(Er Ajay Gupta) Study On Reinforced Concrete Frame PDF

TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY
INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING
PULCHOWK CAMPUS
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
M .Sc. Program in Structural Engineering
Thesis No: SS00147
STUDY ON REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME WITH SOLID INFILL

BRICK MASONRY USING ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
February, 2011
PULCHOWK CAMPUS
Thesis No: SS00147
STUDY ON REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME WITH SOLID INFILL

BRICK MASONRY USING ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK
A Thesis Submitted By
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
February, 2011
COPYRIGHT
The author has agreed that the Library, Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of
Engineering, Pulchowk Campus, may make this thesis freely available for inspection.
Moreover, the author has agreed that permission for extensive copying of this thesis
for scholarly purpose may be granted by the professor who supervised the thesis work
recorded herein or, in his absence, by the Head of the Department or concerning
M.Sc. program coordinator or the Dean of the Institute in which thesis work was
done. It is understood that the recognition will be given to the author of this thesis and
to the Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Engineering, Pulchowk Campus,
in any use of the material of this thesis. Copying or publication or other use of the
thesis for financial gain without approval of the Department of Civil Engineering,
Institute of Engineering, Pulchowk Campus and the authors written permission is
prohibited. Request for permission to copy or to make any other use of the material of
this thesis in whole or in part should be addressed to:
..
Head
Department of Civil Engineering
Pulchowk Campus
Institute of Engineering
Lalitpur, Nepal.
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the work contained in this thesis entitled Study on Reinforced
Concrete Frame with Solid Infill Brick Masonry using Artificial Neural
Network submitted by Mr. Ajay Kumar Gupta (Roll No. 065/MSS/r/102) for the
award of partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Science in Structural
Engineering of Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu is a
bonafide record of work carried out by him under my supervision and guidance, no
part of it has been published or submitted elsewhere for the award of degree.
..
Assoc. Prof. Prajwal Lal Pradhan
Date
Department of Civil Engineering

Institute of Engineering
Pulchowk Campus
Lalitpur, Nepal
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my deep gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Assoc. Prof.

Dr. Prajwal Lal Pradhan his valuable guidance, expertise, encouragement and critical
suggestion without whom, this thesis could not come in this complete form. I highly
appreciate his scholastic attitude and pragmatic thinking over thesis problems.
I also express my gratitude to Mr. Shashidhar Ram Joshi, HOD, Department
of Electronics, Pulchowk campus for giving me the concept of Artificial Neural
Network. He has allowed me to attend the full semester course afford by the
Electronics department for the M.Sc. students of that department. He has also helped
me during my thesis period.
Special appreciation goes to all the teachers of the Department of Civil
Engineering, Pulchowk Campus, especially Prof. Dr. Prem Nath Maskey, Prof. Dr.
Hikmat Raj Joshi and Dr. Jishnu Subedi for their kind support and suggestions during
the entire thesis period.
I owe a debt of gratitude to many other seniors and colleagues who provided
technical support and social encouragement, especially Mr. Sujan Tripathi, Mr.
Dinesh Gupta, Mr. Anup Chaudhary, Mr. Arvind Jha and Mr. Chandan Karna. And
they, all, by virtue of proximity, became living sounding boards of ideas.
Finally, I would like to express my profound gratitude to my family for their
continuous support and encouragement during my study period.
Ajay Kumar Gupta

(065/MSS/r/102)
iii
ABSTRACT
Student: Ajay Kumar Gupta
Supervisor: Dr. Prajwal Lal Pradhan
Despite being the most common construction practice throughout the ages, infills
have not found the space it deserves, in the structural design. There is lack of proper
and easy method to consider the effect of the in-filled. So, this research is a small
effort in the search of the alternative approach for analyzing the infill frames. The
FEM Models are normally incapable of considering all the effecting factors such as
non-linear behavior of the infill materials, lack of fit, non-homogeneity of the
materials, etc. This research gives some idea to the structural engineer how to guess
initially the parameters of interest during the design of infills. Structural design
process is an iterative process and an approximate initial guess can reduce the time
and cost involved in the analysis. The tentative design parameters can be predicted
using the Artificial Intelligence and this computing power of the modern day
computers has been used to fulfill the intended purpose. The data sets, which are
generated by computer from the simulation of the infill-frame structure done in
sophisticated software (ANSYS v10.0) capable of non-linear analysis, are used for the
training of Neural Network. Few other unique data sets are taken for the validation of
the Network trained. The comparison of the results from the ANN and that of
software were in reasonable agreement with each other except in few rare cases.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COPYRIGHT .
CERTIFICATE ..
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .
iii
ABSTRACT
iv
LIST OF TABLES ..
vii
LIST OF FIGURES viii

LIST OF SYMBOLS ..
ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Infilled Frames
1.2 Background
1.3 Why this Study ?
1.4 Objectives of the Study
1.5 Methodology
1.5.1 Review of Literature
1.5.2 Collection of Input Data
1.5.3 Modeling of the Structure
1.5.4 Analysis of the Structure
1.5.5 Result Validation
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 General
2.2 Experimental Studies
2.3 Analytical Studies
2.4 About ANN
12
2.4.1 Back-Propagation Neural Network
13
2.4.2 The Back-Propagation Training Algorithm
14
CHAPTER 3: REINFORCED CONCRETE INFILL FRAME MATERIALS .. 16

3.1 General
16
3.2 Masonry
16
3.3 Bricks
17
3.4 Mortar
18
3.5 Reinforced Concrete
19
CHAPTER 4: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL . 22

4.1 About ANSYS
22
4.2 Modelling Strategy
23
4.2.1 Calibration of the Model
23
4.2.2 Dimensions of the Model
23
4.3 Description of the Models
24
4.3.1 Element used in Modeling
24
4.3.2 Boundary Conditions Imposed
25
4.3.3 Overview of the Materials Used
26
4.3.4 Model Descriptions
27
4.3.5 The Outputs
27
4.4 Preparation of the Training sets
28
CHAPTER 5: TRAINING THE DATA SETS USING ANN ... 30

5.1 Introduction to NeuNet Pro
30
5.2 Development of ANN Tool
30
CHAPTER 6: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ..
32
6.1 Parametric Studies
32
6.2 Geometric Parameters
33
6.2.1 Influence of wall thickness
34
6.2.2 Influence of Aspect Ratio
35
6.2.3 Influence of Bricks
37
6.2.4 Influence of Mortar
37
6.3 Variation of stiffness
38
6.4 Effective width of equivalent diagonal strut
40
6.5 Validation of Neural Network
42
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 48

7.1 General
48
7.2 Conclusions
50
7.3 Recommendations for the future works
51
APPENDIX 53
A. ANSYS Contour Result Plot
53
B. Output Result from ANSYS
55
REFERENCES .. 70
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Analogy between biological and artificial neural networks
13
Table 3-1: Types and Properties of Bricks (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)
17
Table 3-2: Types and Properties of Mortar (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)
19
Table 3-3: Properties of concrete and rebars used in analysis
20
Table 4-1: Material properties used in analysis (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)
26
Table 4-2: Designation of Models used for analysis
27
Table 6.1: Parameters of Interest
32
Table 6-2: Parametric characteristics of infilled frames analysed
33
Table 6-3: Response variation due to wall thickness
35
Table 6-4: Response variation due to aspect ratio
36
Table 6-5: Response variation due to Bricks
37
Table 6-6: Response variation due to Mortar
38
Table 6-7: Comparison of strut widths
41
Table 7-1: Comparison of Results obtained from ANSYS and ANN
43
Table A-1: ANSYS Results for Span 3m
55
Table A-1: ANSYS Results for Span 3.5m
58
61
64
67
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Structure of Artificial Neural Network model
Figure 1-3: Flow Chart for Analysis of Infill Wall using ANN
Figure 2-1: Single Diagonal Strut Models (Smith and Carter 1969)
Figure 2-2: Geometric characteristics in Equations. (2-8) and (2-9)
12
Figure 2-3: Biological Neural Network
13
Figure 2-4: Typical Back-Propagation Network
14
Figure 3-1: Stress-strain characteristics of different bricks used.
18
Figure 4-1: Plane stress element used for Modeling
24
Figure 4-2: Beam3 element used for Modeling Beam and Column
25
Figure 4-4: Sample model prepared for the analysis
26
Figure 4-5: Salient nodal points considered for the output
28
Figure 5-1: Back-propagation Neural Network used for Training
31
Figure 5-2: Error reduction graph during Back-propagation Neural Network Training
31
Figure 6-1 : Infilled frames with different Aspect Ratios
34
Figure 6-2: Variation of displacement with span
39
Figure 6-3: Variation of stiffness with load
40
Figure 6-4 : Equivalent Strut Model
41
Figure 6-5 : Comparison of actual versus predicted data
42
Figure A-1 : Displacement contour plot
53
Figure A-2 : Stress Intensity contour plot
53
Figure A-3 : Shear Stress contour plot
54
Figure A-4 : X-axis Stress contour plot
54
viii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
t
thickness of the infill
height of the infill
length of the infill
inclination of infill with the horizontal
diagonal length of infill
height of the frame, measured between the centerlines of the beams
span of the frame, measured between the centerlines of the columns
Wds
width of the diagonal strut
non-dimensional parameter given by Smith
non-dimensional parameter given by FEMA
Ic
moment of inertia of the columns
Ed
youngs modulus of the infill material
Ef
youngs modulus of the material constituting the frame
Fi
total number of inputs of neuron i in the network
number of step
xi(p)
input of ith node in pth step
yj(p)
output of jth node in pth step
wij
weight assigned to a hidden layer node in between ith and jth nodes
error in the output
stress at a node
strain at a node
ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Infilled Frames
Infill-frames have been used in many parts of the world over a long time. In
these structures, exterior masonry walls and/or interior partitions, usually regarded as
nonstructural architectural elements, are built as an infill between the frame members.
However, the usual practice in the structural design of infill-frames is to ignore the
structural interaction between the frame and infill. This implies that the infill has no
influence on the structural behaviour of the building except for its mass. This would
be appropriate if the frame and infill panel were separated by providing a sufficient
gap between them. However, gaps are not usually specified and the actual behaviour
of infill frames observed during past earthquakes shows that their response is
sometimes wrongly predicted. Infill-frames have often demonstrated good earthquake
resistant behaviour, at least for serviceability level earthquakes in which the masonry
infill can provide enhanced stiffness and strength. It is expected that this structural
system will continue to be used in many countries because the masonry infill panels
are often cost-effective and suitable for temperature and sound insulation purposes.
Hence, further investigation of the actual behaviour of these frames is warranted, with
a goal towards developing a displacement-based approach to their design.
Masonry panels, which contribute a large proportion of the mass of the infillframe, normally consist of anisotropic materials with a wide range of strength,
deformation and energy dissipation properties. Unlike other conventional materials
such as concrete and steel which have, to some extent, standard properties. Masonry
materials vary significantly from one country to another based on the local constituent
materials (the bricks and the mortar) and workmanship. Different local materials are
used to produce masonry units with different shapes; they might be solid or hollow
units with different hole-sizes and hole arrangements.
In many countries, situated in seismic regions, reinforced concrete frames are
infilled by brick masonry panels. Although the infill panels significantly enhance both
the stiffness and strength of the frame, their contribution is often not considered
mainly because of the lack of knowledge of the composite behavior of the frame and
the infill. In multistory structures, the frames are generally well engineered in
accordance with the state of knowledge of the day and to the building practice of
1
every country, whereas the infill panels are considered non-structural. The reason for
the negligence is the high amount of non-linearity and non-homogeneity involved in
the analysis making the analysis portion extremely tedious and monotonous. Thus
computers can be extremely useful in such scenario. The computing capabilities of the
computers can be used to deal with the problems imposed due to the inconsistent
characteristics of the infill.
1.2 Background
Infill frame construction represents a common type of construction in urban
areas. Infill walls change the behavior of frames considerably under lateral loads and
affect mainly the strength, rigidity, energy dissipation, etc. characteristics. In the
conventional design, the building frames are designed for dead and live loads. Hence,
they cannot withstand lateral loads, especially when they are very tall. On the other
hand, post-earthquake damage reports often note poorly detailed reinforced concrete
frames that have failed due to localized forces produced by the infill. Any attempt to
increase the size of the structural elements to withstand these occasional loads is both
expensive and undesirable. The concept of the infill frame considers the integral
structural action of walls and slab with the frames, and provides increased lateral
force resisting capacity for frames.
The use of computers as we all know is inevitable these days in any portion of
the structural design of any type of the structures. And the use of artificial intelligence
in the field of computers is one of the most fascinating and interesting as the use these
days is recommended in almost any field of real life and practical applications. The
field being related to computer applications has not found much of the place in
structural field and especially in the context of Nepal the use has been found to be
very limited. The method based on the Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) can
accommodate all parameters and uncertainties like non-linear behavior of infill, lack
of fit at the frame infill interface, non-homogeneity of the materials. The main
advantage of this method is that the size of the output vector can be increased to meet
all the requirements. The inherent tolerance mechanism and the ability to learn from
the new patterns (data sets) make it an ideal method.
The origins of Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) are in the field biology. The
biological brain consists of billions of highly interconnected neurons forming a neural
2
network. Human information processing depends on this connectionist system of

nervous cells. Based on this advantage of information processing, neural networks can
easily exploit the massively parallel local processing and distributed storage
properties in the brain. Generally speaking, an ANN is an informational system
simulating the ability of a biological neural network by interconnecting many simple
neurons (Fig. 1-1). The neuron accepts inputs from a single or multiple sources and
produces outputs by simple calculations, processing with a predetermined non-linear
function. Therefore, the primary characteristics of an ANN can be presented as
following: (1) the ability of learning; (2) distributed memory; (3) fault tolerance and
(4) operating in parallel.
Figure 1-1: Structure of Artificial Neural Network model
1.3 Why this Study ?

