuously preserve its quality as a historical, cultural and architectural
heritage, especially to the residents in Terrassa.

HISTORY

The Bridge of Sant Pere, designed and executed by Pere Pomersi and Ramon Suris from 1581 to 1625,
with some interruptions, was conceived to save the Vallparads Ravine (inside the Vallparadis Park),
linking the Creu Gran Street to the Rector Homs Square. Its construction turned out to be the
consequence of the rivalry between the communities from the village and the rural area around. On the
XVI century, the villagers were complaining about having to travel for long distances to reach the
churches. Therefore, authorities decided to build a new church in the rural area, in spite of the
disagreement of the rural residents. After some conflicts, however, a new project was proposed instead
the construction of the bridge of Sant Pere appeasing the both communities.
During three centuries, the bridge withstood a series of damages produced due its precarious
construction, even after a collapse of one of the arches in March 15, 1791. Some years after this
collapse, the bridge passed by some small reconstructions and by a restauration in 1828, but its
maintenance through the years was always precarious, regarding the economic problems from that
time. In 1845, the commissary of Protection and Security from the Party of Terrassa, Antonio Ruperto,
diagnosed the imminent danger of the bridges collapse by the pass of carriages. In 1890, a new
reparation process had started in the bridge, finishing in April, 1891.
On the XX century, with the loss of the town of Sant Pere added to Terrassa in 1904 , the bridge
sustained for fifty years an intense traffic of people, even with all the predestination about its possible
demolishment. The protection of the bridge was insured on the seventies by the sensitivity from the
Terrassa residents towards its historical and artistic heritage, which enabled, after some years, the
inclusion of the bridge of Sant Pere as an integral element to the project of the Vallparads Urban Park.
Today, the bridge is well conserved, according to the Catalogue of Buildings of Historical and Artistic
Interest.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 2
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

The bridge is a structural composition of arches, pillars and walls. The structure is a stone faced wall
filled with a poor material. Even, a modernization project was stopped because the inner part of the
structure would not be able to support the self-weight of the new structure [1].
The maximum high is 19.3m, length of 57m and width of 3.5m. The bridge is composed by three different
arches (figure 1), the central arch is an arch of mid-point and with the largest span, and the lateral arches
are pointed arches [1].
The impost stone is supported on the pillars and on the lateral walls in each extreme. The ensemble is
composed by stone masonry in the surface with different types of stones and different qualities. The
inner part of the walls, arches and pillars are filled by a non-compacted and soft material formed by
gravel, sand and earth [1].

57

(b)
(a) (a)
19

(a) Pointed Arch

(b) MidPoint Arch

Figure 1. Diagram of St. Pere Bridge.

ACTUAL STATE OF DECAY AND DAMAGE OF THE STRUCTURE

DECAY OF MATERIALS

Delamination of Red Rocks

The Original external arches were built in red rocks (rocks with a high content of clay), which present
delamination decay, as its possible to see with the figures 2 and 3. The stone develops different layers
which are parallel to the surface until they are defragmented in little laminar pieces. A big portion of the
arches were replaced by bricks. Then, we can think the level of decay by delamination of these rocks
was severe enough to be replaced.

Figure 2. General view of delamination of the unit. Figure 3. Detail of a piece of rock that has fallen off.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 3
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

Pulverization of Mortar
At the base in the central arch we could observe that the process of loss of mortar is advanced. From a
distance its not possible to see the mortar in the joints. The mortar has been come power due to a
chemical process. This problem is localized in this part, is not a generalized issue (figures 4 and 5).

Figure 4. Pulverization of mortar. Figure 5. Pulverization of mortar.

Mechanical Decay on ground because of Public

Because this is a bridge that connects two parts of the town there are a lot of people that currently transit
the bridge. Because of this, we can observe that the bricks on the ground have been worn out and there
have been interventions to maintain the floor in good condition (figures 6 and 7).

Figure 6. Photograph of the bridge from the top. Figure 7. Detail of the Mechanical Decay.

Vegetation (Biofilm)
There is a cape of biofilm in the top part of the bridge (figures 8 and 9). This decay explains why the
bricks have been worn out, because the biofilm maintains humidity and the bricks are rather weaker. We
can observe this decay in the part inside of the bridge, where there is a transit of public.

