Towards a Multiscale Scheme for Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Masonry Structures with Damage

  • Savvas P. TriantafyllouEmail author
  • Eleni N. Chatzi
Part of the Computational Methods in Applied Sciences book series (COMPUTMETHODS, volume 37)


In this work, a three dimensional multiscale formulation is presented for the analysis of masonry structures based on the multiscale finite element formulation. The method is developed within the framework of the Enhanced Multiscale Finite Element Method. Through this approach, two discretization schemes are considered, namely a fine mesh that accounts for the micro-structure and a coarse mesh that encapsulates the former. Through a numerically derived mapping, the fine scale information is propagated to the coarse mesh where the numerical solution of the governing equations is performed. Inelasticity is introduced at the fine mesh by considering a set of internal variables corresponding to the plastic deformation accumulating at the Gauss points of each fine-scale element. These additional quantities evolve according to properly defined smooth evolution equations. The proposed formalism results in a nonlinear dynamic analysis method where the micro-level state matrices need only be evaluated once at the beginning of the analysis procedure. The accuracy and computational efficiency of the proposed scheme is verified through an illustrative example.


Multiscale analysis Hysteresis Masonry Textile reinforcement 



This work has been carried out under the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation for Research Grant #200021_146996: “Hysteretic Multi/Scale Modeling for the Reinforcing of Masonry Structures”.