With the advancement of computational technology and ever going increasing
trend of research activities, the demand for inelastic design is increasing day by day.
The term inelastic is associated to material whose stress-strain diagram is non-linear.
But, the usual practices follow only the linear stress-strain relationships. The linear
relations are acceptable only for the small deformations. Whereas, in most of the
cases when the deformation becomes too large, structural members undergo failure
before the strains become finite. Such a situation can be frequently observed in infill
frame structures. Infill frames are widely constructed using brick masonry infill walls.
Since the brick masonry wall possesses highly heterogeneous material, non-linear
studies become inevitable. Thus, for the analysis of infill frames, the models which
can account for nonlinear behavior of individual materials must be used. For this,
3
non-linear characterization of the materials is quite essential to formulate. These days,

engineering practices demand more and more new additional materials. Whose stressstrain behaviors are still not known or they have to be tested in laboratories. For the
very common materials like bricks, concrete and mortars, which have a long history,
people still are adopting linear relations for stress-strain curve. In the early days,
computational challenges and efforts have made people compelled to accept the state
of linear assumption. Now the advancement in computational technology stipulates
more precised computational techniques, which can minimize the gap between
realistic value and the approximation.
Structural engineering involves understanding of material behavior, laws of
mechanics, intuition, past experience or expertise and analysis techniques. The
modern computer can bring speed, efficiency and accuracy in analysis of structures.
But to computerize the areas such as conceptual design, modeling of natural
phenomenon and material behavior, damage assessment etc., is extremely difficult as
it requires human expertise. Structural design is an iterative process. The initial design
is the first step in design process. Though the various aspects of structural design are
controlled by many codes and regulations, the structural engineer has to exercise
caution and use his judgment in addition to calculations in the interpretation of the
various provisions of the I.S 4562000 code to obtain an efficient and economic
design. After the design process the designer makes an overall guess about the
possible optimum solution consistent with designers experience, knowledge,
constraints, and requirements. The analysis of the structure is then carried out using
initial design. Based on the results of the analysis a re-design of the structure is
carried out if any of the constraints is not satisfied. The efficiency of the design
process depends heavily on initial guess. A good initial design reduces the number of
subsequent analysisdesign cycles. This phase is extremely difficult to computerize as
it needs human intuition. In recent years efforts have been made to computerize the
initial design process using artificial neural networks as they can learn from available
designs during training process. Artificial neural network is a new technology
emerged from approximate simulation of human brain and has been successfully
applied in many fields of engineering. Neural networks and genetic algorithm
demonstrate powerful problem solving ability. They are based on quite simple
principles but take advantage of their mathematical nature in terms of non-linear
4
iteration. Neural networks with Back Propagation (BP) learning can be an extremely
powerful tool for the prediction of subsequent design parameters.
1.4 Objectives of the Study

The overall picture of the analysis of infill wall panels is still so vague in
structural engineering fields. The amount of non-linearity involved due to
heterogeneity in the materials presents complex design scenario for structural
engineers. The presence of whole infill is found to be neglected in design studios. The
research work is intended to produce some useful design criteria in the case of infill
wall panels and easy prediction of the macro response of the wall panels with the use
of artificial intelligence techniques. The summary can be listed as below
To determine the nonlinear response (using material non-linearity) of
the composite action between brick infill walls and reinforced concrete
frame, under in plane lateral load.
To compare the results obtained from a series of analysis of infill of
different aspect ratios, thickness and materials.
To determine the equivalent diagonal strut thickness of infill wall
useful in SEDS (Single Equivalent Diagonal Strut) Model.
To train the computer for the development of ANN tool for the
prediction of non linear results associated with the infill masonry wall.
To
predict
the
infill
wall
response
parameters
of
interest
instantaneously without any real modeling and with much of accuracy

desired.
1.5 Methodology
The analysis comprise of a series of steps which are briefed as under in a
systematic manner.
Non-linear Analysis of Infill
Identification of
Material Properties
(Non-linear)
Modelling
&
Analysis
Density, Poissons
ratio & Stress-Strain
curve of Brick
2D Modelling
of Infill Wall
Frame
Density, Poissons
curve of Mortar
2D Non-linear
Analysis of RC
Infill Wall
Training &
Validation of
Neural Network
Training Neural
Network with
Trainee Data Sets
Verification of
Result obtained
from Trained
Network
Density, Poissons
curve of Reinforced
Concrete
Figure 1-3: Flow Chart for Analysis of Infill Wall using ANN
1.5.1 Review of Literature

The various literatures related with the works were searched and reviewed. In
this regard, the literatures concerned with the traditional masonry infills, steel frame
with infills, etc. were searched. Experimental and analytical studies conducted in the
past were referred simultaneously.
1.5.2 Collection of Input Data
The data regarding the material non-linearities and other properties were
collected from previous researches and published journals. The dimensions of the
infill to be used for the analysis were concluded from the practice being availed in this
part of the country.
1.5.3 Modeling of the Structure

Four different Ansys elements are used for preparation of Reinforced Concrete
infill model in Ansys. Three different materials reinforced concrete, brick and mortar
are considered. In which Ansys element Plane42 is used for both brick and mortar,
and the element Beam3 is used for both beam and column. Link10 element is used for
connection between line and plane element. Using these three elements 2D model is
prepared in Ansys. Different aspect ratios were considered providing the data sets a
wide range and two thickness of infill were used for analysis.
1.5.4 Analysis of the Structure
The infill was modeled as a planar structure and hence the analysis was also
done for the in-plane lateral loading. Since the non-linear analysis was found to quite
time-consuming, static analyses were done for different models in advanced software.
1.5.5 Result Validation
The responses obtained from the analytical analyses were used as data sets to
train the Neural Network and then the trained network was used for the validation of
other data sets for the quick prediction of the responses.
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 General
Recent earthquakes have clearly shown that the damages done to the buildings
with infills were considerable less than those without infills and the difference was
quite a bit significant. Therefore, the structural contribution of infill walls cannot
simply be neglected particularly in regions of moderate and high seismicity where, the
frameinfill interaction may cause substantial increase in both stiffness and strength
of the frame. A review of analysis and design provisions related to masonry infill RC
frames in seismic design codes of different countries shows that only a few codes
have considered the effect of infill in analysis and design of masonry infill RC frames
(Kaushik et al. 2006). On the other hand, the stiffness and strength of the infill frames
are not taken care of by most of the codes. Hence, the behavior of infill frames needs
to be studied extensively in order to develop a rational approach or guidelines for
design.
2.2 Experimental Studies

Hinged steel-frame with solid infill tested under monotonic loading were
found to lose their load carrying capacity at ultimate stage by cracking of mortar
joints along the compressive diagonal of the infill wall (Polyakov, 1948). About 45
single storey, single bay frames with reinforced concrete infill of reduced scale
(between 1/8 and 3/8) were studied under monotonic loading (Benjamin& Williams,
1950). The influence of infill geometry, amount and direction of reinforcement in the
wall, and column reinforcement were studied on ductility and load carrying capacity
of the frame. Another study on steel frames with brick work, and concrete in-filling
showed that the stiffness and the strength of the steel frame was greatly increased
under the composite action of frame and masonry infill wall panel (Holmes, 1960).
Several full-size tests were carried out to determine the behaviour of infill steel
frames subjected to racking or shear loading. Tests on single storey steel frame with
reinforced concrete and brick infill under lateral load led to semi-empirical methods
for accounting effect of infill (Holmes, 1962). Infill walls were modelled as
equivalent diagonal strut and the ultimate lateral load carrying capacity of the infill
8
frame expressed as a function of geometry of frame and infill, and of the compressive
strength of the infill.
2.3 Analytical Studies

Analytical models that have been developed to estimate lateral stiffness and
strength of the infill frames include the equivalent frame model, the single diagonal
strut model, and the multi-diagonal strut model. The equivalent frame model is based
on the concept of equivalent frame, where members have the properties of the
composite sections of the actual structure (Liauw 1972, Kodur et al. 1998). The
equivalent diagonal strut model is the most simplified yet reasonably accurate macromodel. This is usually done by modeling the infill panel as a single diagonal strut
connected to the two compressive diagonal corners. The key to this approach lies in
determination of effective width of equivalent diagonal strut. In the last few decades,
several attempts have been made to compute the effective width of diagonal strut for
infill frames (Holmes 1961, Smith and Carter 1969, Mainstone 1971, Liauw and
Kwan 1984, Paulay and Priestley 1992).
Figure 2-1: Single Diagonal Strut Models (Smith and Carter 1969)
During the last three decades, different approaches have been proposed for the
prediction of the ultimate strength of infill steel frames subjected to monotonic lateral
load. Holmes (1961) proposed that the infill wall be replaced by an equivalent
diagonal strut having a width equal to one-third of the diagonal length of the infill
wall. Stafford Smith (1966) proposed an expression relating the width of the
equivalent strut to the properties of the frame and infill wall. The width of the
equivalent strut varied with value of the following non-dimensional factor:
E th 3 sin 2
h = c
4Es I
1/ 4
(2-1)
Where,
Ec = elastic modulus of the infill material, ksi
Es = elastic modulus of the frame material, ksi
t = thickness of the infill wall, inches
h = height of a single story, inches
4
I = moment of inertia of the frame columns, inch
= slope of the infill diagonal relative to horizontal
Stafford Smith and Carter (1969) further related the width of the equivalent
strut not only to factor h, but also to the variation of the elastic modulus of the infill
material at different stress levels. Makino (1984) proposed a simplified formula to
calculate the width of the equivalent strut based on Stafford Smith and Carters work.
In his formula, the width of the equivalent strut was only related to the diagonal
length of the infill wall or the thickness of the infill wall. Liauw and Kwan (1983a)
expressed the equivalent strut width as a fraction of hcos:
b=
0.86
(h cos ) 0.45(h cos )
h
(2-2)
where, the non-dimensional factor parameter h is defined in Eq. (1). This

relation was obtained by parametric study using the finite element method.
There has been a concern by some researchers (Meharbi et al. (1994), AlChaar (2002), and Al-Chaar et al. (2003a, 2003b)) that the single equivalent diagonal
strut does not predict satisfactorily the lateral stiffness of infill frame. It is therefore
10
important to compare the width of diagonal strut of solid infill frames obtained from
several empirical relationships available in the literature with that obtained by the
finite element analysis. The following relations have been considered.
WdS =
d
3
l
WdS = 0.58
h
0.445
(h )0.335d l
(2-3)
(Smith and Carter 1969)
(2-4)
(Mainstone 1971)
(2-5)
(Liauw and Kwan 1984)
(2-6)
0.064
WdS = 0.16h0.3 d
WdS =
(Holmes 1961)
(0.95h cos )
.h
WdS =
d
4
(Paulay and Priestley 1992) (2-7)
WdS =
d
8
(Angel At. Al 1994)
(2-8)
(FEMA 274, 1997)
(2-9)
WdS = 0.175(h )
0.4
FEMA 356
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) code 356 explains

clearly enough how to take infills into account: the effect of infills has to be
considered by a FEM analysis or, alternatively, by introducing a diagonal pin-jointed
strut equivalent to the infill. For the first option no more is said, unlike the second
one, which is derived from an experimental observation: under lateral forces the
frame tends to separate from the infill near the windward lower and leeward upper
corners of the infill mesh. For FEMA 356 the equivalent strut is to have the same
thickness and modulus of elasticity as the infill panel (but it is not clear along which
direction the modulus of elasticity must be calculated) while the width w is given by
the following equation
W
0.4
= 0.175( ' h')
d
' = 4
Ed tSin(2 )
4E f I c h
(2-10)
(2-11)
11
Figure 2-2: Geometric characteristics in Equations. (2-8) and (2-9)
2.4 About ANN