Figure 8. Consequence of Biofilm on Bricks. Figure 9. Detail of Biofilm on top of the rocks.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 4
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

Vegetation (Plants and Roots) and animals

As the bridge is close to a hill it has a lot of plants nearby and that are also growing close and inside the
bridge (figure 10). The roots create small cracks among the bridge and the plants accumulate humidity.
Additionally, there are holes in the old part of the bridge which we think is due to the original
construction process (figure 11). There has not been an intervention related to these holes, but there is
not a major issue so far, at least since the creation of the bridge in the year 1581, unless the existence of
pigeon nests (figure 12).

Figure 10. Detail of growing roots. Figure 11. Holes of bridge Figure 12. Detail of pigeon nests.

Graffiti
Because the arch in inserted in a park, it is exposed to pedestrians and eventually vandalism (in this
case graffiti). It might not seem as a big issue, but as you can see the cleaning of graffiti is rather
complex and if it is done too often, it will cause material loss (figures 13 and 14).

Figure 13. Graffiti inside the Arch (Pedestrian Trail) Figure 14. Detail of Graffiti

Structural Damage

Incompatibility of materials
The bridge is considered as a three leaf wall where there is a rock external leave (rocks with a high
content of clay) and filled with internal rubble masonry. The interlocking between materials has not been
adequate because there has been separation of the materials. Due to the heterogeneity between the
filling material (grave and earth) and the stone masonry as facing the cracks for incompatibility of the
materials are evident and important (figures 15 and 16). Additionally they dont present interlocking
between the external surface and the filling material.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 5
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

Figure 15. General view of Three Leaf Figure 16. Detail of Incompatibility of Figure 17. Detail of Incompatibility of
Wall Materials Materials

The figure 17 is a complex situation; the crack could be due to the combination of two effects, both
related with compatibility of materials. As we know, the arches are formed with solid stones bigger than
the stones of the masonry but this arch collapsed and was been reconstructed with bricks in the part of
the arch, the interlocking in the connection bricks-masonry is not visible, on the contrary an important
crack is present. Additionally, some centuries after, the arch was filled with a superficial and thing wall in
stone masonry without any kind of interlocking between the ancient and the new intervention; the
consequence of this incompatibility of materials and time of construction could generate also a crack of
incompatibility.

Buckling
Along the longest wall of the bridge (figure 18) a process of buckling was detected, due to the poor
quality of the inner material (unconsolidated grave, sand and earth). According with the figures 19 and
20, the low vertical load acting on the upper part of the bridge is enough to deform this material and
generate an empty internal cavity. The result of the actual and active process is a curvature along the
verticality of the wall.
In this order the ideas, the mechanical properties of the inner material are really bad because the upper
part of the bridge does not support the transit of cars or any other source of important loads.

Figure 18. General view of identified Figure 19. Buckling due Figure 20. Buckling schema indicating a possible
damage deformation in the inner inner separation inside the wall of the bridge.
part. [2]

The buckling of the wall is actually distinguishable. Then it has to be analyzed to determine the level of
importance of the process. We recommend monitoring the deformation of the wall and determine if its
active or inactive, the speed of deformation, total deformation, history research to determine the
possibility and viability of a future intervention.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 6
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

PREVIOUS INTERVENTIONS

In this point we will aboard and identify the historical and architectural alterations: destruction, additions,
insertions, modifications. To which extent have they contributed to existing damage and deformation.
For this we will identify damage and decay as two of the most relevant issues of the actual bridge.

History remarks
During the XVIII century, the bridge was repaired because one of the lateral arches collapsed due to the
crossing of the carriage which transported the merchandises. The initial idea was connect the town with
the commercial activity and it had been used to transport [1].
From 1956 the city hall was interested in expanding the bridge in order to facility the flow of the people
and the tourism. The project was to build a road supported on cantilevers, which came out from the
inside of the bridge and that would give sufficient rigidity to withstand own loads and live loads of the
structure [1].
However the project was stopped when they discovered the inner part of the structure is filled by grave,
sand and earth. Finally the project was canceled. In our point of view was an excellent decision, because
it could be a reason of important damage and maybe of total collapse of the bridge.

Possible extension of the bridge

In the figure 21 is possible to observe, at the beginning of the XX century, the bridge was composed by
three arches, the terrain slope was important in both sides. Some years after, in the figure 22, the right
side has approximately the middle of the first slope and actually, the land has gotten its internal friction
angle enough to stop the movement of the land process.

Figure 21. Ancient view of the bridge (1900) [1]. Figure 22. View of the bridge in 1939 [1].

