Development and application of the truss method on masonry walls to determine the in-plane behavior: A parametric study

Abstract

Determination of the capacity curve and structural behavior of masonry structures is a challenge. While consistent results can be obtained through detailed numerical approaches, the process becomes more complex. Therefore, simplified approaches come to the fore for analysis. This study focuses on this point and proposes a new method that uses a truss model to determine the in-plane behavior of masonry structures. In the development of the proposed method, several important parameters such as the inclination angle, cross-sectional area, mesh size and material parameters are considered. This study specifically conducts a parametric analysis to determine the effect of different angle values on the results. The mate-rial model, which employs a macro modeling approach, was adopted from the literature and held constant during the numerical analysis; thus, its effects were excluded from the scope of this study. Variable conditions include mesh size, aspect ratio, compression stress level, and the inclination angle. A series of experimental tests on masonry walls was selected as the reference model, and a numerical model was created using the proposed approach. A total of seventy-two numerical analyses were performed. Consequently, the results were evaluated, and recommendations were made regarding the application of the new model.

Keywords

• Capacity Curve
• Damage Formation
• In-Plane Behavior
• Masonry Wall
• Simplified Truss Model
• The Inclination Angle

References

1. REFERENCES
2. [1] Siano R, Sepe V, Camata G, Spacone E, Roca P, Pela L. Analysis of the performance in the linear field of Equivalent-Frame Models for regular and irregular masonry walls. Eng Struct 2017;145:190210. [CrossRef]
3. [2] Foraboschi P, Vanin A. Non-linear static analysis of masonry buildings based on a strut-and-tie modeling. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2013;55:4458. [CrossRef]
4. [3] Verbrugge M. Modelling in-plane behaviour of masonry shear walls through a predefined crack pattern at macro level. Delft University of Technology, 2017.
5. [4] Kafkas U. Yığma duvar elastik davranışının düzlem çubuk elemanlarla mikro modellemesi (yüksek lisans tezi). Kütahya: Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü; 2015 [Turkish]
6. [5] Girgin SC, Moharrami M, Koutromanos I. Nonlinear beam-based modeling of RC columns including the effect of reinforcing-bar buckling and rupture. Earthq Spect 2018;34:12891309. [CrossRef]
7. [6] Lu Y, Panagiotou M. Three-dimensional cyclic beam-truss model for nonplanar reinforced concrete walls. J Struct Eng 2014;140:04013071. [CrossRef]
8. [7] D’Altri AM, de Miranda S. Prediction of flexural drift capacity in masonry walls through a nonlinear truss-based model. Int J Solids Struct 2022; 243:111593. [CrossRef]

