Shear Capacity Prediction of Confined Masonry Walls Subjected to Cyclic Lateral Loading

Abstract

This study describes an analytical proposal to predict lateral shear capacity of confined masonry walls that fail by diagonal splitting, where the maximum shear is evaluated as the dowel action of confined columns' reinforcement added to the shear capacity of the plain masonry panel. In order to validate the proposed approach, experimental test results and gathered data from literature were used. The experimental tests concerned two confined clay brick walls subjected to different level of gravity load and cyclic lateral loading. The applicability of some empirical formulae found in literature regarding the stiffness degradation was investigated. Good correlation between the predicted lateral resistance using the proposed approach and all data was achieved.

In‐plane and out‐of‐plane behavior of confined masonry walls for various toothing and openings details and prediction of their strength and stiffness

“…In case of CM walls, the part of shear capacity of the wall can also be attributed to the tie-column reinforcement. The vertical reinforcement in tie-columns contributes to shear capacity because of the dowel action [29]. Therefore, the maximum lateral resistance, R max of the CM wall can be obtained by adding the shear resistance provided by the brick panel R w,s and vertical rebars, R rv,d (Equation (3)).…”

“…The model proposed by Tomaževič and Klemenc [12,27] is based on the stress condition at the center of wall (second hypothesis, HT2) and also considers the shear resistance because of the interaction forces C i , which develops at the interface between confining elements and masonry panel when subjected to lateral loading. Bourzam et al [29] further extended the methodology of Tomaževič and Klemenc [12,27] and also proposed a model to evaluate maximum shear resistance of wall when the failure is governed by the biaxial combination of principal stresses (Equation (16b)). The shear capacity of the CM wall as per Bourzam et al will be the minimum value obtained from two failure criteria (Equations (16a) and (16b)).…”

“…However, the relationship proposed by Chinese code [30] and Rai et al [31] only explicitly considered the contribution of intermediate tie-column in CM walls. On the contrary, most of the models did not differentiate between interior and boundary confining elements and simply considered total amount of reinforcing steel provided in CM walls [13,[24][25][26][27]29].…”

“…The elastic stiffness K el of a masonry wall can be defined by taking into consideration for the shear and flexural deformation of the wall under lateral loads. Using similar approach, Flores and Alcocer [25], Tomaževič and Klemenc [12], and Bourzam et al [29] derived the elastic stiffness of the CM wall. Various existing models to predict the in-plane stiffness of CM walls are listed in Table III.…”

Force‐displacement model for solid confined masonry walls with shear‐dominated failure mode

“…Some studies for determination of ultimate strength of CM proposed modifications for previously proposed relations, for example, for Tomazevic and Klemenc [11] relation by Calderini et al [12] and Amouzadeh [13]. Moreover, Bourzam et al [14] modified the relation proposed by Tomazevic and Klemenc [11] considering two different failure modes in the wall, that is, failure by diagonal tension and biaxial combination of principal stresses. Also, they considered the effects of dowel action in determination of the strength of the CM assuming shear failure in the ties.…”