  1. 1.
    Chesi C, Binda L, Parisi MA (2010) Seismic damage to churches: Observations from the L’Aquila, Italy, earthquake and considerations on a case-study. Advanced Materials Research, 133–134:641–646Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dizhur D, Ingham J, Moon L, Griffith M, Schultz A, Senaldi I, Magenes G, Dickie J, Lissel S, Centeno J, Ventura C, Leite J, Lourenco P (2011) Performance of masonry buildings and churches in the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Bull NZ Soc Earthq Eng 44(4):279–296Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Binda L, Gatti G, Mangano G, Poggi C, Sacchi LG (1992) The collapse of the civic tower of Pavia: a survey of the materials and structure. Mason Int 6:11–20Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Verstrynge E, Schueremans L, Van Gemert D, Wevers M (2009) Monitoring and predicting masonry’s creep failure with the acoustic emission technique. NDT E Int 42(6):518–523Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ElGawady M, Lestuzzi P, Badoux M (2005) In-plane seismic response of URM walls upgraded with FRP. J Compos Constr 9(6):524–535Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Habel K, Denarié E, Brühwiler E (2006) Structural response of elements combining ultrahigh-performance fiber-reinforced concretes and reinforced concrete. J Struct Eng 132(11):1793–1800Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    POLYMAST (2011) polyfunctional technical textiles for the protection and monitoring of masonry structures against earthquakes, final report, seventh framework programme capacities specific programme research infrastructures, project no.: 227887.
  8. 8.
    Antonopoulos C, Triantafillou T (2003) Experimental investigation of FRP-strengthened RC beam-column joints. J Compos Constr 7(1):39–49Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sivaraja SS, Thandavamoorthy TS, Vijayakumar S, Aranganathan SM, Dasarathy AK (2013) Preservation of historical monumental structures using fibre reinforced polymer (frp)—case studies. Procedia Eng 54(0):472–479. The 2nd international conference on rehabilitation and maintenance in civil engineering (ICRMCE)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Triantafillou TC, Fardis MN (1997) Strengthening of historic masonry structures with composite materials. Mater Struct 30(8):486–496Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Messervey TB, Zangani D, Fuggini C (2013) Sensor embedded textiles for the reinforcement, dynamic characterisation, and structural health monitoring of masonry structures. In: Proceedings of the 5th EWSHM 2010, Sorrento, Italy, June 28–July 2, pp 1075–1082Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fuggini C, Chatzi E, Zangani D (2013) Combining genetic algorithms with a meso-scale approach for system identification of a smart polymeric textile. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng 28(3):227–245Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krebber K, Liehr S, Witt J (2012) Smart technical textiles based on fibre optic sensors. In: Proceedings of SPIE 8421, OFS2012 22nd international conference on optical fiber sensorsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thomas K (1996) Masonry walls: specification and design. Butterworth Heinemann, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morton J, Haig G (2011) Designers’ guide to Eurocode 6: design of masonry structures: EN 1996-1-1: general rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry. ICE Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Binda L, Pina-Henriques J, Anzani A, Fontana A, Lourenco PB (2006) A contribution for the understanding of load-transfer mechanisms in multi-leaf masonry walls: testing and modeling. Eng Struct 28:1132–1148Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    BS EN 1998-3 (2005) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance. Assessment and retrofitting of buildingsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    American Society of Civil Engineers (2007) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings (41-06). American Society of Civil EngineersGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fardis M (2010) Advances in performance-based earthquake engineering. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Massart TJ, Peerlings RHJ, Geers MGD (2004) Mesoscopic modeling of failure and damage-induced anisotropy in brick masonry. Eur J Mech A Solids 72(8):1022–1059Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mojsilovic’ N (2011) Strength of masonry subjected to in-plane loading: a contribution. Int J Solids Struct 48(6):865–873Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lourenc’o P (1996) Computational strategies for masonry structures. In: PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Anthoine A (1992) In-plane behaviour of masonry: a literature review. Report EUR 13840 EN, commission of the European communities. Technical report, JRC—Institute for Safety Technology, Ispra, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen S-Y, Moon FL, Yi T (2008) A macroelement for the nonlinear analysis of in-plane unreinforced masonry piers. Eng Struct 30(8):2242–2252Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Peerlings RHJ, Geers MGD, Massart TJ (2007) An enhanced multiscale approach for masonry wall computations with localization of damage. Int J Numer Methods Eng 69(5):1022–1059Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Massart TJ, Peerlings RHJ, Geers MGD, Gottcheiner S (2005) Mesoscopic modeling of failure in brick masonry accounting for three-dimensional effects. Eng Fract Mech 72(8):1238–1253Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Efendiev Y, Hou TY (2009) Multiscale finite element methods. Surveys and tutorials in the applied mathematical sciences, vol 4. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhang HW, Wu JK, Lv J (2012) A new multiscale computational method for elasto-plastic analysis of heterogeneous materials. Comput Mech 49(2):149–169Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Triantafyllou SP, Chatzi EN (2014) A hysteretic multiscale formulation for nonlinear dynamic analysis of composite materials. Comput Mech 54(3):763–787Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Triantafyllou S, Koumousis V (2014) Hysteretic finite elements for the nonlinear static and dynamic analysis of structures. J Eng Mech 140(6):04014025Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lubliner J (2008) Plasticity theory. Dover Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nemat-Naser S (1982) On finite deformation elasto-plasticity. Int J Solids Struct 18(10):857–872Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Erlicher S, Bursi O (2008) Bouc-wen type models with stiffness degradation: thermodynamic analysis and applications. J Eng Mech 134(10):843–855Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Foliente GC, Singh MP, Noori MN (1996) Equivalent linearization of generally pinching hysteretic and degrading systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 25:611–629Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL, Zhu JZ (2005) The finite element method: its basis and fundamentals, 6th edn. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Armstrong PJ, Frederick CO (1966) A mathematical representation of the multiaxial Bauschinger effect. Technical report, report RD/B/N 731 central electricity generating boardGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Belytschko T, Lu YY, Gu L (1994) Element-free Galerkin methods. Int J Numer Methods Eng 37(2):229–256Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Triantafyllou SP, Koumousis VK (2012) A hysteretic quadrilateral plane stress element. Arch Appl Mech 82(10–11):1675–1687Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Washizu K (1983) Variational methods in elasticity and plasticity. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Chopra A (2006) Dynamics of structures. Prentice Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wu C, Hao H (2006) Derivation of 3d masonry properties using numerical homogenization technique. Int J Numer Methods Eng 66(11):1717–1737Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tsai SW, Wu EM (1971) A general a general theory of strength for anisotropic materials. J Compos Mater 5:58–80Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Flores S, Evans AG, Zok FW, Genet M, Cox B, Marshall D, Sudre O, Yang Q (2010) Treating matrix nonlinearity in the binary model formulation for 3d ceramic composite structures. Compos A: Appl Sci Manuf 41(2):222–229Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Jiang J-F, Wu Y-F (2012) Identification of material parameters for drucker-prager plasticity model for FRP confined circular concrete columns. Int J Solids Struct 49(3–4):445–456Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Papanicolaou CG, Triantafillou TC, Karlos K, Papathanasiou M (2007) Textile-reinforced mortar (TRM) versus FRP as strengthening material of URM walls: in-plane cyclic loading. Mater Struct 40(10):1081–1097Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hilber HM, Hughes TJR, Taylor RL (1977) Improved numerical dissipation for time integration algorithms in structural dynamics. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 5(3):283–292Google Scholar
  47. 47.
  48. 48.
    BS EN 1998-1 (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1: general rules seismic actions and rules for buildingsGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Abaqus version 6.11 [Computer software]. Dassault Systmes Simulia, Providence, RIGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringThe University of NottinghamNottinghamUK
  2. 2.Institute of Structural Engineering, ETHZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations