Computational Modelling of Damage Progression in Unreinforced Masonry Walls via DEM

Yıl 2024, , 125 - 147, 01.05.2024

Bora Pulatsu , Kağan Tuncay

https://doi.org/10.18400/tjce.1323977

Cited By: 1

Öz

Unreinforced masonry (URM) walls are the common load-bearing elements for old masonry buildings and heritage structures. As witnessed from the past and recent earthquakes, URM walls may demonstrate various collapse mechanisms along with different crack patterns influenced by the wall aspect ratio, vertical pre-compression load, opening size and ratio, among many other factors. Typically, the mortar joints and unit-mortar interfaces are the weak planes where we expect to observe most failures, such as sliding, cracking and joint opening. However, it is not a straightforward task to simulate the structural behaviour and the failure mechanism of URM walls, including the crack localizations and propagation through the mortar joints, using the standard continuum-based computational models given the composite and highly nonlinear nature of the material. In this context, the present research offers a discontinuum-based approach to simulate the damage progression in URM walls subjected to combined shear-compression loading using the discrete element method (DEM). The masonry walls are represented via distinct elastic blocks interacting through point contacts to their surroundings. It is aimed to present the effect of the local fracture mechanism on the macro response of the masonry walls via validated DEM-based numerical models that can address all possible fracture mechanisms occurring at the unit-mortar interfaces. An innovative damage monitoring technique relying on the stress state at the point contacts is implemented and utilized to explore the associated damage progression in URM walls. The results show the great potential of the adopted modelling strategy to better understand the mechanics of URM walls and indicate the effect of strength properties of masonry constituents on the overall in-plane capacity of the load-bearing walls.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Discrete Element Method, Contact Mechanics, Masonry, In-Plane Behavior, Fracture Mechanisms