Machine learning involves adaptive mechanisms that enable computers to
learn from experience, learn by example and learn by analogy. Learning capabilities
can improve the performance of an intelligent system over time. The most popular
approaches to machine learning are Artificial Neural Networks and Genetic
Algorithms. A neural network can be defined as a model of reasoning based on the
human brain. The brain consists of a densely interconnected set of nerve cells, or
basic information-processing units, called neurons. The human brain incorporates
nearly 10 billion neurons and 60 trillion connections, synapses, between them. By
using multiple neurons simultaneously, the brain can perform its functions much
faster than the fastest computers in existence today. Each neuron has a very simple
structure, but an army of such elements constitutes a tremendous processing power. A
neuron consists of a cell body, soma, a number of fibers called dendrites, and a single
long fiber called the axon.
Our brain can be considered as a highly complex, non-linear and parallel
information-processing system. Information is stored and processed in a neural
network simultaneously throughout the whole network, rather than at specific
locations. In other words, in neural networks, both data and its processing are global
rather than local. Learning is a fundamental and essential characteristic of biological
12
neural networks. The ease with which they can learn led to attempts to emulate a
biological neural network in a computer.
Figure 2-3: Biological Neural Network
An artificial neural network consists of a number of very simple processors,

also called neurons, which are analogous to the biological neurons in the brain. The
neurons are connected by weighted links passing signals from one neuron to another.
The output signal is transmitted through the neurons outgoing connection. The
outgoing connection splits into a number of branches that transmit the same signal.
The outgoing branches terminate at the incoming connections of other neurons in the
network.
Table 2-1: Analogy between biological and artificial neural networks
Biological Neural Network Artificial Neural Network

Soma
Dendrite
Axon
Synapse
Neuron
Input
Output
Weight
2.4.1 Back-Propagation Neural Network
The network computes its output pattern, and if there is an error or in other
words a difference between actual and desired output patterns, the weights are
adjusted to reduce this error. A training set of input patterns is presented to the
network. In a back-propagation neural network, the learning algorithm has two
phases.
13
First, a training input pattern is presented to the network input layer. The
network propagates the input pattern from layer to layer until the output pattern is
generated by the output layer. If this pattern is different from the desired output, an
error is calculated and then propagated backwards through the network from the
output layer to the input layer. The weights are modified as the error is propagated.
2.4.2 The Back-Propagation Training Algorithm
Step 1: Initialisation -Set all the weights and threshold levels of the network to
random numbers uniformly distributed inside a small range:
2.4 2.4

,+
Fi
Fi
(2-12)
Figure 2-4: Typical Back-Propagation Network
Step 2: Activation- Activate the back-propagation neural network by applying inputs

x1(p), x2(p),, xn(p) and desired outputs yd,1(p), yd,2(p),, yd,n(p).
(a) Calculate the actual outputs of the neurons in the hidden layer:
n
y j ( p ) = sigmoid xi ( p ).wij ( p ) j
i =1
(2-13)
Where, n is the number of inputs of neuron j in the hidden layer, and sigmoid is
the sigmoid activation function.
14
(b) Calculate the actual outputs of the neurons in the output layer:
m
yk ( p ) = sigmoid x jk ( p ).w jk ( p ) k
j =1
(2-14)
Where, m is the number of inputs of neuron k in the output layer.
Step 3: Weight training- Update the weights in the back-propagation network

propagating backward the errors associated with output neurons.
(a) Calculate the error gradient for the neurons in the output layer:
k ( p) = y k ( p).[1 y k ( p)].ek ( p)
Where, ek ( p ) = y d ,k ( p ) y k ( p )
(2-15)
(2-16)
Calculate the weight corrections:

w jk ( p ) = . y j ( p) k ( p )
(2-17)
Update the weights at the output neurons:

(2-18)
w jk ( p + 1) = w jk ( p ) + w jk ( p )
Step 4: Iteration- Increase iteration p by one, go back to Step 2 and repeat the process
until the desired error criterion is satisfied.
15
CHAPTER 3: REINFORCED CONCRETE INFILL FRAME

MATERIALS
3.1 General
Reinforced Concrete, mortar & brick are the major components of masonry
units. Masonry possesses distinct directional properties due to the mortar joints. A
number of influence
factors (such as anisotropy of units, size of units, mortar
thickness, material properties of units and mortar, arrangement of bed as well as head
joints, and quality of workmanship) make simulation of masonry structures extremely
difficult. The frame-masonry interaction in infill makes it even harder for the
computer simulation.
3.2 Masonry
Masonry is the building of structures from individual units laid in and bound
together by mortar; the term masonry can also refer to the units themselves. The
common materials of masonry construction are brick, stone such as marble, granite,
travertine, limestone; concrete block, glass block, and tile. Masonry is generally a
highly durable form of construction. However, the materials used, the quality of the
mortar and workmanship, and the pattern in which the units are assembled can
significantly affect the durability of the overall masonry construction.
Masonry units, such as brick, tile, stone, glass brick or concrete block
generally conform to the requirements specified in the 2003 International Building
Code (IBC) Section 2103.
Masonry is commonly used for the walls of buildings, retaining walls and
monuments. Brick and concrete block are the most common types of masonry in use
in industrialized nations and may be either weight-bearing or a veneer. Concrete
blocks, especially those with hollow cores, offer various possibilities in masonry
construction. They generally provide great compressive strength, and are best suited
to structures with light transverse loading when the cores remain unfilled. Filling
some or all of the cores with concrete or concrete with steel reinforcement (typically
rebar) offers much greater tensile and lateral strength to structures.
16
Masonry is broadly classified as i) Stone masonry and ii) Brick masonry.

Apart from the load-bearing capacity, the following aspects also are considered while
selecting the most suitable type of masonry unit: (a) adequate thermal and sound
insulation capacity of masonry, especially in the case of external walls, (b) reduction
of the weight of the building in order to reduce the seismic loads, and (c) economy of
construction.
3.3 Bricks
A brick is a block of ceramic material used in masonry construction, usually
laid using various kinds of mortar. The term brick refers to small units of building
material, often made from fired clay and secured with mortar, a bonding agent
comprising of cement, sand, and water. Long a popular material, brick retains heat,
with-stands corrosion, and resists fire. Masonry construction are being made of either
burnt clay brick, concrete or light-weight concrete units in different sizes and shapes,
either solid or perforated. As a rule, they must meet national standard requirements.
When selecting the most suitable type of unit, one has to consider, apart from the
load-bearing capacity, the following aspects:
1. That can provide adequate thermal and sound insulation capacity, especially
in external walls.
2. Which can minimise the weight of the building and of seismic horizontal
forces.
3. Which can optimise the cost of construction.
Table 3-1: Types and Properties of Bricks (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)
Material
Types
Modulus of Elasticity
E (N/m2)
Poisson's Ratio
Density
, (kg/m3)
Brick
MB
LB
3.022 E9
2.387 E9
0.09
1700
Build houses using brick masonry is a common practice in this part of the
world. Generally there can be a few types of brick available anywhere in the world.
Here also we intend to use three different types of brick, based on their properties and
not dimensions. The types of the brick and their corresponding properties used in the
modeling are tabulated in Table 3-1.
17
Figure 3-1: Stress-strain characteristics of different bricks used.
3.4 Mortar
Mortar is a mixture of sand, lime and Portland cement, mixed with water to a
workable consistency. It is used as a bond in masonry or for covering a wall. Mortar
are referred as any of various bonding materials used in masonry, surfacing, and
plastering, especially a plastic mixture of cement or lime, sand, and water that hardens
in place and is used to bind together bricks or stones. Sometimes, additives are added
to mortar to improve its workability, or for other reasons. Mortars must be sufficiently
strong, durable, capable of keeping the wall intact, and must create a water-resistant
barrier. It is applied with a bricklayer's trowel, and sets solid in a few hours. There are
many different mixes and admixtures used to make mortars with different
performance characteristics.
According to the classification used in Euro Code 6, different types of mortar
are used in masonry construction some of them are:
1. General purpose mortar, use in joints with a thickness greater than 3 mm
and in which only dense aggregates are used.
2. Thin-layer mortar, designed mortar for use in joints between 1 mm and 3
mm in thickness.
18
3. Lightweight mortar, designed mortar with a dry hardened density lower

than 1500 kg/m3.
4. Pre-batched mortar, consisting of constituents batched in a plant, supplied
to the building site and mixed there under factory specified proportions and
conditions.
5. Site-made mortar, composed of primary constituents batched and mixed on
the building site.
The types of the mortar and their corresponding properties used here for
modeling are stated as below.
Table 3-2: Types and Properties of Mortar (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)
Material
Composition
E (N/m2)
Poisson's Ratio
Density
, (kg/m3)
Mortar
1:4
1:6
3.651 E9
2.616 E9
0.17
1780
Figure 3-2: stress-strain characteristics of different mortar used
3.5 Reinforced Concrete

Concrete is a mixture of cement (usually Portland cement) and stone
aggregate. When mixed with a small amount of water, the cement hydrates form
microscopic opaque crystal lattices encapsulating and locking the aggregate into a
rigid structure. Typical concrete mixes have high resistance to compressive stresses
(about 4000 psi (28 Mpa); however any appreciable tension (e.g., due to bending) will
19
break the microscopic rigid lattice, resulting in cracking and separation of the
concrete. For this reason, typical non-reinforced concrete must be well supported to
prevent the development of tension.
A rebar (short for reinforcing bar), also known as reinforcing steel,
reinforcement steel, or a deformed bar, is a common steel bar, and is commonly used
as a tensioning device in reinforced concrete and reinforced masonry structures
holding the concrete in compression. It is usually formed from carbon steel, and is
given ridges for better mechanical anchoring into the concrete. Rebars were known in
construction well before the era of the modern reinforced concrete. The name is taken
from an extinct species of African jungle snakes used in tribal wars. The cast iron
used for rebars is of very high quality, and they can resist corrosion on them for
extremely long periods.
If a material with high strength in tension, such as steel, is placed in concrete,
then the composite material, reinforced concrete, resists not only compression but also
bending and other direct tensile actions. A reinforced concrete section where the
concrete resists the compression and steel resists the tension can be made into almost
any shape and size for the construction industry.
The common practice observed in this part of Nepal and almost everywhere in
the country is to use reinforced concrete for frame materials and brick masonry for
infill materials. So here we have intended to get closer to the real practice by
modeling the structure using these four distinct materials and use their non-linear
characteristics as far as possible.
The properties of the concrete and the reinforcing bars used for the modeling
purpose are listed as under:
Table 3-3: Properties of concrete and rebars used in analysis
Material
E (N/m2)
Poisson's Ratio
Density
, (kg/m3)
Reinforced Concrete
2.549E+10
0.15
2500
20
Figure 3-3: Stress-Strain Characteristics of Reinforced Concrete
21
CHAPTER 4: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

4.1 About ANSYS
The finite element method is a numerical procedure that can be used to obtain
solutions to a large class of engineering problems involving stress analysis, heat
transfer, electromagnetism, and fluid flow. ANSYS software is the software of choice
for structural dynamics, material modeling, fast fluid flow, impact and blast and shock
response at many leading institutions worldwide. An integrated ANSYS software
tightly integrates the preprocessing, post-processing and analysis modules for
maximum productivity.
ANSYS software is not an average explicit finite element or Computational
Fluid Dynamics (CFD) program. From the very beginning, ANSYS developed this
technology to handle, naturally and effectively, the non-linear behavior of fluids and
structures in an integrated fashion. A key component is the seamless way that users
can couple sophisticated material models with a fluid structure program. ANSYS
software is different from other explicit programs in a number of ways:
Integrated and coupled response of fluids, structures and materials.
Multiple solvers including finite element, CFD and Smooth Particle
Hydrodynamics (SPH) as well as the coupling between FE and
the
other solvers.
Use of materials with strength, such as metals, in all solvers, in
addition to fluids and gasses.
Comprehensive remapping capabilities from FE to CFD and vice
versa.
Interactive GUI with leading edge visualization.
Solvers seamlessly integrated pre- and post-processors.
22
4.2 Modelling Strategy