Filling of the Arch

The bridge is composed by 4 arches in stone masonry, actually in brick masonry too, the two external
arches were filled with a similar material of the arch. Actually, the most evident problem in the bridge is
the material fall of one of them. The presence of the initial arch lets to the loads follow the shape gives by
the general behavior of an arch. In this way, the part filled with material was unloaded and finally is falling
down. In the figure 23, in spite of the presence of vegetation, is possible see the first arch was opened.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 7
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

Figure 23. Filling of the Arch.

This intervention has not been very useful because the arch receives the external forces and the thrust
line acts describing the arch built, and then the filling is unloaded and has been collapsing. We can add
that the filling did not have any use more than aesthetic, it was a very thin layer in comparison to the
whole thickness of the arch.
Additionally, this intervention represents a problem of incompatibility of materials, which has caused an
important crack of incompatibility of materials between the filling material and the ancient material (see
Structural damage Incompatibility of materials).

Rendering
In general the walls are not covered, except for the specific parts where we found some problems. For
example, in the inner part of the central arch, an important process of pulverization is actually active,
then, the upper part of this arch is covered by a layer of mortar. At some of the external walls, a problem
of buckling is visible. Then, in the bottom of the wall are an important area covered by mortar. Our
hypothesis about the presence of some layers of mortars is oriented to hide the consequences of the
problems (figures 24 and 25).

Figure 24. Detail of Lateral Wall. Figure 25. Detail of the Inside Arch.

Replacement of Bricks
The state of the units of the masonry is good. The rocks used for the construction of the bridge are not a
special or unique type of material; in general they are different type of stones with different shapes and
colors. Some specific units present a chemical decay due different process of weathering. Apparently,
the process of weathering of the masonry units in specific points had been important, because some
specific points are repaired by blocks. Even the principal arches have too bricks in the place of the red
stones, which suffer a process of delamination (figures 26 to 29). According to the history, during the
XVIII century the arch collapsed and was rebuilt with bricks [1].

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 8
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

Figure 26. Detail of Top Part of Bridge Figure 27. Detail of Pedestrian Part of Bridge

Figure 28. Detail of Top Part of arch Figure 29. Detail of the reconstructed arch

Steel
In the figure 30, there is evidence of steel tensioner. It is located near to the upper part of the wall that
extends the bridge. The hypothesis is oriented to prevent the buckling due the poor quality of the inner
material that is generating the buckling on the wall.

About the figure 31, it is just a peace of steel nailed on the bridge. Fortunately its presence did not carry
the appearance of cracks or damage.

Figure 30. Detail of Tensor.

Figure 31. Detail of Steel element.

Mesh
In the new part of the arch, we can observe a hole that can eventually be a pigeon nest or accumulate
vegetation and humidity (figures 32 and 33). In order to prevent pigeons from installing their nests there
has been a Mesh. Personally we think that this is not a good intervention, because it is very invasive to
the human eye and anti-aesthetical.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 9
SA1 Report 4: Saint Pere Bridge in Terrassa

Figure 32. Mesh intervention to block a hole. Figure 33. The mesh intervention on the upper part of the bridge.

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding the history, some actual situations are clearer. The difference between the construction
material of the arches is explained by the fact one part of the bridge collapsed and were rebuilt. The
process of buckling is also explained by the history research, the inner part of the structure is not a
consolidated and good material (discovered and characterized by an event of reconstruction). The
history allows understanding the actual situation of the monument.
In general, the bridge is in good conditions, even knowing that its construction was very precarious.
Some works of maintenance although poor interventions had been implemented, as the repointing
and substitution of bricks. Maybe they are very distinguishable and different from the original concept of
the monument, but they have been useful for the state of the bridge.
The presence of some layers of mortar shows some problems that had been hidden.
The intervention in one of the lateral arches was not successful; the arch was filled with a thin layer of
stone masonry, actually this wall is falling down because is an unloaded part of the arch. This
intervention generated a zone with a bad image of the monument and helped to the formation of an
important compatibility crack.
A process of buckling is being developed because the material inside the structure is poor. Its a slow
process but it must to be monitoring in order to investigate the real level of damage.

REFERENCES

[1] Verdaguer, J. (2007) LES XACRES DEL PONT DE SANT PERE. TERME 22. 169 193.
[2] Pere Roca. SA1.09 DAMAGE AND COLLAPSE MECHANISMS (PART 1) (Slides of class)
Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.

Erasmus Mundus Programme

ADVANCED MASTERS IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL

CONSTRUCTIONS 10