Seismicdesign
designand
andassessment
assessmentof
of
Masonry
Masonry Structures
Structures
Lesson 9, continued
October 2004
To perform a separate analysis for each storey, it is necessary to make assumptions on the
boundary conditions of the piers, i.e. on their rotational restraints: fixed-fixed, or fixed-
free, or other.
These assumptions are strongly affected by the strength and stiffness of the coupling
horizontal structural elements: plain unreinforced masonry spandrel beams, or r.c. slabs, or
r.c. ring beams, which may or may not crack or fail as horizontal loads increase.
The state of stress of these elements cannot be determined accurately on the basis of a
separate analysis for each storey, but only from a global analysis of the whole multi-storey
structure. In principle, only by knowing how much the coupling element are stressed can
the engineer judge if cracking or failure can be expected, and, as a consequence, what kind
of boundary conditions can be assumed for the piers.
A variation in the axial force of the piers may take place under the overturning effect of the
horizontal loads, affecting the flexural and shear strength of the individual piers. This effect
may not be of relevance in low-rise squat buildings, but it can be in a more general context.
Again, an evaluation of this effect can be made only very approximately with a separate
storey-by-storey analysis.
URM MASONRY
SPANDREL
BEAMS UNDER at first cracking
SEISMIC
ACTION
Vt = h t fv0
where: h is the section height of the masonry beam;
t is the width (thickness) of the beam
fv0 = is the shear strength in absence of compression.
maschio
nodo
MAS3D (Braga, PEFV (D’Asdia & SAM (Magenes, Della TREMURI (Lagomarsino,
Liberatore, Spera) Viskovic) Fontana, Bolognini) Penna & Galasco)
• Reliability of results:
• all the fundamental failure mechanisms should be accounted for with suitable
failure criteria;
• the model should give a good estimate of the overall deformational behaviour
under horizontal loads.
EQUIVALENT TRUSS
APPROACH
(Pagano et al., 1984-1990)
“Joint” element
TREMURI
(Lagomarsino, Penna,
Galasco 1997- today)
Beam-columns-type
elements with
internal degrees of
freedom and
coupling of
rotation/axial
displacement to
simulate rocking.
Allows dynamic
analysis also.
•Flexural (“rocking”) failure:a plastic hinge is introduced at the end of the effective
length where Mu is attained
•Shear failure: plastic shear deformation γ occurs when Vu is attained
effective
γ = shear deformation
length Heff
j'
rigid H2
offset
j
V
V
Spandrel
Shear force- Pier element element
V
shear V u
u
deformation
behaviour in
the case of αV
u
shear failure
mechanism γ
γ γ γ
1 2
γ = θu− ϕ
80
70 F.E.M.
SAM (w. brittle spandrels)
Total base shear (kN)
60
50
40
30
20
10
150
160
Wall D - Door wall
100 140
120
50
100
0 80
Exp. 1st cycle envelope
-50 60 Exp. 2nd cycle envelope
Exp. 3rd cycle envelope
40 SAM pushover analysis
-100
20
-150 0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Equivalent displacement δeq (mm)
Equivalent displacement δeq (mm)
1.22
2.25
1.45
2.25
1.45
19.12
2.25
1.45
2.25
1.63
2.25
0.64
3.70 1.05 1.74 1.05 2.73 1.05 2.03 2.56 2.03 1.05 2.73 1.05 1.74 1.05 3.70
29.26
1000 0.30
Analysis B
R.c. beams: elasto-plastic
800 0.24
beam elements (w. flexural Analysis C
hinging). 600 0.18
Analysis G
20 5th FLOOR
Coupling elements (masonry soft storey
spandrels and r.c. beams) can
16 4th FLOOR
affect not only the strength,
global overturning
but also the overall deformed of cantilever walls
shape and collapse mechanism 12
3rd FLOOR
Height (m)
2nd FLOOR
8
1st FLOOR
4
Analysis A
Analysis C
soft storey Analysis G
0
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
Horizontal displacement (m)
500
100
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03
Spostame nto [m]
The non linear static analysis is based on the application of gravity loads and of a
horizontal force system that, keeping constant the relative ratio between the acting
horizontal forces, is scaled in order to monotonically increase the horizontal displacement
of a control point on the structure (for example, the centre of the mass of the roof), up to
the achievement of the ultimate conditions.
A suitable distribution of lateral loads should be applied to the building. At least two
different distributions must be applied:
-a “modal” pattern, based on lateral forces that are proportional to mass multiplied by the
displacement associated to the first mode shape
- a “uniform” pattern, based on lateral forces that are proportional to mass regardless of
elevation (uniform response acceleration).
Lateral loads shall be applied at the location of the masses in the model, taking into
account accidental eccentricity.
The relation between base shear force and the control displacement (the “capacity
curve”) should be determined by pushover analysis for values of the control
displacement ranging between zero and a sufficiently large value, which must exceed by
a suitable margin the displacement demand which will be estimated under the design
earthquake (target displacement) .
The target displacement is calculated as the seismic demand derived from the design
response spectrum by converting the capacity curve into an idealized force-displacement
curve of an equivalent single-degree-of-freedom system.
For the evaluation of the displacement demand of the equivalent s.d.o.f. system,
different procedures can be followed, depending on:
• how the seismic input is represented (acceleration spectra, displacement spectra,
composite A-D spectra);
• how the inelastic and hysteretic behaviour of the structure is accounted for (equivalent
viscous damping, ductility demand, energy dissipation demand).
(kN)
chosen force 500
Forza [KN]
distribution. Plot
Base shear
400
capacity curve
300
and determine the
performance 200
limit states of
100
interest
0
0 0.01 0.0146 0.02
Spostamento [m]
Roof displacement (m)
Γ = ∑m iΦ 2i
Φvibration
array that represents the mass displacement in the first mode of
of the structure, in the considered direction, normalized
mΦ
to the unit value of the relative component of the control point.
∑ i i
2000 Fb
Fb
1800
F* =
1600 Γ
Base shear [kN]
1400
1200 Step 2: determine an
1000 equivalent bilinear
800
600
s.d.o.f. system
400
200 dc
0
dc
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 d* =
Roof displacement [cm] Γ
N m*
m* = ∑ mi Φ i T * = 2π
i =1 k*
800
Capacity
F*max curve
700
F*y
600
0.8F*max
0.7F*max
500 Sistema equivalente SDOF
TETTO
[KN]
Equivalent
(kN)
400 Bilineare
bilinear
Forza
Base shear
SDOF
300
200
100
0
0 d*y 0.01 d*max 0.02
Displacement
Spostamento [m] (m)
if T*<TC
d e , max ⎡ T ⎤
∗
d max = ⎢1 + (q * − 1 ) C ⎥ ≥ d e , max
q* ⎣ T *⎦
elastic acceleration
m* S e (T * ) spectrum
q = *
d* =
dc Fy*
∗
d max Γ
N m*
m* = ∑ mi Φ i T * = 2π
i =1
k*
2000
Stato Limite DS
1800
1600
du Φu
µu = = Ultimate ductility
de Φe
q2 +1 q behaviour factor
µu ≥
2 (force reduction factor),
specified by code (e.g.
1.5-2.0 for urm)
a S ⋅ β0
H du , j ≥ Vdesign , j = υ j ⋅ Wtot ⋅ S d (T ; q ) = k j ⋅ Wtot ⋅
g q
•Evaluate ratio between interstorey shear Vj of the storey j being considered and the
total base shear: N
υ j = V j / Fbase Vj = ∑F
i= j
i
•Calculate d*max= d*y [1+(q*-1)Tc/T1] (not greater than q d*y ) and check d*max≤ du