A parametric study is performed to obtain lateral stiffness of infill frames with
varying aspect ratios. The FE model is prepared for the purpose. The FE model is first
calibrated using published results of experimental specimens available in the
literature. This calibrated model is used in the parametric study to determine the
lateral stiffness of infill frames. The width of equivalent diagonal strut for the infill
frame using other established relations is compared to that estimated from the FE
method. That is, equivalent width of diagonal strut is to be determined that will give
correct approximation of lateral stiffness. In the parametric study, five parameters,
i.e., aspect ratio, brick property, mortar property, thickness of infill and lateral load
are varied considerably to get the sufficient data for Neural Network training. A
single-bay single-story is considered for the study and their lateral stiffness is
determined by non-linear analysis considering material non-linearity. The single-bay
single-story infill frame considered is shown in figure bellow. Thus a total of 200
models have to be analysed in the parametric study. All the analyses are performed
using the software ANSYS v10.0.
4.2.1 Calibration of the Model
Experimental results available in the published literatures are used to calibrate

the FE model (Table 5-1). The influence of the following four factors namely, (a)
modulus of elasticity of reinforced concrete, (c) modulus of elasticity of brick and (d)
modulus of elasticity of mortar are considered in the analysis. Other data are taken as
the provisions in the relevant codes.
4.2.2 Dimensions of the Model
Frame section comprising of beam of size 300mm x 350mm and

column section of size 300mm x 300mm.
Length of the panels varying from 3m to 5m, c/c of columns, at an
interval of 0.5m.
Single storey single bay frame panel of height 3m.
Brick masonry infill of two different thicknesses of 110mm and
230mm.
23
Mortar thickness of 12mm provided in between consecutive bricks.
4.3 Description of the Models

The finite element model shown above is prepared using ANSYS. The
material properties and the elements used for analytical study are described as under.
4.3.1 Element used in Modeling
Four different Ansys elements are used for preparation of Reinforced Concrete
infill model in Ansys. Three different materials reinforced concrete, brick and mortar
are considered. In which Ansys element Plane42 is used for both brick and mortar,
and the element Beam3 is used for both beam and column. Link10 element is used for
connection between line and plane element. Using these three elements 2D model is
prepared in Ansys.
Plane42 element can be used either as a plane element (plane stress or plane strain) or
as an axi-symmetric element for 2D analysis of structure. According to name of the

element Plane means aerial, 4 means four nodes i.e. quadrilateral and 2 means two
degree of freedom (translations in the nodal x and y directions) at each nodes.
Figure 4-1: Plane stress element used for Modeling
Beam3 is a linear element. This element is used for modelling of the members which
has bending capabilities. The element has three degrees of freedom at each node,
translations in the nodal x and y directions and rotation about the nodal z-axis.
24
Figure 4-2: Beam3 element used for Modeling Beam and Column
Link10 is a linear element. This element is used where only compressive or tension
property of the material has to be considered. When it is used as compressive only, at

that time tension property of that material is taken to be zero. This element is used for
modelling of cable, non-tension element etc.
Figure 4-3: Link10 element used for Modeling Frame-Infill Interface
4.3.2 Boundary Conditions Imposed
Two degrees of freedom are considered for all the nodes of infill. The
displacements in X- and Y- directions in the plane of frame are considered at all
nodes for the infill and for this Plane42 element is used. The element having
translations in the nodal x and y directions and rotation about the nodal z-axis i.e.
Beam3 element is used for modelling of Beam and Column. Link10 element is used
for connection between Frame (i.e. line element) and infill (i.e. Plane42 element) by
taking only compression feature of this element.
25
Figure 4-4: Sample model prepared for the analysis
4.3.3 Overview of the Materials Used
Three different materials reinforced concrete, brick and mortar are used for
modeling to incorporate the complex heterogeneity involved in the infill as far as
possible. The area for the link element is computed using average spacing of the link
elements throughout the run of the infill and the thickness of the beam and column
element. The material non-linearity is also considered. An overview of the material
properties used for the analysis purpose is presented in the tabular form below.
Table 4-1: Material properties used in analysis (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)
Material
Remarks
Reinforced
Concrete
Brick
Mortar
MB
LB
1:4
1:6
E (N/m2)
Poisson's Ratio
Density
, (kg/m3)
2.549E10
0.15
2500
0.09
1700
0.17
1780
3.022 E9
2.387 E9
3.651 E9
2.616 E9
26
4.3.4 Model Descriptions
The above mentioned materials and geometries were combined to generate the
models which ensured the combination of materials in a systematic way and thus
creating the desired variation in the analysis that was intended to be given to this
research. The respective combination of geometries with their respective material
properties are given in the table below.
Table 4-2: Designation of Models used for analysis
Aspect
Ratios
Brick
Machine
Made Brick
1
Local Brick
0.86
0.75
0.67
0.60
Mortar
Wall Thickness
(mm)
110
230
110
1:6
230
110
1:4
230
110
1:6
230
Same as in Aspect Ratio 1
1:4
Model
Designation
11-MB4
23-MB4
11-MB6
23-MB6
11-LB4
23-LB4
11-LB6
23-LB6
4.3.5 The Outputs
The model prepared was described above and the outputs taken were limited
to the specific points as described below. All the points could not be considered for
the output so the salient points which were considered to be of considerable interest
were only considered. The reactions and moments were noted at both the supports
along with the top roof displacement and then the stresses and strains were also noted
down for the points as shown below in the figure.
27
RU, RU
LU, LU
C, C
LB, LB
Hz
RB, RB
Hz
ML
MR
V
Figure 4-5: Salient nodal points considered for the output
Where,
HzL
Horizontal reaction at Left Support.
HzR
Horizontal reaction at Right Support.
Vertical Reaction at each Support
ML
Moment at the Left Support.
MR
Moment at the Right Support.
LB, LB
Stress and Strain at the Bottom-Left corner.
LU, LU
Stress and Strain at the Upper-Left corner.
C, C
Stress and Strain at the Center of the Infill.
RB, RB
Stress and Strain at the Bottom-Right corner.
RU, RU
Stress and Strain at the Upper-Right corner.
4.4 Preparation of the Training sets

Total of 200 sets of data were prepared and organized in a schematic manner
in order to feed them in the neural network. The non-linear analysis results from
28
Ansys were taken as the reference for the preparation of the training sets. Another 16
data sets were also prepared using Ansys for validation purpose. The 200 data sets
that were collected for the training purpose of the neural network comprised of
variation of single height, five spans, two brick-types, two mortar-types, two
thicknesses of infill and five loads thus making a total of 5 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 5 = 200
models to be analysed. The validating 16 data sets were taken in order to check the
accuracy of the data predicted from the trained network.
29
CHAPTER 5: TRAINING THE DATA SETS USING ANN

5.1 Introduction to NeuNet Pro
NeuNet Pro is a complete neural network development system. Neural
networks can be used for pattern recognition, data mining, market forecasting,
medical diagnosis, sports handicapping, and almost any activity where you need to
make a prediction based on our data. The graphical user interface incorporated in the
software makes it extremely easy to operate and handle while providing flexibility in
operation and handling as well. The user is allowed to choose manually which rows as
well as fields are to be trained and which rows values are to be predicted after the
training is accomplished. However the field that can be predicted is limited to one for
greater accuracy. The user is allowed to select from available classic Backprop
algorithms. Records containing missing values are automatically detected and
handled. Algorithms are fully compiled and optimized for extremely fast operation.
Backprop algorithm allows one output value to be predicted using up to 255 input
values. Backprop allows up to 128 neurons in the hidden layer. Users are allowed to
browse through data table while comparing actual versus predicted.
One can
interactively experiment with field values while observing effect on the prediction.
Data mine anomalies by performing a descending sort on difference between actual
and prediction. Perform graphical data mining by clicking mouse on scatter graph
and confusion matrix. While browsing data, rows may be interactively check marked
for export.
5.2 Development of ANN Tool

The data obtained from the linear analyses were trained using a sophisticated
Artificial Neural Network. The network consisted of 5 inputs and a single output
every-time the training was done, i.e. a single output field was predicted every-time
the training was done, for greater accuracy. The network comprised of five nodes in a
single hidden layer. The model of the network that was used for the training purpose
is shown below (Figure 5-1). Taking Ansys results as the reference, the verification
was done regarding the accuracy of the trained network. In total, 200 sets of data were
used as training sets and 16 data sets were used for validating the results obtained
from the neural network.
30
Figure 5-1: Back-propagation Neural Network used for Training
Figure 5-2: Error reduction graph during Back-propagation Neural Network Training
31
CHAPTER 6: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

6.1 Parametric Studies
In previous chapter, a finite element model developed for simulating the
infilled frame which was of interest in this study. As stated in Section 4.2 and 4.3, the
finite element model was developed in order to supplement the generally adopted
construction practices. It was also pointed out that material characteristics were taken
as per the availing practices in this part of the country. In this chapter, the finite
element model that was developed will be used to investigate the influence of several
parameters. The parameters investigated are those that relate to choices that ordinarily
need to be made in the design process, such as geometric sizes, material properties
and strength parameters. In Table 6.1 a list of parameters that may be of interest is
shown. The geometric parameters investigated are: the overall dimensions of infilled
frames, thus, aspect ratio; the wall thickness. Under material properties are considered
the elasticity modulus of Brick and the Mortar Units. The influence of infill to the
overall Frame-infill structure is considered under the strength criterion; however this
study is limited to the plane of the infill.
Table 6.1: Parameters of Interest
Geometric
Material Properties
Strength
Aspect Ratio
of Brick
In-plane Lateral
Thickness of wall
of Mortar
Stiffness
The variation is the parameters on the above mentioned interest are tabulated
below making the sum total number of analysed models 200. Combination of five
aspect ratios, two thicknesses of wall, two different bricks, and two different mortars
are anylysed for five loading conditions. The schematic variation in the considered
parameters is shown in the table below.
32
Table 6-2: Parametric characteristics of infilled frames analysed
Analyses
Aspect
Ratios
Brick
Machine
Made
Brick
1 40
1
Local Brick
41 - 80
81 120
121 160
161 200
0.85
0.75
0.67
0.60
Wall
Mortar
Thickness
(mm)
110
1:4
230
110
1:6
230
110
1:4
230
110
1:6
230
Same as in 1 - 40
Same as in 1 - 40
Same as in 1 - 40
Same as in 1 - 40
Lateral load
(KN)
100,200,300,400,500
100,200,300,400,500
100,200,300,400,500
100,200,300,400,500
6.2 Geometric Parameters

In Table 6-2 a summary of the geometric characteristics of the two hundred
types of infilled frames analysed is given. Three geometric parameters, namely, aspect
ratio and thickness of wall in the infill are included in the study. The aspect ratio is
defined as h/l where h is the height of the infilled frame and l is its length. Five aspect
ratios, 0.6, 0.67, 0.75, 0.85 and 1.0 were used in the analyses. The corresponding
infilled frames, shown in Figure 6.1, are 3.0 m high by 5.0 m wide, 3.0 m high by 4.5
m wide, 3.0 m high by 4.0 m wide and 3.0 m high by 3.5 m wide and 3.0 m high by
3.0 m wide respectively.
The first geometric parameter is the aspect ratio. The variation is shown in the
table above ranging from 0.6 to 1.0. The second geometric parameter studied is the
thickness of the wall. The thickness is either 110 mm or 230 mm. First forty analyses
were done as per stated in the table above and the subsequent analyses were carried
out considering the same variation as in 1 40. In conformity with the materials used
in the experiments and the validation of the ANSYS model, the properties of the
materials used in the analyses are as shown in Table 4.1
33
(a) Aspect Ratio 1.0 (3m x 3m)
(b) Aspect Ratio 0.86 (3m x 3.5m)
(c) Aspect Ratio 0.75 (3m x 4m)
(d) Aspect Ratio 0.67 (3m x 4.5m)
(e) Aspect Ratio 0.6 (3m x 5m)

Figure 6-1 : Infilled frames with different Aspect Ratios
6.2.1 Influence of wall thickness
The table shown below shows that the ratios of stiffness and stresses at main
and the off-diagonal points of infilled frames with 230 mm thick infill walls to those
of infilled frames with 110 mm thick infill walls. These results indicate that there is a
34
near linear relationship between the wall thickness and the infilled frame stiffness, as
well as between the wall thickness. The Ratio of stiffness is increasing as the aspect
ratio is decreasing, i.e., the ratio of stiffness is increasing with increase in the span.
However, the trend for the ratio of stress and strain is opposite. The ratio of stresses
and strains at the specified nodal points seems to be decreasing with the decrease in
aspect ratio (i.e. increase in span).
Table 6-3: Response variation due to wall thickness
Aspect
Ratios
0.85
0.75
0.67
0.6
Ratio of Stresses
Ratio of Stresses
Model
Designation
Ratio of
Stiffness
LU
RU
LU
RU
MB-4
1.060
0.565
0.508
0.509
0.566
0.508
0.511
MB-6
1.067
0.569
0.518
0.518
0.570
0.518
0.512
LB-4
1.063
0.569
0.513
0.513
0.569
0.513
0.513
LB-6
1.070
0.574
0.523
0.523
0.574
0.523
0.515
MB-4
1.076
0.511
0.508
0.507
0.512
0.508
0.507
MB-6
1.086
0.516
0.520
0.520
0.517
0.519
0.510
LB-4
1.080
0.508
0.512
0.512
0.509
0.512
0.507
LB-6
1.091
0.511
0.522
0.522
0.512
0.522
0.512
MB-4
1.091
0.527
0.509
0.510
0.524
0.509
0.508
MB-6
1.102
0.527
0.520
0.518
0.523
0.519
0.514
LB-4
1.104
0.579
0.513
0.513
0.576
0.513
0.528
LB-6
1.114
0.565
0.523
0.523
0.561
0.522
0.531
MB-4
1.101
0.524
0.508
0.508
0.527
0.509
0.506
MB-6
1.117
0.529
0.518
0.518
0.531
0.518
0.507
LB-4
1.107
0.571
0.518
0.519
0.571
0.514
0.512
LB-6
1.139
0.567
0.521
0.521
0.564
0.515
0.507
MB-4
1.114
0.531
0.506
0.506
0.532
0.505
0.523
MB-6
1.131
0.533
0.512
0.512
0.534
0.511
0.506
LB-4
1.137
0.588
0.511
0.512
0.592
0.511
0.528
LB-6
1.151
0.583
0.519
0.519
0.587
0.518
0.510
6.2.2 Influence of Aspect Ratio
The influence of aspect ratio can be clearly seen on the in-plane stiffness of
the infill frame and bare frame. The stiffness decreases if the aspect ratio decreases in
case of the bare frame. However, the stiffness was found to increase with the decrease
in aspect ratio for the infilled frame. The normalised stresses exert almost linear
relationship with the change in aspect ratio. In this study the size of aperture was kept
constant for respective aspect ratio as stated in table 6-2.
35
1.085
1.079
1.078
1.071
1.105
1.102
1.101
11 MB 4
11 MB 6
11 LB 4
11 LB 6
23 MB 4
23 MB 6
23 LB 4
23 LB 6
1.098
0.85
1.171
1.177
1.180
1.185
1.094
1.131
1.097
1.146
0.75
1.258
1.227
1.232
1.230
1.112
1.161
1.119
1.182
0.67
Normalised Stiffness
Model
Designation
Table 6-4: Response variation due to aspect ratio
1.245
1.255
1.261
1.269
1.103
1.170
1.114
1.196
0.6
0.909
0.876
0.913
0.873
1.050
0.991
1.023
0.990
0.85
1.241
1.251
1.244
1.254
1.029
1.341
0.981
1.338
0.75
0.961
0.946
0.945
0.924
0.780
0.990
0.745
0.973
0.67
Normalised stresses
0.982
0.978
0.973
0.972
0.747
1.013
0.717
0.985
0.6
0.913
0.878
0.920
0.877
1.055
0.992
1.030
0.993
0.85
1.253
1.259
1.257
1.263
1.043
1.370
0.992
1.365
0.75
0.954
0.981
0.981
0.975
0.799
1.025
0.762
1.009
0.67
Normalised strains
1.030
1.024
1.020
1.020
0.773
1.061
0.742
1.032
0.6
6.2.3 Influence of Bricks
The influence of aspect ratio can be clearly seen on the in-plane stiffness of
the infill frame and bare frame. The stiffness decreases if the aspect ratio decreases in
case of the bare frame. However, the stiffness was found to increase with the decrease
in aspect ratio for the infilled frame. The normalised stresses exert almost linear
relationship with the change in aspect ratio. In this study the size of aperture was kept
constant for respective aspect ratio as stated in table below. The ratio of stiffness was
found to increases with decrease in aspect ratio. The stresses and strains were found to
be decrease with decrease in aspect ratio and also on increase in wall thickness.
Table 6-5: Response variation due to Bricks
Aspect
Ratios
0.85
0.75
0.67
0.6
Model
Designation
Ratio of
Stiffness
Ratio of Stresses
LU
Ratio of Stresses
RU
LU
RU
11 1:4
1.015
1.071
1.095
1.094
0.845
0.865
0.779
11 1:6
1.015
1.063
1.080
1.079
0.840
0.853
0.781
23 1:4
1.008
1.063
1.073
1.074
0.838
0.848
0.778
23 1:6
1.008
1.054
1.060
1.059
0.832
0.838
0.777
11 1:4
1.021
1.068
1.077
1.077
0.845
0.853
0.764
11 1:6
1.022
1.060
1.065
1.064
0.839
0.843
0.786
23 1:4
1.011
1.057
1.053
1.052
0.837
0.834
0.759
23 1:6
1.012
1.054
1.044
1.044
0.834
0.827
0.779
11 1:4
1.024
1.071
1.050
1.050
0.845
0.829
0.900
11 1:6
1.024
1.032
1.033
1.033
0.813
0.814
0.903
23 1:4
1.014
1.072
1.029
1.034
0.846
0.812
0.888
23 1:6
1.015
1.055
1.013
1.013
0.833
0.799
0.897
11 1:4
1.030
1.060
1.051
1.051
0.838
0.830
0.813
11 1:6
1.029
1.042
1.033
1.034
0.823
0.815
0.806
23 1:4
1.015
1.049
1.030
1.031
0.832
0.816
0.811
23 1:6
1.001
1.048
1.029
1.029
0.830
0.813
0.813
11 1:4
1.034
1.058
1.092
1.092
0.837
0.863
0.727
11 1:6
1.031
1.031
1.072
1.073
0.814
0.847
0.697
23 1:4
1.018
1.054
1.079
1.080
0.833
0.854
0.750
23 1:6
1.019
1.037
1.057
1.058
0.820
0.836
0.723
6.2.4 Influence of Mortar
The ratio of responses with 1:4 mortar to 1:6 mortar are tabulated below. It
can be clearly seen on the in-plane stiffness of the infill frame with 1:4 mortar are
slightly above to those compared to those with 1:6 mortar. The ratio of stiffness was
37
found to increases with decrease in aspect ratio. The stresses and strains were found to
be decrease with decrease in aspect ratio and also with the increase in wall thickness.
Table 6-6: Response variation due to Mortar
Aspect
Ratios
0.85
0.75
0.67
0.6
Model
Designation
Ratio of
Stiffness
Ratio of Stresses
LU
Ratio of Stresses
RU
LU
RU
11 MB
1.016
1.019
0.951
0.950
1.021
0.951
1.052
11 LB
1.016
1.011
0.938
0.937
1.014
0.938
1.054
23 MB
1.013
1.011
0.941
0.943
1.013
0.941
1.049
23 LB
1.014
1.002
0.929
0.929
1.006
0.929
1.048
11 MB
1.017
0.953
0.968
0.967
0.952
0.964
0.976
11 LB
1.018
0.947
0.957
0.955
0.945
0.953
1.005
23 MB
1.014
0.959
0.960
0.959
0.958
0.957
0.976
23 LB
1.014
0.957
0.952
0.952
0.955
0.948
1.002
11 MB
1.025
1.080
1.008
1.008
1.081
1.011
0.889
11 LB
1.025
1.039
0.991
0.991
1.039
0.992
0.892
23 MB
1.014
0.981
1.001
1.002
0.980
1.003
0.855
23 LB
1.015
0.966
0.985
0.982
0.965
0.987
0.863
11 MB
1.030
1.061
1.005
1.003
1.065
1.004
1.005
11 LB
1.029
1.041
0.988
0.987
1.045
0.987
0.996
23 MB
1.025
0.973
0.985
0.984
0.983
0.995
0.993
23 LB
1.010
0.972
0.983
0.981
0.982
0.991
0.995
11 MB
1.036
1.094
0.951
0.950
1.099
0.948
1.010
11 LB
1.034
1.065
0.933
0.934
1.069
0.931
0.969
23 MB
1.016
0.988
0.940
0.940
0.988
0.938
0.999
23 LB
1.016
0.972
0.921
0.921
0.972
0.919
0.961
6.3 Variation of stiffness

Stiffness is defined as the resistance to the deformation. This is one parameter
which can be considered of considerable interest to structural engineers. In the study
conducted now, the variation of stiffness with load and span is studied. The graphs
showing the variation are shown below.
The deflection goes on decreasing with increase in span, i.e., the tendency of
the infill to resist the horizontal load seems to be increasing and thus causing a
schematic increase in the stiffness with increase in span. The stiffness of the infilled
frame goes on decreasing with the application of load, i.e. the decrease in stiffness is
observed for different loading values. Also the stiffness for the infilled frame with 230
mm thickness is considerably greater than the stiffness of those with thickness 110
mm. the decrease in stiffness can be observed from the graphs below.
38
(a) MB4
(b) LB4
(a) MB6
(b) LB6
Figure 6-2: Variation of displacement with span
(a) 3m
(b) 3.5m
39
(c) 4m
(d) 4.5m
(e) 5m
Figure 6-3: Variation of stiffness with load
6.4 Effective width of equivalent diagonal strut

The results of the finite element analyses in this research support the
observation that infill walls essentially provide diagonal bracing to bounding frames.
As such, the wall can be replaced with an equivalent diagonal strut. In order to
evaluate the effective widths of the equivalent diagonal strut for the walls in the
infilled frames analysed, it is hereby assumed that the equivalent diagonal strut is
pinned to the intersection of the beams and columns at the loaded corners; the
modulus of elasticity and the thickness of the strut are the same as those of the wall;
and the frame connections are rigid. As stated in chapter 2, several theoretical and
empirical formulae for the effective width have been proposed by various researchers.
In Table 6.7 effective widths derived from the finite element analyses of rigidly
connected infilled frames with 110 mm thick walls are compared with effective
widths calculated from some of these expressions.
40
Figure 6-4 : Equivalent Strut Model
The finite element (FE) effective widths have been determined by replacing
the infill wall with a strut that results in the same infilled frame stiffness as from the
corresponding finite element analysis. Calculations based on Mainstone (1971)
method, and the FEMA 306 (1998) method are in reasonable agreement with each
other while that obtained from the current FE analyses shows the results on a higher
side for the estimates of the effective widths of the equivalent diagonal struts.
Table 6-7: Comparison of strut widths

Aspect
Ratio
0.86
0.75
MB4
FEM
Wds
(m)
0.364
FEMA
Wds
Factor
(m)
of FE
0.398
1.093
Mainstone
Wds
Factor
(m)
of FE
0.417
1.146
Angel
Wds
Factor
(m)
of FE
0.473
1.299
MB6
0.371
0.405
1.091
0.422
1.138
0.473
1.275
LB4
0.369
0.403
1.091
0.421
1.140
0.473
1.282
LB6
0.376
0.409
1.089
0.426
1.133
0.473
1.258
Model
Designation
MB4
0.403
0.438
1.086
0.458
1.138
0.519
1.289
MB6
0.417
0.445
1.067
0.464
1.113
0.519
1.245
LB4
0.413
0.443
1.072
0.463
1.120
0.519
1.258
LB6
0.423
0.450
1.064
0.468
1.107
0.519
1.228
MB4
0.454
0.481
1.059
0.503
1.109
0.569
1.253
MB6
0.459
0.489
1.065
0.510
1.110
0.569
1.239
LB4
0.456
0.486
1.067
0.508
1.114
0.569
1.248
LB6
0.464
0.495
1.066
0.514
1.108
0.569
1.226
41
0.67
0.6
MB4
0.483
0.527
1.090
0.551
1.140
0.621
1.285
MB6
0.497
0.535
1.077
0.558
1.122
0.621
1.249
LB4
0.492
0.533
1.083
0.556
1.130
0.621
1.262
LB6
0.501
0.542
1.082
0.563
1.123
0.621
1.239
MB4
0.536
0.575
1.072
0.600
1.120
0.674
1.258
MB6
0.542
0.584
1.078
0.608
1.122
0.674
1.244
LB4
0.538
0.582
1.081
0.606
1.126
0.674
1.254
LB6
0.546
0.591
1.083
0.613
1.124
0.674
1.235
6.5 Validation of Neural Network

