Parametric Evaluation of Interface Properties for Simplified Micro-Modelling of Masonry Walls

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 489 - 505, 15.03.2026

Alper Çelik

https://doi.org/10.34248/bsengineering.1846533

https://izlik.org/JA72SB59NT

Öz

This study presents a systematic numerical investigation of hollow clay brick masonry wall panels using a simplified micro-modelling approach in which mortar joints are not modelled as separate solid layers. Instead, the joints are represented by surface-based cohesive zone models (CZM) governed by traction–separation relations. The main objective is to clarify, from a user-oriented perspective, how variations in key interface parameters influence the in-plane response of vertically perforated masonry walls. To this end, a one-factor-at-a-time parametric strategy was adopted to isolate individual effects. The interface normal and shear stiffnesses (Knn, Kss, Ktt), maximum normal traction capacity (tn), cohesion (c), friction coefficient (μ), and Mode I–II fracture energies (GIC and GIIC) were varied independently within predefined ranges while all other properties were kept constant. In total, 25 finite element models were analyzed. Hollow brick units were modelled in three dimensions with their actual geometry to preserve the discontinuous contact condition at the bed joints. The nonlinear response of the units was described using a concrete damaged plasticity (CDP) model previously calibrated for the same material system. Results were assessed through global performance indicators (peak load, displacement at peak load, stiffness, and energy dissipation capacity) together with stress, damage, and interface slip (CSLIPEQ) distributions at the peak load. The analyses indicate that parameters governing shear transfer along the joints play a dominant role in the structural response and strongly control the initiation, spread, and localization of interface slip bands. In contrast, parameters associated with the normal direction lead to relatively limited changes under the considered loading condition. Fracture energies mainly regulate the softening rate and damage evolution, therefore controlling the post-peak regime; in combination with frictional resistance, they shape the transition toward more localized or more distributed failure mechanisms. Overall, the study provides a practical cohesive modelling framework to interpret interface-parameter effects, guide model calibration, and support sensitivity assessments for hollow brick masonry systems modelled with simplified approaches in commercial finite element software.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Hollow brick masonry , Surface-based cohesive zone model , Traction–separation law , Diagonal compression , Simplified micro-modelling

Etik Beyan

Ethics committee approval was not required for this study because of there was no study on animals or humans.

