Skip to main content

Effect of near-field earthquake on masonry structure

Abstract

Directivity and fling step effects are the prominent features of near-field (NF) ground motion and therefore the response of the structures would be quite different near to the fault rupture than far away from the fault. This paper deals with the analysis of unreinforced brick masonry (URBM) buildings under NF earthquakes and modelling of brick masonry is done by using the finite element method (FEM). The masonry has been used commonly for construction in many developing countries and also many heritage buildings were constructed with the same material. Masonry buildings have shown considerable damage during several earthquakes and it is necessary to observe its behaviour under NF earthquake which is pretty different from far-field (FF) ground motions. A set of eight ground motions has been considered for the case of FF and NF (comprises of directivity and fling step effects), are applied at the base of a single-story house in the z-direction. The objective of the study is to find out the difference in the behaviour of the structure under near- and far-field earthquakes. It is realised that the base shear, Von-Mises stress, displacement, and drift ratio have a significant effect on frequency ratio (ω/ωn), the amplitude of predominant frequency, and the distribution of Fourier amplitudes in Fourier spectra. The effect of NF fling step effect is much higher among all responses as compared to the NF directivity effect and FF ground motions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Agnihotri, P., Singhal, V., & Rai, D. C. (2013). Effect of in-plane damage on out-of-plane strength of unreinforced masonry walls. Engineering Structures, 57, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Agrawal, P., & Shrikhande, M. (2006). Earthquake resistant design of structures. New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ahmed, A., Afreen, A., & Moin, K. (2017). State of art review: behaviour of masonry structures under gravity and seismic loads. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 10, 202–214.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Alavi, B., & Krawinkler, H. (2001). Effects of near-fault ground motions on frame structures (p. 301). Stanford: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Belmouden, Y., & Lestuzzi, P. (2009). An equivalent frame model for seismic analysis of masonry and reinforced concrete buildings. Construction and Building Material, 23(1), 40–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bhandari, M., Bharti, S. D., Shrimali, M. K., & Datta, T. K. (2018). The numerical study of base-isolated buildings under near-field and far-field earthquakes. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 22(6), 989–1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bhandari, M., Bharti, S. D., Shrimali, M. K., & Datta, T. K. (2019). Seismic fragility analysis of base-isolated building frames excited by near-and far-field earthquakes. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 33(3), 04019029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bilgin, H., & Hysenlliu, M. (2020). Comparison of near and far-fault ground motion effects on low and mid-rise masonry buildings. Journal of Building Engineering, 30, 101248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bose, D. C., & Paul, M. M. (2014). Non-linear seismic analysis of masonry structures. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 3, 1367–1378.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bozorgnia, Y., & Bertero, V. V. (2004). Earthquake engineering: from engineering seismology to performance-based engineering. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Bray, J. D., & Rodriguez-Marek, A. (2004). Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 24(11), 815–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Castellazzi, G., D’Altri, A. M., de Miranda, S., & Ubertini, F. (2017). An innovative numerical modeling strategy for the structural analysis of historical monumental buildings. Engineering Structures, 132, 229–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen, S. Y., Moon, F. L., & Yi, T. (2008). A macro-element for the nonlinear analysis of in-plane unreinforced masonry piers. Engineering Structures, 30(8), 2242–2252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Council, B. S. S. (1997). NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. FEMA-273, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, pp 2–12.

  15. FEMA 356. (2000). Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC

  16. FEMA P. (2009). Quantification of building seismic performance factors. 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon

  17. IS 4326. (1993). Earthquake resistant design and construction of buildings-code of practice

  18. Jacob, A., & Menon, A. (2014). Non-linear modelling and seismic analysis of masonry structures—a review. In: Second European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology, Istanbul

  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), 728–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lagomarsino, S., Penna, A., Galasco, A., & Cattari, S. (2013). TREMURI program: an equivalent frame model for the nonlinear seismic analysis of masonry buildings. Engineering Structures, 56, 1787–1799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Li, S., & Xie, L. L. (2007). Progress and trend on near-field problems in civil engineering. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 20(1), 105–114.

