Numerical and Experimental Behavior of Two-Story Confined Masonry Structure Subjected to Cyclic Loads
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This research presents the numerical and experimental results of lateral cyclic loading applied on a two-story confined masonry structure utilizing local materials and standards. Two half-scale confined masonry structures were constructed using clay masonry units, confining columns, tie beams, and reinforced concrete slabs. The assemblies were tested up to failure using a displacement controlled loading methodology under vertical self-weight and lateral reversed cyclic loading. The walls of the assemblies have varying perforations (solid / windows / doors) to examine the influence of perforation on in-plane and out-of-plane performance. A strengthened assembly with an exterior layer of ferrocement has been used and this suggested upgrading approach enhanced the lateral resistance of the confined assembly by about (61–95%) while improving ductility and total energy absorbed by 27%. The maximum lateral drift at failure have been decreased to (23–31%), however the corresponding load for the first visible fracture have been raised by (150–175%). Furthermore, total failure has been delayed for the strengthened walls (all sides, particularly the perforated sides). Comparing distorted forms, fracture patterns, and capacity curves of finite element models included in this research yielded excellent agreement.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Masonry and Concrete Structural Analysis · Building materials and conservation · Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. ANSYS® Academic Research, Release 12.0, ANSYS, Inc.
2. Ashraf, M., et al. (2012). Seismic behavior of unreinforced and confined brick masonry walls before and after ferrocement overlay retrofitting. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 6, 665–688.10.1080/15583058.2011.599916 ↗
3. ASTM E519-02. (2002). Standard test method for diagonal tension (Shear) in masonry assemblages.
4. ATC-58-1. (2011). Seismic performance assessment of building. Volume 1, prepared by ATC for FEMA.
5. Bhargavi, S., & Pradeep Kumar, R. (2015). Comparison between the effect of lintel and lintel band on the global performance of load bearing walls and masonry infilled RC frames. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 6(2), 68–78.
6. Choayb, B., Jean-Patrick, P. L. A. S. S. I. A. R. D., Messabhia, A., Ple, O., & Guenfoud, M. (2021). Analytical and numerical study of double-panel confined masonry walls. Journal of Building Engineering., 39, 102322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.10232210.1016/j.jobe.2021.102322 ↗
7. Chourasia, A., et al. (2019). Experimental investigation of seismic strengthening technique for confined masonry buildings. Journal of Building Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.10083410.1016/j.jobe.2019.100834 ↗
8. El-Diasity, M., Okail, H., Kamal, O., & Said, M. (2015). Structural performance of confined masonry walls retrofitted using ferrocement and GFRP under in-plane cyclic loading. Engineering Structures, 94, 54–69.10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.03.035 ↗
9. ElGawady, M. A., Lestuzzi, P., & Bandoux, M. (2005). In-plane seismic response of URM walls upgraded with FRP. Journal of Composites for Construction, 2005, 524–535.10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:6(524) ↗
10. El-Salakawy, T., & Hamdy, G. (2021). Experimental and numerical investigation of strengthening of openings in masonry walls using steel bars and steel wire mesh. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2021.199782810.1080/19648189.2021.1997828 ↗
11. European Committee for Standardisation. (1995). EC6, design of masonry structures. Part 1–1: General rules for buildings—Rules for reinforced and un-reinforced masonry, ENV1996 1–1: Bruxels: CEN.
12. Flores L.E., & Alcocer S.M. (1996). Calculated response of confined masonry structures. 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Mexico, paper No. 1830.
13. Flores, L.E., Mendoza, J.A., & Reyes. C. (2004). Ensaye de mures de mamposterfa con y sin refuerzo alrededer de la abortun. 14th National Congress on Structure Engineering, Mexico; 2004.
14. Garcí, A. B., et al. (2019). Diagonal compression tests on masonry wallets coated with mortars reinforced with glass fibers. Materials and Structures. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-019-1360-y10.1617/s11527-019-1360-y ↗
15. Gostic, S., & Zarnic, R. (1999). Cyclic lateral response of masonry infilled RC frames and confined masonry walls. Proceedings of the 8th North American Masonry Conference, Austin, 3–6 June 1999, 477–488.
16. Gupta, A., & Singhal, V. (2020). Strengthening of confined masonry structures for in-plane loads: A review. International Conference on Materials, Mechanics and Structures. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/936/1/01203110.1088/1757-899X/936/1/012031 ↗
17. Hose, Y., & Seible, F. (1999). Performance evaluation database for concrete bridge components, and systems under simulated seismic loads. PEER report 1999/11, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center College of Engineering, University of California, Berkley, U.S.A.