Kaynakça

• Tomaževič M. Shear resistance of masonry walls and Eurocode 6: Shear versus tensile strength of masonry. Mater Struct Constr 2009;42:889–907. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-008-9430-6.
• Betti M, Galano L, Petracchi M, Vignoli A. Diagonal cracking shear strength of unreinforced masonry panels: a correction proposal of the b shape factor. Bull Earthq Eng 2015;13:3151–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9756-8.
• Roca P, Cervera M, Gariup G, Pela’ L. Structural analysis of masonry historical constructions. Classical and advanced approaches. Arch Comput Methods Eng 2010;17:299–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-010-9046-1.
• Aldemir A, Erberik MA, Demirel IO, Sucuoǧlu H. Seismic performance assessment of unreinforced masonry buildings with a hybrid modeling approach. Earthq Spectra 2013;29:33–57. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.4000102.
• Lourenço PB, Rots JG, Blaauwendraad J. Continuum model for masonry: Parameter estimation and validation. J Struct Eng 1998;124:642–52. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:6(642).
• Gonen S, Soyoz S. Investigations on the elasticity modulus of stone masonry. Structures 2021;30:378–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.01.035.
• Lourenço PB. Anisotropic softening model for masonry plates and shells. J Struct Eng 2000;126:1008–16.
• Foti F, Vacca V, Facchini I. DEM modeling and experimental analysis of the static behavior of a dry-joints masonry cross vaults. Constr Build Mater 2018;170:111–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.02.202.
• Mendes N, Zanotti S, Lemos J V. Seismic Performance of Historical Buildings Based on Discrete Element Method: An Adobe Church. J Earthq Eng 2020;24:1270–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1463879.
• Lemos J V. Discrete element modeling of the seismic behavior of masonry construction. Buildings 2019;9. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings9020043.
• Malomo D, DeJong MJ, Penna A. Influence of Bond Pattern on the in-plane Behavior of URM Piers. Int J Archit Herit 2019;00:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2019.1702738.
• Pulatsu B, Erdogmus E, Lourenço PB, Lemos J V., Tuncay K. Simulation of the in-plane structural behavior of unreinforced masonry walls and buildings using DEM. Structures 2020;27:2274–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.08.026.
• Murano A, Mehrotra A, Ortega J, Rodrigues H, Vasconcelos G. Comparison of different numerical modelling approaches for the assessment of the out-of-plane behaviour of two-leaf stone masonry walls. Eng Struct 2023;291:116466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116466.
• Gonen S, Pulatsu B, Erdogmus E, Karaesmen E, Karaesmen E. Quasi-static nonlinear seismic assessment of a fourth century A.D. Roman Aqueduct in Istanbul, Turkey. Heritage 2021;4:401–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage4010025.
• Mordanova A, de Felice G. Seismic Assessment of Archaeological Heritage Using Discrete Element Method. Int J Archit Herit 2020;14:345–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2018.1543482.
• Lourenço PB. Computations on historic masonry structures. Prog Struct Eng Mater 2002;4:301–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/pse.120.
• Damiani N, DeJong MJ, Albanesi L, Penna A, Morandi P. Distinct element modeling of the in-plane response of a steel-framed retrofit solution for URM structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2023;52:3030–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3910.
• Szakály F, Hortobágyi Z, Bagi K. Discrete Element Analysis of the Shear Resistance of Planar Walls with Different Bond Patterns. Open Constr Build Technol J 2016;10:220–32. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874836801610010220.
• de Felice G. Out-of-plane seismic capacity of masonry depending on wall section morphology. Int J Archit Herit 2011;5:466–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2010.530339.
• Wilson R, Szabó S, Funari MF, Pulatsu B, Lourenço PB. A Comparative Computational Investigation on the In-Plane Behavior and Capacity of Dry-Joint URM Walls. Int J Archit Herit 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2023.2209776.
• Lemos J V. Discrete element modeling of masonry structures. Int J Archit Herit 2007;1:190–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583050601176868.
• Cundall PA. A computer model for simulating progressive, large-scale movements in blocky rock systems. Int. Symp. Rock Mech., vol. 2, Nancy: 1971, p. 47–65.
• Itasca Consulting Group Inc. 3DEC Three Dimensional Distinct Element Code 2013.
• Cundall PA, Detournay C. Dynamic relaxation applied to continuum and discontinuum numerical models in geomechanics. Rock Mech. Eng. Vol. 3 Anal. Model. Des., 2017, p. 45–90. https://doi.org/10.1201/b20402.
• Pulatsu B. Coupled elasto-softening contact models in DEM to predict the in-plane response of masonry walls. Comput Part Mech 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-023-00586-x.
• Sarhosis V, Dais D, Smyrou E, Bal İE, Drougkas A. Quantification of damage evolution in masonry walls subjected to induced seismicity. Eng Struct 2021;243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112529.
• Saygılı Ö, Lemos J V. Investigation of the Structural Dynamic Behavior of the Frontinus Gate. Appl Sci 2020;10:5821. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10175821.
• Çaktı E, Saygılı Ö, Lemos J V., Oliveira CS. Discrete element modeling of a scaled masonry structure and its validation. Eng Struct 2016;126:224–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.07.044.
• Casapulla C, Mousavian E, Argiento L, Ceraldi C, Bagi K. Torsion-shear behaviour at the interfaces of rigid interlocking blocks in masonry assemblages: experimental investigation and analytical approaches. Mater Struct Constr 2021;54. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-021-01721-x.
• Pulatsu B, Gonen S, Lourenço PB, Lemos J V., Hazzard J. Computational investigations on the combined shear–torsion–bending behavior of dry-joint masonry using DEM. Comput Part Mech 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-022-00493-7.
• Lourenço PB, Rots JG. Multisurface interface model for analysis of masonry structures. J Eng Mech 1997;123:660–8.
• Lemos J V. Block modelling of rock masses. Concepts and application to dam foundations. Rev Eur Génie Civ 2008;12:915–49. https://doi.org/10.3166/ejece.12.915-949.
• Vermeltfoort AT, Raijmakers T, Janssen HJM. Shear tests on masonry walls. In: Hamid AA, Harris HG, editors. 6th North Am. Mason. Conf., Philadelphia: The Masonry Society; 1993, p. 1183–93.
• Ganz HR, Thürlimann B. Tests on masonry walls under normal and shear loading. Zurich, Switzerland: 1984.
• Lourenço PB, Gaetani A. Recommended properties for advanced numerical analysis. Finite Elem. Anal. Build. Assess., New York: Routledge; 2022, p. 209–320. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429341564-4.
• Wilding BV, Dolatshahi KM, Beyer K. Shear-compression tests of URM walls: Various setups and their influence on experimental results. Eng Struct 2018;156:472–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.11.057.
• Sarhosis V, Sheng Y, Garrity SW. Computational modelling of clay brickwork walls containing openings. Int Mason Soc 2010;11:1743–52.
• Giamundo V, Sarhosis V, Lignola GP, Sheng Y, Manfredi G. Evaluation of different computational modelling strategies for the analysis of low strength masonry structures. Eng Struct 2014;73:160–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.05.007.
• Sarhosis V, Garrity SW, Sheng Y. Influence of brick-mortar interface on the mechanical behaviour of low bond strength masonry brickwork lintels. Eng Struct 2015;88:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.12.014.