Kaynakça

• Abdulla, K. F., Cunningham, L. S., & Gillie, M. (2017). Simulating masonry wall behaviour using a simplified micro-model approach. Engineering Structures, 151, 349–365.
• Adhikari, R. K., Parammal Vatteri, A., & D’Ayala, D. (2023). Seismic performance assessment of low-rise unreinforced and confined brick masonry school buildings using the applied element method. Buildings, 13(1), 159.
• Alforno, M., Monaco, A., Venuti, F., & Calderini, C. (2021). Validation of simplified micro-models for the static analysis of masonry arches and vaults. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 15(8), 1196–1212.
• Bolhassani, M., Hamid, A. A., Lau, A. C., & Moon, F. (2015). Simplified micro modeling of partially grouted masonry assemblages. Construction and Building Materials, 83, 159–173.
• Brasile, S., Casciaro, R., & Formica, G. (2010). Finite element formulation for nonlinear analysis of masonry walls. Computers & Structures, 88(3–4), 135–143.
• Burnett, S., Gilbert, M., Molyneaux, T., Beattie, G., & Hobbs, B. (2007). The performance of unreinforced masonry walls subjected to low-velocity impacts: Finite element analysis. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 34(8), 1433–1450.
• Çaktı, E., Saygılı, Ö., Lemos, J. V., & Oliveira, C. S. (2016). Discrete element modeling of a scaled masonry structure and its validation. Engineering Structures, 126, 224–236.
• Çelik, A. (2026). Seismic resilience of masonry buildings with a novel arch-type hollow brick (ArchBrick): Multi-scale numerical assessment from unit to building level. Engineering Structures, 353, 122190.
• Çelik, A., Anıl, Ö., Mercimek, Ö., Akkaya, S. T. (2025c). Investigation of mechanical properties of masonry materials under compressive loading: Experimental and numerical study. Politeknik Dergisi, 28(2), 565–572. https://doi.org/10.2339/politeknik.1478067
• Çelik, A., Kocaman, İ., Mercimek, Ö., Anıl, Ö., Fener, M., Çelik, B., & Milani, G. (2025b). Understanding roots of failure of historical Ottoman monumental buildings by means of advanced finite element modelling: The effect of the 1939 Erzincan earthquake on Nafiz Pasha Bath-house and Izzet Pasha Mosque. Engineering Failure Analysis, 179, 109811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2025.109811
• Çelik, A., Mercimek, Ö., Anıl, Ö., & Taciroglu, E. (2025a). Bond-slip models for textile reinforced mortar strengthened masonry walls. Engineering Structures, 343, 121263.
• Chen, D., Wu, H., & Fang, Q. (2023). Simplified micro-model for brick masonry walls under out-of-plane quasi-static and blast loadings. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 174, 104529.
• Chetouane, B., Dubois, F., Vinches, M., & Bohatier, C. (2005). NSCD discrete element method for modelling masonry structures. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 64(1), 65–94.
• D’Altri, A. M., De Miranda, S., Castellazzi, G., & Sarhosis, V. (2018). A 3D detailed micro-model for the in-plane and out-of-plane numerical analysis of masonry panels. Computers & Structures, 206, 18–30.
• Dassault Systèmes. (2020). ABAQUS/Standard and ABAQUS/Explicit (Version 20). Dassault Systèmes.
• Dhanasekar, M., & Haider, W. (2008). Explicit finite element analysis of lightly reinforced masonry shear walls. Computers & Structures, 86(1–2), 15–26.
• Dilsiz, A., Kocaman, İ., Mercimek, Ö., Ismail, S. H., Çelik, A., & Anıl, Ö. (2025). Field observations and numerical modeling of the collapse mechanism of the Habibi Neccar Mosque during the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes. Engineering Failure Analysis, 179, 109767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2025.109767
• Dimitri, R., De Lorenzis, L., & Zavarise, G. (2011). Numerical study on the dynamic behavior of masonry columns and arches on buttresses with the discrete element method. Engineering Structures, 33(12), 3172–3188.
• Drougkas, A. (2022). Macro-modelling of orthotropic damage in masonry: Combining micro-mechanics and continuum FE analysis. Engineering Failure Analysis, 141, 106704.
• Drougkas, A., Roca, P., & Molins, C. (2019). Experimental analysis and detailed micro-modeling of masonry walls subjected to in-plane shear. Engineering Failure Analysis, 95, 82–95.
• Eslami, A., Ronagh, H. R., Mahini, S. S., & Morshed, R. (2012). Experimental investigation and nonlinear FE analysis of historical masonry buildings: A case study. Construction and Building Materials, 35, 251–260.
• Farneti, E., Ávila, F., Cavalagli, N., & Ubertini, F. (2024). Collapse analysis of a masonry arch bridge using the applied element method. Engineering Research Express, 6(3), 035109.