18. Ishibashi, K., Meli, R., Alcocer, S.M., Leon, F., & Sanchez, T.A. (1992). Experimental study on earthquake-resistant design of confined masonry structure. Proceedings of the tenth world conference on earthquake engineering, Madrid, Spain, 3469–3474.
19. Kaushik, H. B., Rai, D. C., & Jain, S. K. (2007). Stress–strain characteristics of clay brick masonry under uniaxial compression. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 19(9, ASCE), 728–739.10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:9(728) ↗
20. Kuroki, M., Kikuchi, K., Nonaka, H., & Shimosako, M. (2012). Experimental study on reinforcing methods using extra RC elements for confined masonry walls with openings. 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering 2012. Lisbona, Portugal.
21. Lourenco, P. B. (2002). Computations on historic masonry structures. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials, 4(3), 301–319.10.1002/pse.120 ↗
22. Lourenço, P. B., Milani, G., Tralli, A., & Zucchini, A. (2007). Analysis of masonry structures: Review of and recent trends of homogenization techniques. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 34, 1443–1457.10.1139/L07-097 ↗
23. Milani, G. (2011). Simple homogenization model for the non-linear analysis of in-plane loaded masonry walls. Computers & Structures, 89, 1586–1601.10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.05.004 ↗
24. Page, A. W. (1978). Finite element model for masonry. Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, 104(8), 1267–1285.10.1061/JSDEAG.0004969 ↗
25. Perez, G. et al. (2009). Testing of masonry walls with different lengths: Kinematics and lateral stiffness. XVII National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Puebla, Mexico.
26. RILEM TC: 76-LUM. (1994). Diagonal tensile strength tests of small wall specimens. In RILEM (International Union of Laboratories and Experts in Construction Materials), Recommendations for the testing and use of constructions materials, London: E&FN SPON, p. 488–89.
27. Roca, P., Cervera, M., Gariup, G., & Pelà, L. (2010). Structural analysis of masonry historical constructions, classical and advanced approaches. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering., 17(3), 299–325.10.1007/s11831-010-9046-1 ↗
28. Roca, P., Cervera, M., Pelà, L., Clemente, R., & Chiumenti, M. (2013). Continuum FE models for the analysis of Mallorca Cathedral. Engineering Structures, 46, 653–670.10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.08.005 ↗
29. Sandeep, M.V., Renukadevi, S.M., & Somanath. (2013). Influence of reinforcement on the behavior of hollow concrete blocks masonry prism under compression—an experimental and analytical approach. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 106–110.10.15623/ijret.2013.0213019 ↗
30. Shanour, A. S., Mahmoud, A. A., Adam, M. A., & Said, M. (2014). Experimental investigation of concrete beams reinforced with GFRP bars. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 5(11), 154–164.
31. Singhal, V., & Rai, D. C. (2018). Behaviour of confined masonry walls with openings under in-plane and out-of-plane loads. Earth Spectra, 34(2), 807–841.10.1193/061416EQS097M ↗
32. Tarek, S. S., et al. (2020). Experimental and numerical study of bond between masonry and near-surface mounted steel bars. Case Studies in Construction Materials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2020.e0046810.1016/j.cscm.2020.e00468 ↗
33. Tomazevic, M., & Klemence, I. (1997). Verification of seismic resistance of confined masonry buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 26, 1073–1088.10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199710)26:10<1073::AID-EQE695>3.0.CO;2-Z ↗
34. Willam, K.J., & Warnke, E.D. (1975). Constitutive model for the triaxial behavior of concrete. In: Proceedings of International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering: Seminar on Concrete Structures Subjected to Triaxial Stress, ISMES, Bergamo, Italy, p. 174186.
35. Yacila, J., Camata, G., Salsavilca, J., & Tarque, N. (2019). Pushover analysis of confined masonry walls using a 3D macro-modelling approach. Engineering Structures, 201, 109731.10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109731 ↗
36. Yan, H., Minghui, K., & Zifa, W. (2011). Nonlinear analysis for monotonic and low cyclic loading. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 94–96, 406–415.10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.127.406 ↗
37. Yanez, F., Astroza, M., Holmberg, A., & Ogaz, O. (2004). Behavior of confined masonry shear walls with large openings. 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, No. 343.
38. Yoshimura, K., Kikuchi, K., Kuroki, M., Nonaka, H., Tae Kim, K., Wangdi, R., & Oshikata, A. (2004). Experimental study on effect of height of lateral forces, column reinforcement and wall reinforcement on seismic behavior of confined masonry walls. 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, No. 1597.
39. Yu, P., Silva P., & Nanni, A. (2007). In-plane response of URM walls strengthened with GFRP grid reinforced polyurea. 10th North American Masonry Conference, USA, pp 466–477.