Analytical and empirical models for predicting the drift capacity of modern unreinforced masonry walls

Wilding, Bastian Valentin; Beyer, Katrin

doi:10.1002/eqe.3053

Cited by 13 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fig. 4a shows a comparison of the above-mentioned approaches to a database of shear-compression tests [9]. The database contains the results of 61 quasi-static cyclic shear-compression tests.…”

Section: Proposed Equations 241 Shear Failurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Der vorgeschlagene Ansatz und die normativen Vorgaben zur Vorhersage der Schubtragfähigkeit werden mit der Datenbank zu den Schub-Druck-Versuchen [9] in Bild 5 verglichen. Für die Berechnung gemäß SIA D 0237 [12] werden die folgenden Annahmen getroffen: Die Druckfestigkeit senkrecht zu den Stoßfugen beträgt f y = 0,3 f u [18], [29].…”

Section: Vergleichunclassified

“…The proposed approach and code provisions for predicting the shear force capacity are compared to the shear-compression test database [9] in Fig. 5.…”

Section: Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The performance of Eq. (8) in predicting the initial E-modulus of wall tests from the database [9], is compared to code formulations estimating the initial elastic modulus simply as a multiple of the masonry compressive strength. For the proposed approach, the initial elastic moduli of the wall tests are back-calculated from the measured initial stiffness using a G/E ratio of 0.25 while for the EC6-approach [31] and the provision according to TMS 402 [32] they are obtained using a G/E ratio of 0.4 as suggested by the respective codes in order to remain consistent throughout the whole prediction process.…”

Section: Initial Elastic Modulus Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Formulations based on Wilding and Beyer [7], [8] are proposed and compared to currently used code approaches. Furthermore, a mechanics-based model for the ultimate drift capacity as developed in Wilding and Beyer [8], [9] is presented along with code approaches for this key parameter. All models are validated with results from a database [9] of 61 shear-compression tests.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Prediction of stiffness, force and drift capacity of modern in‐plane loaded URM walls

Wilding

Beyer

2018

Mauerwerk

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unreinforced masonry (URM) walls show a limited horizontal in‐plane deformation capacity, which can lead to an unfavorable seismic response. To predict this response, the walls' effective stiffness, shear force and drift capacity are required. While mechanics‐based models for the force capacity are well established, such approaches are largely lacking for the effective stiffness and the drift capacity. The mostly empirical code equations for the two latter parameters lead to often unsatisfactory and, in the case of drift capacities, sometimes unconservative predictions when compared to test results. This article summarises recently developed simple closed‐form equations for the effective stiffness, the shear force and the drift capacity. Furthermore, it compares said formulations and currently used code equations to a database of shear compression tests. It shows that the novel models capture the effective stiffness and the drift capacity more accurately than current code equations. The shear force capacity is predicted with a similar reliability, yet using a very simple formulation.

show abstract

Section: Proposed Equations 241 Shear Failurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Vergleichunclassified

“…The proposed approach and code provisions for predicting the shear force capacity are compared to the shear-compression test database [9] in Fig. 5.…”

Section: Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Initial Elastic Modulus Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Prediction of stiffness, force and drift capacity of modern in‐plane loaded URM walls

Wilding

Beyer

2018

Mauerwerk

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A three‐dimensional macroelement for modelling the in‐plane and out‐of‐plane response of masonry walls

Vanin

Penna

Beyer

2020

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The seismic performance of unreinforced masonry buildings is commonly assessed using equivalent frame modelling. Its computational efficiency allows for a large number of analyses to be conducted, which are often required to account for epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties. To obtain a full description of the building response, in-plane and out-of-plane failure modes need to be considered, though previous elements for equivalent frame models of unreinforced masonry buildings only account for the in-plane response. This paper presents the formulation of a three-dimensional macroelement for modelling the dynamic in-plane and out-of-plane behaviour of masonry panels, which extends the approach of a previously developed macroelement to simulate the in-plane response. The proposed three-node, three-dimensional macroelement is implemented in the software OpenSees and describes the main features of the in-plane and out-of-plane behaviour of a masonry wall, including second-order geometrical effects and a coupled shear/flexural response. It also allows for the use of complex material models. The proposed element is used to simulate experimental results for in-plane shear-compression tests and out-of-plane free vibration tests of masonry panels. The implemented element, as well as the example models, is openly shared through the repository https://github.com/ eesd-epfl/OpenSees/wiki. K E Y W O R D S 3D macroelement, equivalent frame modelling, masonry, out-of-plane response, seismic analysis 1 | INTRODUCTION Unreinforced masonry buildings are among the most vulnerable under earthquake loading, and as such, are responsible for much of the economic and social impact of a seismic event. Because their seismic behaviour is heavily influenced by nonlinear phenomena, such as cracking or crushing, that is already apparent at moderate deformation levels, it is common to conduct nonlinear seismic analyses when assessing or even designing such buildings. To assist in this regard, several approaches have been proposed in the literature for modelling structural masonry, varying in the level of detail. In detailed micromodelling approaches, 1 the heterogeneity of the material is treated explicitly, whereas in simplified micromodels, joints are modelled by interface elements. 2,3 Less computationally expensive models include homogenised micromodels 4-6 and models in which damage is smeared into a continuum. 7-9 As an alternative to finite element modelling, discrete elements have been used for blocky structures, 10,11 accounting for the complex dynamics of interacting blocks. Although such modelling approaches comprise different levels of complexity and are, as a result,

show abstract

Experimental Study of the Wall Size Effect on the Seismic Behaviour of Unreinforced Masonry Walls

Inzunza Araya,

Saloustros,

Beyer

2024

Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analytical and empirical models for predicting the drift capacity of modern unreinforced masonry walls

Cited by 13 publications

References 19 publications

Prediction of stiffness, force and drift capacity of modern in‐plane loaded URM walls

Prediction of stiffness, force and drift capacity of modern in‐plane loaded URM walls

A three‐dimensional macroelement for modelling the in‐plane and out‐of‐plane response of masonry walls

Experimental Study of the Wall Size Effect on the Seismic Behaviour of Unreinforced Masonry Walls

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About