• Grande, E., Imbimbo, M., & Sacco, E. (2013). Finite element analysis of masonry panels strengthened with FRPs. Composites Part B: Engineering, 45(1), 1296–1309.
• Guragain, R., Worakanchana, K., Mayorca, P., & Meguro, K. (2006). Simulation of brick masonry wall behavior under cyclic loading using applied element method. Seisan Kenkyu, 58(6), 531–534.
• Karbassi, A., & Nollet, M. J. (2013). Performance-based seismic vulnerability evaluation of masonry buildings using applied element method in a nonlinear dynamic-based analytical procedure. Earthquake Spectra, 29(2), 399–426.
• Khattak, N., Derakhshan, H., Thambiratnam, D. P., Malomo, D., & Perera, N. J. (2023). Modelling the in-plane/out-of-plane interaction of brick and stone masonry structures using applied element method. Journal of Building Engineering, 76, 107175.
• Kumar, N., Barbato, M., Rengifo-López, E. L., & Matta, F. (2022). Capabilities and limitations of existing finite element simplified micro-modeling techniques for unreinforced masonry. Research on Engineering Structures and Materials, 8(3), 463–490. https://doi.org/10.17515/resm2022.408st0226
• Lemos, J. V. (2007). Discrete element modeling of masonry structures. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 1(2), 190–213.
• Lemos, J. V. (2019). Discrete element modeling of the seismic behavior of masonry construction. Buildings, 9(2), 43.
• Li, T., & Atamturktur, S. (2014). Fidelity and robustness of detailed micromodeling, simplified micromodeling, and macromodeling techniques for a masonry dome. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 28(3), 480–490.
• Malomo, D., Pinho, R., & Penna, A. (2018). Using the applied element method for modelling calcium silicate brick masonry subjected to in-plane cyclic loading. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 47(7), 1610–1630.
• Mayorca, P., & Meguro, K. (2003). Modeling masonry structures using the applied element method. Seisan Kenkyu, 55(6), 581–584.
• Pandey, B. H., & Meguro, K. (2004, August). Simulation of brick masonry wall behavior under in-plane lateral loading using applied element method. In 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (pp. 1–6).
• Pantò, B., Cannizzaro, F., Caddemi, S., & Caliò, I. (2016). 3D macro-element modelling approach for seismic assessment of historical masonry churches. Advances in Engineering Software, 97, 40–59.
• Pantò, B., Cannizzaro, F., Caliò, I., & Lourenço, P. B. (2017). Numerical and experimental validation of a 3D macro-model for the in-plane and out-of-plane behavior of unreinforced masonry walls. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 11(7), 946–964.
• Pantò, B., Silva, L., Vasconcelos, G., & Lourenço, P. B. (2019). Macro-modelling approach for assessment of out-of-plane behavior of brick masonry infill walls. Engineering Structures, 181, 529–549.
• Rafiee, A., & Vinches, M. (2013). Mechanical behaviour of a stone masonry bridge assessed using an implicit discrete element method. Engineering Structures, 48, 739–749.
• Rots, J. G., & Blaauwendraad, J. (1995). Two approaches for the analysis of masonry structures: Micro and macro-modeling. Heron, 40(4).
• Salvalaggio, M., Bernardo, V., & Lourenço, P. B. (2024). Exploring seismic fragility and strengthening of masonry built heritage in Lisbon (Portugal) via the applied element method. Engineering Structures, 320, 118890.
• Sarhosis, V., & Lemos, J. V. (2018). A detailed micro-modelling approach for the structural analysis of masonry assemblages. Computers & Structures, 206, 66–81.
• Sarhosis, V., Bagi, K., Lemos, J. V., & Milani, G. (Eds.). (2016). Computational modeling of masonry structures using the discrete element method. IGI Global.
• Smoljanović, H., Živaljić, N., & Nikolić, Ž. (2013). A combined finite-discrete element analysis of dry stone masonry structures. Engineering Structures, 52, 89–100.
• Smoljanović, H., Živaljić, N., Nikolić, Ž., & Munjiza, A. (2018). Numerical analysis of 3D dry-stone masonry structures by combined finite-discrete element method. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 136, 150–167.
• Tóth, A. R., Orbán, Z., & Bagi, K. (2009). Discrete element analysis of a stone masonry arch. Mechanics Research Communications, 36(4), 469–480.
• Tzamtzis, A. D., & Asteris, P. G. (2003, June). Finite element analysis of masonry structures: Part I—Review of previous work. In 9th North American Masonry Conference (pp. 101–111).
• 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.
• Zerin, A. I., Hosoda, A., Salem, H., & Amanat, K. M. (2017). Seismic performance evaluation of masonry infilled reinforced concrete buildings utilizing verified masonry properties in applied element method. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology, 15(6), 227–243.