Encyclopedia of Earthquake Engineering

2015 Edition
| Editors: Michael Beer, Ioannis A. Kougioumtzoglou, Edoardo Patelli, Siu-Kui Au

Masonry Box Behavior

  • Rui MarquesEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35344-4_155


Box action; Building global behavior; Diaphragm effect; Structural connectivity


This entry deals with the box behavior of masonry structures, which is a major hypothesis for the application of seismic assessment procedures based on the in-plane response of the walls, when using performance-based approaches for seismic safety. A general description is also made of the unreinforced and confined masonry building typologies, regarding the constructive technique, industrial development, and applicability. Methods and procedures are presented for the seismic assessment and safety verification of masonry buildings, which are applied to the case of a dwelling.

Masonry has been continually used for building, employing very different materials and bond patterns, but the main distinction between masonry constructions probably is the presence or absence of rigid floor diaphragms well connected to the walls. According to this aspect, masonry constructions can be divided in two...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Brzev S (2007) Earthquake-resistant confined masonry construction. National Information Center of Earthquake Engineering (NICEE), KanpurGoogle Scholar
  2. Brzev S, Astroza M, Moroni MO (2010) Performance of confined masonry buildings in the February 27, 2010 Chile earthquake. EERI report, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, OaklandGoogle Scholar
  3. Calderini C, Cattari S, Lagomarsino S (2008) Numerical investigations on the seismic behaviour of confined masonry walls. In: Proceedings of the 2008 seismic engineering conference commemorating the 1908 Messina and Reggio Calabria earthquake. AIP Conference Proceedings 1020, New York, pp 816–823Google Scholar
  4. Caliò I, Marletta M, Pantò B (2012) A new discrete element model for the evaluation of the seismic behaviour of unreinforced masonry buildings. Eng Struct 40:327–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Calliari R, Manzini CF, Morandi P, Magenes G, Remino M (2010) User manual of ANDILWall, version 2.5. ANDIL Assolaterizi, RomeGoogle Scholar
  6. EN 1996-1-1 (2005) Eurocode 6: design of masonry structures – part 1–1: general rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures. European Committee for Standardization, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  7. EN 1998-1 (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance – part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  8. Fajfar P, Fischinger M (1988) N2 – a method for nonlinear seismic analysis of regular buildings. In: Proceedings of the 9th world conference on earthquake engineering, vol 5, Tokyo-Kyoto, pp 111–116Google Scholar
  9. Gouveia JP, Lourenço PB (2007) Masonry shear walls subjected to cyclic loading: influence of confinement and horizontal reinforcement. In: Proceedings of the 10th North American Masonry conference (paper 042), St. LouisGoogle Scholar
  10. Gruppo Sismica (2013) Theoretical manual of the 3DMacro software, beta version. Gruppo Sismica, CataniaGoogle Scholar
  11. IBC (2008) Italian building code, Ministerial Decree dated of 14-01-2008. Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, RomeGoogle Scholar
  12. Jäger W, Hirsch R, Masou R (2010) Product and system development in masonry construction under requirements of sustainable construction. In: Proceedings of the 8th international Masonry conference (keynote speech), Dresden (CD-ROM)Google Scholar
  13. Lagomarsino S, Penna A, Galasco A, Cattari S (2009) User guide of TreMuri (Seismic analysis program for 3D masonry buildings), version 1.7.34. University of GenoaGoogle Scholar
  14. Lourenço PB (2002) Computations of historical masonry constructions. Prog Struct Eng Mater 4(3):301–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lourenço PB, Vasconcelos G, Gouveia JP, Medeiros P, Marques R (2008) CBloco: handbook of structural design. Cerâmica Vale da Gândara SA, ViseuGoogle Scholar
  16. Magenes G (2006) Masonry building design in seismic areas: recent experiences and prospects from a European standpoint. In: Proceedings of the 1st European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology (keynote k9), GenevaGoogle Scholar
  17. Magenes G, Calvi GM, Kingsley R (1995) Seismic testing of a full-scale, two-story masonry building: test procedure and measured experimental response. In: Experimental and numerical investigation on a brick masonry building prototype: numerical prediction of the experiment. Report 3.0. Gruppo Nazionale per la Difesa dai Terremoti, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  18. Marques R, Lourenço PB (2011) Possibilities and comparison of structural component models for the seismic assessment of modern unreinforced masonry buildings. Comput Struct 89(21–22):2079–2091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marques R, Lourenço PB (2013) A model for pushover analysis of confined masonry structures: implementation and validation. Bull Earthquake Eng. 11(6):2133–2150 doi:10.1007/s10518-013-9497-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Parsekian GA, Hamid AA, Drysdale RG (2012) Behavior and design of structural masonry. EdUFSCar-Editora da Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  21. Saiidi M, Sozen MA (1981) Simple nonlinear seismic analysis of R/C structures. ASCE J Struct Div 107(5):937–953Google Scholar
  22. San Bartolomé A (1994) Masonry buildings: seismic behavior and structural design. Fondo Editorial, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, LimaGoogle Scholar
  23. Sullivan TJ, Priestley MJN, Calvi GM (eds) (2012) A model code for the displacement-based seismic design of structures, DBD12. IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  24. Tomaževič M (1978) The computer program POR. Report ZRMK. Institute for Testing and Research in Materials and Structures, LjubljanaGoogle Scholar
  25. Tomaževič M (1999) Earthquake-resistant design of masonry buildings, vol 1, Series on innovation in structures and construction. Imperial College Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Touliatos PG (1996) Seismic behaviour of traditionally-built constructions: repair and strengthening. In: Courses and lectures-international centre for mechanical sciences. Springer, New York, pp 57–70Google Scholar
  27. Turnšek V, Čačovič F (1970) Some experimental results on the strength of brick masonry walls. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international brick Masonry conference. British Masonry Society, Stoke-on-Trent, pp 149–156Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Engineering Department, Civil Engineering SectionPontifical Catholic University of PeruLimaPeru