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lourenço, P. B., Mendes, N., Ramos, L. F., & Oliveira, D. V. (2011). Analysis of masonry structures without box behavior. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 5(4–5), 369–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lourenço, P. B., Avila, L., Vasconcelos, G., Alves, J. P. P., Mendes, N., & Costa, A. C. (2013). Experimental investigation on the seismic performance of masonry buildings using shaking table testing. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 11(4), 1157–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lubliner, J., Oliver, J., Oller, S., & Oñate, E. (1989). A plastic-damage model for concrete. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 25(3), 299–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Magenes, G., & Penna, A. (2011). Seismic design and assessment of masonry buildings in Europe: recent research and code development issues. In: Proceedings of the 9th Australasian masonry conference

  26. Maheri, M. R., & Najafgholipour, M. A. (2012). In-plane shear and out-of-plane bending capacity interaction in brick masonry walls. In: Proceedings of 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, Portugal

  27. Manual, A. U. (2014). Abaqus theory guide. Version 6.14. USA: Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mendes, N., Lourenço, P. B., & Campos-Costa, A. (2014). Shaking table testing of an existing masonry building: assessment and improvement of the seismic performance. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 43(2), 247–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Milani, G. (2011). Simple homogenization model for the non-linear analysis of in-plane loaded masonry walls. Computers and Structures, 89(17–18), 1586–1601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology earthquake Model HAZUS®MH MR4. (2003). Technical Manual FEMA Mitigation Division. Washington, DC

  31. Oyarzo-Vera, C. A., Abdul Razak, A. K., & Chouw, N. (2009). Modal testing of an unreinforced masonry house. Portonovo, Ancona, Italy: In International operational modal analysis conference.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Pacific earthquake engineering research (PEER) ground motion database. Berkeley: PEER Center, University of California

  33. Rodriguez-Marek, A., & Bray, J. D. (2006). Seismic site response for near-fault forward directivity ground motions. Journal of Geotechnical and Geo-environmental Engineering, 132(12), 1611–1620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M., Bharti, S., & Datta, T. (2019). Seismic energy dissipation in semi-rigid connected steel frames. In: Proceedings of the 16th world conference on seismic isolation. Energy Dissipation and Active Vibration Control of Structures. Russia: Saint Petersburg

  35. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M. K., Bharti, S. D., & Datta, T. K. (2020a) Seismic fragility evaluation of semi-rigid frames subjected to near-field earthquakes. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 176, 106384

  36. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M. K., Bharti, S. D., & Datta, T. K. (2020b) Seismic energy loss in semi-rigid steel frames under near-field earthquakes. In Recent advances in computational mechanics and simulations (pp. 431–443). Singapore: Springer

  37. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M. K., Bharti, S. D., & Datt, T. K. (2020c). Evaluation of responses of semi-rigid frames at target displacements predicted by the nonlinear static analysis. Steel and Composite Structures, 36(4), 399–415.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M. K., Bharti, S. D., & Datta, T. K. (2020d). Behavior of semi-rigid steel frames under near-and far-field earthquakes. Steel and Composite Structures, 34(5), 625–641.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M. K., Bharti, S. D., & Datta, T. K. (2020e). Sensitivity of lateral load patterns on the performance assessment of semi-rigid frames. In: proceedings of the 7th Nirma University international conference on engineering (NUICONE 2019). Technologies for sustainable development, 21–22 November 2019 (p. 62). Ahmedabad: CRC Press

  40. Somerville, P. G., Smith, N. F., Graves, R. W., & Abrahamson, N. A. (1997). Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity. Seismological Research Letters, 68(1), 199–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Valente, M., Barbieri, G., & Biolzi, L. (2017). Seismic assessment of two masonry Baroque churches damaged by the 2012 Emilia earthquake. Engineering Failure Analysis, 79, 773–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Yang, J. N., & Agrawal, A. K. (2002). Semi-active hybrid control systems for nonlinear buildings against near-field earthquakes. Engineering Structures, 24(3), 271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

This manuscript is a part of the thesis, the principal author is Adeela Afreen, co-guide is Dr. Akil Ahmed and guide is Prof. Khalid Moin.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Akil Ahmed.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Afreen, A., Ahmed, A. & Moin, K. Effect of near-field earthquake on masonry structure. Asian J Civ Eng 22, 895–910 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-021-00353-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Near-field earthquakes
  • Unreinforced brick masonry
  • Non-linear time history analysis
  • Base shear
  • Von-mises stress
  • Drift ratio