After the training of the network was done, the predicted output was compared
with the standard outputs obtained from the analysis done in Ansys. The
corresponding maximum error was noted down. This process was repeated for all the
16 outputs and results were tabulated below. A sample error comparison chart for the
displacement-output is shown as below. The dots show the predicted data and the
diagonal line corresponds to the actual data.
Figure 6-5 : Comparison of actual versus predicted data
This was done for all the 16 outputs those were desired to be produced from the
network. The validation of the predicted data sets was done in reference to those data
sets from Ansys analysis. The predicted data and the desired data and their
corresponding difference in percentage which indicates the accuracy of the predicted
data are shown in the table below.
42
ANN
ANSYS
-99997
-150000
163970
74302
97579
12.911
2033
-4795728
-606176
-4817533
6144
3.870E-07
-9.583E-04
-1.900E-04
-1.418E-03
1.047E-06
Responses
Hz L (N)
Hz R (N)
V (N)
M L (N-m)
M R (N-m)
Disp (mm)
LB (N/m2)
LU (N/m2)
C (N/m2)
RB (N/m2)
RU (N/m2)
LB
LU
RB
RU
9.798E-07
-1.443E-03
-1.947E-04
-1.004E-03
3.928E-07
5980
-4989542
-611721
-4737439
1849
13.168
98226
75393
163451
-149503
-100329
250
Load
Model
6.381
1.768
2.496
4.808
1.487
2.661
3.570
0.915
1.215
9.022
1.988
0.663
1.468
0.317
0.331
0.332
% Error
8.407E-07
-1.003E-03
-1.347E-04
-7.266E-04
3.035E-07
4348
-3718866
-430130
-3475204
1118
16.589
132500
97796
231990
-213150
-136850
ANSYS
11-MB4
Table 7-1: Comparison of Results obtained from ANSYS and ANN
9.091E-07
-1.095E-03
-1.366E-04
-7.915E-04
3.382E-07
4268
-4037448
-434327
-3565439
1074
16.473
132989
97432
232805
-211241
-135908
ANN
450
8.128
9.162
1.444
8.933
11.428
1.853
8.567
0.976
2.597
3.879
0.701
0.369
0.373
0.351
0.896
0.689
% Error
2.883E-07
-4.427E-04
-5.894E-05
-3.319E-04
1.556E-07
2093
-1511038
-197155
-1653769
528
7.064
56706
41834
99461
-91505
-58495
ANSYS
2.672E-07
-4.558E-04
-5.702E-05
-3.175E-04
1.648E-07
1876
-1508890
-189955
-1858448
465
6.934
56212
41200
98058
-89219
-57538
ANN
150
7.299
2.959
3.261
4.335
5.901
10.370
0.142
3.652
12.377
11.894
1.842
0.871
1.516
1.411
2.498
1.635
% Error
2.181E-06
-2.276E-03
-3.942E-04
-1.985E-03
8.622E-07
10183
-6231407
-993716
-6301922
4778
24.421
179010
138530
293230
-267510
-182490
ANSYS
23-MB4
2.320E-06
-2.172E-03
-3.937E-04
-1.962E-03
8.048E-07
10634
-5653019
-1009572
-5778220
5438
24.434
179778
139091
292447
-268607
-182535
ANN
350
6.336
4.592
0.144
1.161
6.652
4.430
9.282
1.596
8.310
13.810
0.054
0.429
0.405
0.267
0.410
0.024
% Error
ANN
ANSYS
-100560
-149440
163550
75332
98313
13.163
2129
-4953283
-643746
-4967742
6881
3.856E-07
-9.901E-04
-2.026E-04
-1.467E-03
1.078E-06
Responses
Hz L (N)
Hz R (N)
V (N)
M L (N-m)
M R (N-m)
Disp (mm)
LB (N/m2)
LU (N/m2)
C (N/m2)
RB (N/m2)
RU (N/m2)
LB
LU
RB
RU
9.972E-07
-1.476E-03
-1.939E-04
-1.061E-03
3.405E-07
6180
-5091107
-630214
-4798553
1896
13.337
98861
75896
163207
-149582
-100822
250
Load
Model
7.466
0.602
4.295
7.187
11.689
10.189
2.483
2.102
3.124
10.956
1.322
0.557
0.749
0.209
0.095
0.261
% Error
2.146E-06
-2.120E-03
-3.675E-04
-1.535E-03
3.745E-07
12541
-6165900
-1165171
-6470576
5772
24.498
179240
138180
293250
-267490
-182510
ANSYS
11-MB6
1.866E-06
-2.075E-03
-3.544E-04
-1.655E-03
3.337E-07
10981
-5832554
-1119811
-5717876
5819
24.706
180898
139530
292111
-268872
-181804
ANN
450
44
13.062
2.122
3.568
7.831
10.919
12.443
5.406
3.893
11.633
0.815
0.850
0.925
0.977
0.388
0.517
0.387
% Error
2.883E-07
-4.427E-04
-5.894E-05
-3.319E-04
1.556E-07
2093
-1511038
-197155
-1653769
528
7.064
56706
41834
99461
-91505
-58495
ANSYS
2.672E-07
-4.558E-04
-5.702E-05
-3.175E-04
1.648E-07
1876
-1508890
-189955
-1858448
465
6.934
56212
41200
98058
-89219
-57538
ANN
150
7.299
2.959
3.261
4.335
5.901
10.370
0.142
3.652
12.377
11.894
1.842
0.871
1.516
1.411
2.498
1.635
% Error
8.339E-07
-1.061E-03
-1.438E-04
-7.226E-04
3.230E-07
4873
-3890035
-457402
-3603996
1179
16.879
133400
99041
231490
-212210
-137790
ANSYS
23-MB6
9.100E-07
-1.123E-03
-1.374E-04
-7.968E-04
3.444E-07
4457
-4183064
-451793
-3646379
1089
16.809
133916
98977
233048
-212342
-135330
ANN
350
9.125
5.911
4.451
10.274
6.619
8.539
7.533
1.226
1.176
7.575
0.414
0.387
0.064
0.673
0.062
1.785
% Error
ANN
ANSYS
-100640
-149360
163420
75703
98491
13.249
1938
-4435134
-562581
-4489361
5461
4.740E-07
-1.218E-03
-2.225E-04
-1.671E-03
1.270E-06
Responses
Hz L (N)
Hz R (N)
V (N)
M L (N-m)
M R (N-m)
Disp (mm)
LB (N/m2)
LU (N/m2)
C (N/m2)
RB (N/m2)
RU (N/m2)
LB
LU
RB
RU
1.428E-06
-1.708E-03
-2.298E-04
-1.258E-03
4.279E-07
5980
-4800765
-578272
-4587174
1757
13.459
99194
76678
162810
-149124
-100821
250
Load
Model
12.464
2.187
3.298
3.310
9.735
9.501
6.936
2.789
3.428
9.321
1.586
0.714
1.288
0.373
0.158
0.180
% Error
2.181E-06
-2.276E-03
-3.942E-04
-1.985E-03
8.622E-07
10183
-6231407
-993716
-6301922
4778
24.421
179010
138530
293230
-267510
-182490
ANSYS
11-MB4
2.320E-06
-2.172E-03
-3.937E-04
-1.962E-03
8.048E-07
10634
-5653019
-1009572
-5778220
5438
24.434
179778
139091
292447
-268607
-182535
ANN
450
45
6.336
4.592
0.144
1.161
6.652
4.430
9.282
1.596
8.310
13.810
0.054
0.429
0.405
0.267
0.410
0.024
% Error
3.589E-07
-4.778E-04
-7.053E-05
-3.663E-04
1.756E-07
1676
-1371119
-173548
-1490799
487
7.124
56862
42077
99367
-91406
-58594
ANSYS
3.662E-07
-4.338E-04
-7.342E-05
-3.683E-04
1.954E-07
1801
-1329601
-175490
-1690440
446
6.913
56070
41032
98049
-89400
-57519
ANN
150
2.025
9.191
4.100
0.541
11.268
7.477
3.028
1.119
13.392
8.546
2.952
1.393
2.483
1.326
2.194
1.835
% Error
8.354E-07
-1.210E-03
-1.592E-04
-8.288E-04
3.664E-07
3901
-4157936
-402957
-3275523
1166
16.832
133160
98821
231590
-212670
-137330
ANSYS
23-MB4
8.799E-07
-1.316E-03
-1.678E-04
-9.125E-04
4.162E-07
4268
-3812790
-414469
-3411099
1029
16.632
133232
98036
231613
-210674
-136552
ANN
350
5.335
8.815
5.407
10.101
13.585
9.406
8.301
2.857
4.139
11.726
1.187
0.054
0.795
0.010
0.939
0.566
% Error
ANN
ANSYS
-101230
-148770
162970
76832
99283
13.524
1886
-4587630
-602243
-4663352
6338
4.003E-07
-1.158E-03
-2.395E-04
-1.741E-03
1.365E-06
Responses
Hz L (N)
Hz R (N)
V (N)
M L (N-m)
M R (N-m)
Disp (mm)
LB (N/m2)
LU (N/m2)
C (N/m2)
RB (N/m2)
RU (N/m2)
LB
LU
RB
RU
1.448E-06
-1.734E-03
-2.342E-04
-1.254E-03
3.638E-07
6180
-4926436
-600434
-4657419
1803
13.637
99877
77282
162562
-148815
-101758
250
Load
Model
6.097
0.385
2.222
8.329
9.117
2.492
5.642
0.300
1.521
4.432
0.832
0.598
0.585
0.250
0.030
0.521
% Error
2.556E-06
-2.367E-03
-4.249E-04
-1.957E-03
9.378E-07
11861
-6328377
-1065036
-5828512
4986
25.135
181010
141160
292140
-266310
-183690
ANSYS
11-MB4
2.327E-06
-2.180E-03
-3.983E-04
-1.890E-03
8.283E-07
10981
-5708711
-1048822
-5683134
5622
25.550
182771
143211
291252
-267203
-183992
ANN
450
46
8.961
7.908
6.253
3.422
11.679
7.425
9.792
1.522
2.494
12.753
1.652
0.973
1.453
0.304
0.335
0.165
% Error
3.892E-07
-5.372E-04
-7.377E-05
-3.958E-04
1.816E-07
1947
-1459303
-185955
-1561059
492
7.179
57013
42311
99277
-91285
-58715
ANSYS
3.584E-07
-4.830E-04
-7.096E-05
-3.835E-04
2.011E-07
1876
-1449315
-183159
-1751616
451
7.063
56395
41680
97952
-88847
-57684
ANN
150
7.930
10.096
3.807
3.101
10.738
3.622
0.684
1.504
12.207
8.306
1.610
1.084
1.492
1.335
2.671
1.756
% Error
9.738E-07
-1.278E-03
-1.710E-04
-8.593E-04
3.768E-07
4522
-3821021
-430671
-3392969
1130
17.094
133730
99861
230400
-211110
-137890
ANSYS
23-MB4
8.800E-07
-1.339E-03
-1.682E-04
-8.957E-04
4.227E-07
4457
-3980147
-432644
-3492311
1043
16.980
134214
99622
231858
-210329
-136786
ANN
350
9.625
4.795
1.651
4.242
12.185
1.443
4.164
0.458
2.928
7.684
0.665
0.362
0.239
0.633
0.370
0.800
% Error
From the above tables it can be noted that the percentage of error in prediction
of data from the ANN tool so developed is varying from maximum of 13.81% to
minimum of 0.01%. Hence ANN can be taken as a powerful tool for the prediction of
initial design parameters related to any field especially if the mass data regarding that
field is available. For the data sets given above it can be noticed that error percentage
is relatively high in stress and strain fields whereas the error percentage is almost
negligible in reaction fields (displacements, shear and vertical reaction). This is a
good sign that the parameters of interest was predicted more accurately by the tool so
developed and the variation in data predicted for stress and strain fields can be
attributed to the reason that the data taken was not uniform enough as the
recognisation of nodes at the exact place was almost impossible for all the models
prepared thus creating a more varying data for the training sets itself and hence the
prediction showing the results afterwards.
47
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 General
Infilled frame has been studied by various researchers; this research represents
the yet another effort to investigate the behaviour of infill walls using various
materials. The peculiarities of brick and mortar combinations along with varying
thickness being practiced traditionally are still unknown. It was therefore considered
necessary to carry out an experimental and numerical investigation in order to
describe the structural behaviour of such infilled frames.
The influence of several geometrical, material and interface parameters on this
behaviour has been investigated. In this research the behaviour of reinforced concrete
frame infilled with brick masonry units subjected to in-plane lateral loads has been
described. Simplified expressions for prediction of the stiffness and other macro
responses of these types of infilled frames have been proposed. Infill walls are already
commonly used as partitions and claddings on building structures. Accounting for
their contribution in resisting loads leads to more efficient use of materials.
Evaluating the stiffness and strength of the infills also leads to reduced risks of
damage to the infills, bounding frames and the finishes. This in turn can lead to
significant reductions in maintenance and rehabilitation costs of buildings.
The literature review includes modelling of infilled frames by replacing the
infill wall by strut models with best possible result outcomes. Work on infilled frames
was initiated in 1940s. Modelling of infilled frames and further development in this
area happened by late 1960s. Studies on monotonic behaviour of infilled frames under
lateral load were carried out in the 1970s. Similarly, cyclic tests, full scaled tests and
nonstructural infill frame tests were carried out during the 1980s and 90s. Studies
were concentrated primarily in two distinct areas, namely on materials and on
modelling of infilled frames. Basic properties were studied of bricks, mortar and
masonry wallets. Infill frame models were developed that describe the different
failure modes. These models include strut models, effective column width model and
micro-models. Over the years, several different analytical approaches were proposed.
But, the equivalent -strut method gained the most popularity among practitioners.
48
Several modifications were proposed in the equivalent strut models. The outcomes of
this research are in reasonable agreement with the one proposed by FEMA356.
A series of two hundred full scale analyses was conducted using finite element
model to simulate each model. The finite element model was used to carry out
parametric studies. The model utilises 4-noded plane stress elements for masonry
units, 2-noded link elements for frame-to-wall contact and again 2-noded beam
element for the modelling of beam and column. A simplified approach to formulate an
equivalent strut width for the infills has been proposed in this research. With the aid
of software, reactions, deflections and other responses at several nodes on each
specimen were recorded. Load deflection responses showed that infills increased the
stiffness of frames by 2.5 times.
Non-linear elastic behaviour was prescribed for frame-to-wall contact and
thin-layer joints. Linear elastic behaviour was assumed for steel. Material properties
used in this model were obtained from estimations based on the available literature.
The finite element model has been used to study the influence of several geometric,
material and interface parameters. These parameters included the aspect ratio of the
infilled frame, the thickness of the infill wall, the elasticity modulus of the bricks and
the mortars. It has been concluded that composite infilled frame action is optimum in
infilled frames with aspect ratios less than or nearly equal to one. In relatively squat
infilled frames, the wall dominates the behaviour while the frames contribution
diminishes. On the other hand, for relatively slender infilled frames, bending
deflections increasingly overshadow composite action of the bounding frame and
infill walls. In general, most geometrical parameters have the highest relative
influence on the stiffness of square infilled frames.
A comparison of effective widths of equivalent diagonal struts derived from
finite element analyses in this study with those derived from other methods from
literature showed that a width of the diagonal proposed by FEMA length is a good,
though a bit underestimated, approximation.
The data thus obtained from the structural analyses were then fed into the
neural network and the network was trained for as many cycles as possible to reduce
the mean RMS error. The neural network was trained to predict one output at a time
for the prediction of a particular response. The results predicted from the trained
network and those from the ANSYS were compared and found to be in reasonable
49
accuracy. Thus based on this study, ANN model was found to be reasonably accurate
for the structure like infilled frame where the degree of non-linearity is very high.
And hence the ANNs are expected to be applicable to other civil engineering
problems, and may have wider applications in other engineering problems.
7.2 Conclusions
The following conclusions are drawn from this study:
Three strut models considered, two performed okay but the one fitting best
with the current FE analyses is the one proposed by FEMA; the locations for
the strut and the formula for the calculation of their strut width best represent
the scenario of an infill bounded by reinforced concrete frame.
The combination of material constituting masonry units have a wider influence
on the stiffness and stress- strain responses developed in the infill and each
case has to be investigated peculiarly to know the exact response rather than
treating complete masonry infill as a single unit.
The responses from the non-linear analysis of the infill model prepared in
ANSYS were used as training data sets. Standard Neural Network software
was used to train the network and later some data sets were used for validation
of the results predicted. The results were found to be satisfactory with error
ranging from 0.01% minimum to 13.81% maximum.
For the quick prediction of the design parameters, neural network can be
extremely useful. The network needs to be trained with data sets of similar
types though. A typical neural network was fed into 200 data sets as training
data sets for the training purpose and the network with just one hidden layer
containing 5 nodes produced accuracy as high as 99.99%. However the
accuracy on the predicted data heavily depends upon the anomalies present in
the data that is being used to train the network.
The research conducted above makes it clear that infill materials present a
very complex scenario for structural engineers when it comes to the simulation of the
real structures in computers. The material heterogeneity and complex interaction
among several infill-masonry components make it extremely difficult to idealise the
50
structure and thus the computer simulation to represent the characteristics of the infill
becomes extremely tedious and monotonic. Thus the prediction of correct initial
design parameters, if possible, can be a boon to structural engineers. These days
computers come with extra-ordinary computing capabilities and hence computing
powers of modern day computers can be used to an optimum extent to predict the
responses of the infill due to in-plane lateral load analysis. This is where the Artificial
Neural Networks can be extremely useful.
7.3 Recommendations for the future works