9. [8] Salinas D, Koutromanos I, Leon RT. Nonlinear truss modeling method for masonry-infilled reinforced concrete frames. Eng Struct 2022;262:114329. [CrossRef]
10. [9] Pirsaheb H, Wang P, Moradi MJ, Milani G. A Multi-Pier-Macro MPM method for the progressive failure analysis of perforated masonry walls in-plane loaded. Eng Fail Anal 2021;127:105528. [CrossRef]
11. [10] Pirsaheb H, Wang P, Milani G, Habibi M. A Multi-Pier-Macro MPM method for the progressive failure analysis of full scale walls in two way bending. Eng Fail Anal 2022;131:105862. [CrossRef]
12. [11] Ridwan M, Yoshitake I, Nassif AY. Two-dimensional fictitious truss method for estimation of out-of-plane strength of masonry walls. Construct Build Mater 2017;152:2438. [CrossRef]
13. [12] Zhao L, Song Z, Feng H, Zhao M, Pirsaheb H. A Multi Pier (MP) method for the evaluation FRP delamination on flat and curve masonry substrates. Compos Struct 2022; 294:115793. [CrossRef]
14. [13] Pirsaheb H, Moradi MJ, Milani G. A Multi-Pier MP procedure for the non-linear analysis of in-plane loaded masonry walls. Eng Struct 2020; 212:110534. [CrossRef]
15. [14] Gargari MM. Development of novel computational simulation tools to capture the hysteretic response and failure of reinforced concrete structures under seismic loads (master thesis). Virginia, USA: The Faculty of The Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; 2016.
16. [15] Magenes G, Morandi P, Penna A. Test results on the behaviour of masonry under static cyclic in plane lateral loads. Enhanced safety and efficient construction of masonry structures in Europe, Project No. Coll – Ct – 2003 – 500291, University of Pavia, 2008.
17. [16] Magenes G, Penna A, Galasco A, Da Pare M. In-plane cyclic shear tests of undressed double-leaf stone masonry panels, 8th International Masonry Conference 2010, Dresden.
18. [17] Magenes G, Penna A, Galasco A, Rota M. Experimental characterisation of stone masonry mechanical properties, 8th International Masonry Conference 2010b; 247-56, Dresden.
19. [18] Araujo ASFF. Modelling of the seismic performance of connections and walls in ancient masonry buildings. University of Minho, 2014.
20. [19] Nayak CB. A state-of-the-art review of vertical ground motion (VGM) characteristics, effects and provisions. Innov Infrastruct Solut 2021; 6:124. [CrossRef]
21. [20] Işık E, Avcil F, Büyüksaraç A, İzol R, Arslan MH, Aksoylu C, et al. Structural damages in masonry buildings in Adıyaman during the Kahramanmaraş (Turkiye) earthquakes (Mw 7.7 and Mw 7.6) on 06 February 2023. Eng Fail Anal 2023;151:107405. [CrossRef]
22. [21] Zengin B, Koçak A. The effect of the bricks used in masonry walls on characteristic properties. Sigma J Eng Nat Sci 2017;35:667677.
23. [22] Aktan S, Doran B. Constitutive modeling of masonry walls under in-plane loadings. Sigma J Eng Nat Sci 2016;7:165171. [Turkish]
24. [23] Reyes E, Galvez JC, Casati MJ, Cendon DA, Sancho JM, Planas J. An embedded cohesive crack model for finite element analysis of brickwork masonry fracture. Eng Fract Mech 2009;76:19301944. [CrossRef]
25. [24] Yuen TYP, Deb T, Zhang H, Liu Y. A fracture energy based damage-plasticity interfacial constitutive law for discrete finite element modelling of masonry structures. Comput Struct 2019;220:92113. [CrossRef]
26. [25] Wang H, Dyskin A, Dight P, Pasternak E, Hsieh A. Review of unloading tests of dynamic rock failure in compression. Eng Fract Mech 2020;225:106289. [CrossRef]
27. [26] Bolat Ç, Bilge G, Gökşenli A. An investigation on the effect of heat treatment on the compression behavior of aluminum matrix syntactic foam fabricated by sandwich infiltration casting. Mater Res 2021;24:e20200381. [CrossRef]
28. [27] Spetz A, Denzer R, Tudisco E, Dahlblom O. Phase-field fracture modelling of crack nucleation and propagation in porous rock. Int J Fract 2020;224:3146. [CrossRef]
29. [28] Nadjai A, O’Garra M, Ali F. Finite element modelling of compartment masonry walls in fire. Comput Struct 2003;81:19231930. [CrossRef]
30. [29] Lourenço PB. Computational strategies for masonry structures. Delft University of Technology, 1996.
31. [30] Thuyet VN, Deb SK, Dutta A. Mitigation of seismic vulnerability of prototype low-rise masonry building using U-FREIs. J Perform Constr Facil 2018;32:04017136. [CrossRef]
32. [31] Demirtaş Y, Yurdakul Ö, Avşar Ö. Lattice modelling of substandard RC beam-column joints considering localization issues. Structures 2023;47:25152530. [CrossRef]
33. [32] Güner Y, Nuhoğlu A. Analysis of in-plane behaviour of masonry structures by truss model approach. Süleyman Demirel Univ J Nat Appl Sci 2022;26:479489. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
34. [33] Ercan E, Arısoy B, Hökelekli E, Nuhoğlu A. Estimation of seismic damage propagation in a historical masonry minaret. Sigma J Eng Nat Sci 2017;35:647666.
35. [34] Pereira JM, Correia AA, Lourenço PB. In-plane behaviour of rubble stone masonry walls: Experimental, numerical and analytical approach. Construct Build Mater 2021;271:121548. [CrossRef]
36. [35] Turkish Building Earthquake Code. Resmi Gazete 2018; Sayı: 30364 (Mükerrer) [Turkish