Keeping the time frame in mind, all the possible combination of parameters
are taken into account in this research. However the scope for the development never
perishes. Recommendations are hereby made from the point of view of the future
continuation of this research. The above issues can be experimentally investigated
without any major changes to the existing setup used in this work. The limitations
being the high costs and practical difficulties involved in conducting large-scale tests,
it is essential that experimental tests should be carried out hand-in-hand with
numerical analyses. As encountered in this investigation, although modelling nonlinear behaviour of brick masonry walls and frame-to-wall interfaces is by no means
easy, numerical modelling can be powerful contributor in understanding and
interpreting the experimental behaviour. It is recommended that the numerical
analyses conducted in this investigation should be extended into the cracking and post
cracking range. This would facilitate an assessment of the ultimate load and give a
more realistic assessment of the margin between the cracking (service) loads and the
ultimate load. This in turn would assist in determining the appropriate safety factors in
the design guidelines.
It is hereby recommended that this research should be continued, generally, in
the following order:
Experimental investigation of infilled frames

The infilled frames analysed in this study should be studied experimentally as
for the correct prediction of their responses and verification of the responses
derived analytically here in this study.
51
Variation in masonry properties

Although some variation in the properties of masonry units are considered in
the current study, a broad investigation on the influence of masonry properties
on response parameters is felt necessary as strength of a masonry wall depends
on the individual properties of brick units and mortar mix.
Reversal cyclic loading
All the analyses carried in the current research are under monotonic loading of
the infilled frame. However it can be interesting to study the responses of the
infill under the reverse cyclic loading for any structural engineer.
Generation of more data sets for the training purpose
Due to the time limitations, only two hundred sets of data were prepared and
fed into the neural network for its training purpose. It has to be noticed the
error in the double digits is an outcome of limitation on the data sets being
used for the training purpose. To get even better accuracy at least 500 data sets
has to be used for the training purpose, thus making the prediction of
responses more accurate.
52
APPENDIX
A. ANSYS Contour Result Plot
Figure A-1 : Displacement contour plot
Figure A-2 : Stress Intensity contour plot
53
Figure A-3 : Shear Stress contour plot
Figure A-4 : X-axis Stress contour plot
54
B. Output Result from ANSYS

Input
Reactions
Brick
Load
(KN)
HzL
(N)
ML
(N-m)
MR
(N-m)
1:4
MB
100
-42976
1:4
MB
200
-85901
-57024
93155
31126
36911
5.88350
-114100
185750
63191
74552
12.04600
0.11
1:4
MB
300
-128270
-171730
278220
95425
112400
18.28000
0.11
1:4
MB
400
0.11
1:4
MB
500
-170410
-229590
370720
127600
150230
24.51000
-212200
-287800
463090
159980
188260
30.82300
0.11
1:4
LB
100
-43132
-56868
92979
31447
37115
5.96880
0.11
1:4
LB
200
-86227
-113770
185420
63803
74935
12.20900
0.11
0.11
1:4
LB
300
-128860
-171140
277730
96344
112960
18.52100
1:4
LB
400
-171230
-228770
369960
129010
151110
24.88200
0.11
1:4
LB
500
-213330
-286670
462030
161930
189480
31.33900
0.11
1:6
MB
100
-43069
-56931
92936
31509
37183
5.99620
0.11
1:6
MB
200
-85691
-114310
185380
63819
75049
12.24000
0.11
1:6
MB
300
-127850
-172150
277750
96210
113030
18.53400
0.11
1:6
MB
400
-169660
-230340
370060
128700
151130
24.87400
0.11
1:6
MB
500
-211450
-288550
462320
161250
189280
31.24100
0.11
1:6
LB
100
-43221
-56779
92756
31838
37393
6.08470
0.11
1:6
LB
200
-86058
-113940
185040
64438
75429
12.40300
0.11
1:6
LB
300
-128420
-171580
277210
97216
113660
18.80100
0.11
1:6
LB
400
-170530
-229470
369260
130170
152050
25.26600
0.11
1:6
LB
500
-212670
-287330
461220
163290
190550
31.77800
0.23
1:4
MB
100
-42568
-57432
93712
30112
36251
5.60320
0.23
1:4
MB
200
-85231
-114770
187330
60393
72610
11.26100
0.23
1:4
MB
300
-127870
-172130
280400
91606
109690
17.18300
0.23
1:4
MB
400
-170160
-229840
373410
122880
146880
23.13700
0.23
1:4
MB
500
-212200
-287800
466360
154250
184170
29.13600
0.23
1:4
LB
100
-42655
-57345
93614
30292
36365
5.65120
0.23
1:4
LB
200
-85383
-114620
187150
60719
72818
11.34600
0.23
1:4
LB
300
-128120
-171880
280120
92113
110020
17.31900
0.23
1:4
LB
400
-170510
-229490
373040
123570
147310
23.32200
0.23
1:4
LB
500
-212700
-287300
465910
155080
184680
29.35300
0.23
1:6
MB
100
-42583
-57417
93664
30198
36310
5.62830
0.23
1:6
MB
200
-85304
-114700
186900
61140
73166
11.47500
0.23
1:6
MB
300
-127630
-172370
279870
92495
110400
17.45200
0.23
1:6
MB
400
-169620
-230380
372790
123910
147730
23.46600
0.23
1:6
MB
500
-211180
-288820
465670
155360
185130
29.51000
0.23
1:6
LB
100
-42669
-57331
93560
30388
36432
5.67940
0.23
1:6
LB
200
-85469
-114530
186700
61496
73392
11.57100
0.23
1:6
LB
300
-127890
-172110
279580
93020
110730
17.59300
0.23
1:6
LB
400
-169990
-230010
372410
124600
148160
23.64900
0.23
1:6
LB
500
-211750
-288250
465210
156220
185650
29.73500
Mortar
0.11
0.11
HzR
(N)
Displacement
V
(N)
Thickness
(m)
55
(mm)
Stress (N/m2)
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
LB
LU
RB
RU
MB
Load
(KN)
100
1.846E+03
-1.627E+06
-2.237E+05
-1.453E+06
2.259E+03
1:4
MB
200
3.581E+03
-2.730E+06
-4.416E+05
-2.580E+06
4.450E+03
Mortar
Brick
1:4
0.11
0.11
1:4
MB
300
5.371E+03
-3.791E+06
-6.595E+05
-3.648E+06
6.671E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
400
7.194E+03
-4.904E+06
-8.800E+05
-4.694E+06
8.881E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
500
9.044E+03
-5.945E+06
-1.101E+06
-5.605E+06
1.108E+04
0.11
1:4
LB
100
1.881E+03
-1.513E+06
-2.068E+05
-1.313E+06
2.089E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
200
3.654E+03
-2.551E+06
-4.087E+05
-2.352E+06
4.128E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
300
5.472E+03
-3.555E+06
-6.101E+05
-3.306E+06
6.166E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
400
7.378E+03
-4.567E+06
-7.933E+05
-4.227E+06
8.009E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
500
9.357E+03
-5.561E+06
-9.795E+05
-5.055E+06
9.901E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
100
1.688E+03
-1.524E+06
-2.354E+05
-1.502E+06
2.376E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
200
3.339E+03
-2.673E+06
-4.643E+05
-2.663E+06
4.693E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
300
5.051E+03
-3.781E+06
-6.947E+05
-3.755E+06
7.016E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
400
6.808E+03
-4.865E+06
-9.249E+05
-4.689E+06
9.346E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
500
8.594E+03
-5.978E+06
-1.155E+06
-5.600E+06
1.167E+04
0.11
1:6
LB
100
1.728E+03
-1.429E+06
-2.200E+05
-1.380E+06
2.223E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
200
3.418E+03
-2.532E+06
-4.353E+05
-2.452E+06
4.397E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
300
5.156E+03
-3.545E+06
-6.509E+05
-3.418E+06
6.570E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
400
6.982E+03
-4.571E+06
-8.470E+05
-4.280E+06
8.569E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
500
8.869E+03
-5.623E+06
-1.046E+06
-5.106E+06
1.059E+04
0.23
1:4
MB
100
9.394E+02
-8.260E+05
-1.121E+05
-7.363E+05
1.133E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
200
1.858E+03
-1.654E+06
-2.265E+05
-1.486E+06
2.288E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
300
2.729E+03
-2.228E+06
-3.369E+05
-2.022E+06
3.404E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
400
3.614E+03
-2.788E+06
-4.470E+05
-2.570E+06
4.520E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
500
4.511E+03
-3.292E+06
-5.569E+05
-3.125E+06
5.633E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
100
9.662E+02
-7.689E+05
-1.030E+05
-6.678E+05
1.039E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
200
1.916E+03
-1.565E+06
-2.116E+05
-1.354E+06
2.138E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
300
2.813E+03
-2.099E+06
-3.147E+05
-1.864E+06
3.180E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
400
3.724E+03
-2.624E+06
-4.179E+05
-2.352E+06
4.218E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
500
4.648E+03
-3.105E+06
-5.216E+05
-2.847E+06
5.271E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
100
8.812E+02
-8.857E+05
-1.219E+05
-8.163E+05
1.228E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
200
1.706E+03
-1.574E+06
-2.393E+05
-1.492E+06
2.414E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
300
2.532E+03
-2.159E+06
-3.563E+05
-2.078E+06
3.594E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
400
3.380E+03
-2.711E+06
-4.722E+05
-2.694E+06
4.766E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
500
4.247E+03
-3.265E+06
-5.891E+05
-3.252E+06
5.948E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
100
9.096E+02
-8.317E+05
-1.135E+05
-7.480E+05
1.146E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
200
1.766E+03
-1.493E+06
-2.261E+05
-1.386E+06
2.284E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
300
2.622E+03
-2.055E+06
-3.368E+05
-1.940E+06
3.402E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
400
3.499E+03
-2.582E+06
-4.474E+05
-2.495E+06
4.515E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
500
4.390E+03
-3.108E+06
-5.591E+05
-3.007E+06
5.650E+03
56
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
Strain
Mortar
Brick
1:4
MB
Load
(KN)
100
0.11
1:4
MB
200
1.115E-06
-8.231E-04
-1.330E-04
-7.871E-04
2.050E-06
0.11
LB
LU
RB
RU
5.745E-07
-4.934E-04
-6.736E-05
-4.463E-04
1.034E-06
1:4
MB
300
1.672E-06
-1.142E-03
-1.986E-04
-1.108E-03
3.055E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
400
2.240E-06
-1.477E-03
-2.650E-04
-1.423E-03
4.068E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
500
2.816E-06
-1.791E-03
-3.315E-04
-1.695E-03
5.076E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
100
7.377E-07
-5.821E-04
-7.883E-05
-5.115E-04
1.315E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
200
1.433E-06
-9.751E-04
-1.558E-04
-9.100E-04
2.610E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
300
2.146E-06
-1.358E-03
-2.326E-04
-1.274E-03
3.898E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
400
2.894E-06
-1.744E-03
-3.025E-04
-1.624E-03
5.247E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
500
3.671E-06
-2.123E-03
-3.735E-04
-1.937E-03
6.640E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
100
5.291E-07
-4.594E-04
-7.091E-05
-4.592E-04
9.844E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
200
1.047E-06
-8.050E-04
-1.399E-04
-8.086E-04
1.942E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
300
1.584E-06
-1.139E-03
-2.093E-04
-1.136E-03
2.902E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
400
2.134E-06
-1.465E-03
-2.786E-04
-1.416E-03
3.866E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
500
2.694E-06
-1.801E-03
-3.478E-04
-1.688E-03
4.844E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
100
6.824E-07
-5.462E-04
-8.388E-05
-5.347E-04
1.251E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
200
1.350E-06
-9.658E-04
-1.659E-04
-9.436E-04
2.474E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
300
2.036E-06
-1.352E-03
-2.481E-04
-1.310E-03
3.697E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
400
2.757E-06
-1.743E-03
-3.229E-04
-1.636E-03
4.973E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
500
3.503E-06
-2.144E-03
-3.988E-04
-1.949E-03
6.298E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
100
2.924E-07
-2.505E-04
-3.377E-05
-2.263E-04
5.251E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
200
5.785E-07
-5.017E-04
-6.822E-05
-4.567E-04
1.051E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
300
8.497E-07
-6.727E-04
-1.015E-04
-6.188E-04
1.568E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
400
1.125E-06
-8.406E-04
-1.346E-04
-7.841E-04
2.079E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
500
1.404E-06
-9.922E-04
-1.677E-04
-9.521E-04
2.589E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
100
3.789E-07
-2.958E-04
-3.927E-05
-2.603E-04
6.746E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
200
7.517E-07
-6.027E-04
-8.069E-05
-5.278E-04
1.350E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
300
1.103E-06
-8.035E-04
-1.200E-04
-7.237E-04
2.015E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
400
1.461E-06
-1.003E-03
-1.593E-04
-9.101E-04
2.674E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
500
1.823E-06
-1.186E-03
-1.989E-04
-1.100E-03
3.333E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
100
2.762E-07
-2.678E-04
-3.674E-05
-2.503E-04
5.031E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
200
5.347E-07
-4.744E-04
-7.208E-05
-4.558E-04
1.003E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
300
7.938E-07
-6.502E-04
-1.073E-04
-6.325E-04
1.492E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
400
1.060E-06
-8.165E-04
-1.422E-04
-8.183E-04
1.979E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
500
1.332E-06
-9.833E-04
-1.774E-04
-9.855E-04
2.467E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
100
3.591E-07
-3.189E-04
-4.325E-05
-2.907E-04
6.464E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
200
6.972E-07
-5.703E-04
-8.619E-05
-5.367E-04
1.289E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
300
1.035E-06
-7.838E-04
-1.284E-04
-7.482E-04
1.918E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
400
1.382E-06
-9.846E-04
-1.706E-04
-9.599E-04
2.548E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
500
1.734E-06
-1.185E-03
-2.131E-04
-1.154E-03
3.178E-06
57

Input
Reactions
Displacement
(mm)
Thickness
(m)
Mortar
Brick
Load
(KN)
HzL
(N)
HzR
(N)
V
(N)
ML
(N-m)
MR
(N-m)
0.11
1:4
MB
100
-41315
-58685
79952
30142
37526
5.425
0.11
1:4
MB
200
-83003
-117000
159550
60994
75564
11.055
0.11
1:4
MB
300
-124450
-175550
238960
92222
113930
16.785
-234500
318280
123580
152440
22.571
-293630
397540
155060
191050
28.404
0.11
1:4
MB
400
-165500
0.11
1:4
MB
500
-206370
0.11
1:4
LB
100
-41508
-58492
79753
30565
37801
5.534
-116620
159170
61813
76091
11.267
0.11
1:4
LB
200
-83383
0.11
1:4
LB
300
-125090
-174910
238350
93513
114760
17.118
0.11
1:4
LB
400
-166590
-233410
317380
125490
153670
23.061
0.11
1:4
LB
500
-207910
-292090
396290
157720
192760
29.083
-58537
79812
30438
37721
5.507
61750
76121
11.257
0.11
1:6
MB
100
-41463
0.11
1:6
MB
200
-83077
-116920
159180
0.11
1:6
MB
300
-124280
-175720
238450
93233
114690
17.072
-234920
317620
124900
153440
22.960
-293880
396590
156960
192480
28.948
0.11
1:6
MB
400
-165080
0.11
1:6
MB
500
-206120
0.11
1:6
LB
100
-41657
-58343
79606
30875
38004
5.620
-116500
158780
62613
76673
11.478
0.11
1:6
LB
200
-83495
0.11
1:6
LB
300
-124990
-175010
237800
94610
115580
17.425
0.11
1:6
LB
400
-166270
-233730
316670
126930
154740
23.476
-292370
395270
159790
194270
29.664
36733
5.110
0.11
1:6
LB
500
-207630
0.23
1:4
MB
100
-40721
-59279
80528
28917
0.23
1:4
MB
200
-81494
-118510
161040
57869
73491
10.230
-177390
241300
87342
110600
15.518
0.23
1:4
MB
300
-122610
0.23
1:4
MB
400
-163830
-236170
321250
117410
148200
20.935
0.23
1:4
MB
500
-204740
-295260
401200
147480
185820
26.365
0.23
1:4
LB
100
-40824
-59176
80421
29146
36881
5.169
-118300
160830
58322
73785
10.347
0.23
1:4
LB
200
-81704
0.23
1:4
LB
300
-122910
-177090
240980
88014
111040
15.691
0.23
1:4
LB
400
-164230
-235770
320830
118310
148780
21.168
-294710
400670
148610
186550
26.656
36799
5.135
0.23
1:4
LB
500
-205290
0.23
1:6
MB
100
-40774
-59226
80481
29019
0.23
1:6
MB
200
-81757
-118240
160820
58333
73798
10.367
-176950
240760
88426
111400
15.798
0.23
1:6
MB
300
-123050
0.23
1:6
MB
400
-163860
-236140
320640
118630
149130
21.266
0.23
1:6
MB
500
-204420
-295580
400470
148910
186950
26.778
-59118
80366
29263
36956
5.198
58808
74105
10.489
0.23
1:6
LB
100
-40882
0.23
1:6
LB
200
-81967
-118030
160600
0.23
1:6
LB
300
-123370
-176630
240440
89123
111840
15.977
-235690
320200
119580
149730
21.509
-294950
399910
150110
187710
27.084
0.23
1:6
LB
400
-164310
0.23
1:6
LB
500
-205050
58
Stress (N/m2)
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
1:4
MB
Load
(KN)
100
4.411E+02
-1.203E+06
-2.302E+05
-1.323E+06
2.324E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
200
1.135E+03
-2.306E+06
-4.574E+05
-2.655E+06
4.617E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
300
1.695E+03
-3.406E+06
-6.834E+05
-4.036E+06
6.903E+03
0.11
Mortar
Brick
LB
LU
RB
RU
1:4
MB
400
2.265E+03
-4.549E+06
-9.102E+05
-5.430E+06
9.193E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
500
2.840E+03
-5.884E+06
-1.138E+06
-6.664E+06
1.149E+04
0.11
1:4
LB
100
4.224E+02
-1.125E+06
-2.161E+05
-1.242E+06
2.184E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
200
8.158E+02
-2.173E+06
-4.296E+05
-2.497E+06
4.337E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
300
1.212E+03
-3.183E+06
-6.415E+05
-3.764E+06
6.480E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
400
1.624E+03
-4.253E+06
-8.355E+05
-5.081E+06
8.438E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
500
2.045E+03
-5.513E+06
-1.032E+06
-6.244E+06
1.042E+04
0.11
1:6
MB
100
5.084E+02
-1.258E+06
-2.392E+05
-1.377E+06
2.422E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
200
1.161E+03
-2.383E+06
-4.731E+05
-2.634E+06
4.779E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
300
1.750E+03
-3.560E+06
-7.069E+05
-4.137E+06
7.140E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
400
2.352E+03
-4.922E+06
-9.392E+05
-5.362E+06
9.487E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
500
2.952E+03
-6.119E+06
-1.169E+06
-6.056E+06
1.181E+04
0.11
1:6
LB
100
4.378E+02
-1.181E+06
-2.263E+05
-1.308E+06
2.294E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
200
8.615E+02
-2.246E+06
-4.486E+05
-2.505E+06
4.535E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
300
1.295E+03
-3.328E+06
-6.707E+05
-3.886E+06
6.783E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
400
1.748E+03
-4.609E+06
-8.730E+05
-5.092E+06
8.825E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
500
2.202E+03
-5.904E+06
-1.077E+06
-5.823E+06
1.088E+04
0.23
1:4
MB
100
2.229E+02
-6.076E+05
-1.164E+05
-6.674E+05
1.171E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
200
4.451E+02
-1.220E+06
-2.329E+05
-1.345E+06
2.349E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
300
8.674E+02
-1.779E+06
-3.482E+05
-2.067E+06
3.514E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
400
1.145E+03
-2.321E+06
-4.626E+05
-2.743E+06
4.673E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
500
1.426E+03
-2.873E+06
-5.766E+05
-3.514E+06
5.826E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
100
2.154E+02
-5.726E+05
-1.106E+05
-6.306E+05
1.118E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
200
4.301E+02
-1.150E+06
-2.209E+05
-1.275E+06
2.231E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
300
6.302E+02
-1.689E+06
-3.304E+05
-1.963E+06
3.338E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
400
8.290E+02
-2.205E+06
-4.390E+05
-2.603E+06
4.437E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
500
1.031E+03
-2.721E+06
-5.481E+05
-3.320E+06
5.536E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
100
2.605E+02
-6.459E+05
-1.218E+05
-6.991E+05
1.229E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
200
5.154E+02
-1.272E+06
-2.429E+05
-1.411E+06
2.453E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
300
8.831E+02
-1.835E+06
-3.626E+05
-2.111E+06
3.664E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
400
1.176E+03
-2.410E+06
-4.804E+05
-2.882E+06
4.850E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
500
1.475E+03
-2.982E+06
-5.990E+05
-3.650E+06
6.065E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
100
2.270E+02
-6.102E+05
-1.166E+05
-6.687E+05
1.179E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
200
4.478E+02
-1.207E+06
-2.323E+05
-1.354E+06
2.348E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
300
6.625E+02
-1.750E+06
-3.469E+05
-2.026E+06
3.503E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
400
8.820E+02
-2.291E+06
-4.606E+05
-2.740E+06
4.650E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
500
1.105E+03
-2.824E+06
-5.752E+05
-3.468E+06
5.809E+03
59
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
Strain
1:4
MB
Load
(KN)
100
1.336E-07
-3.660E-04
-6.992E-05
-4.024E-04
6.319E-07
0.11
1:4
MB
200
3.422E-07
-6.985E-04
-1.389E-04
-8.096E-04
1.262E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
300
5.110E-07
-1.031E-03
-2.076E-04
-1.224E-03
1.890E-06
0.11
Mortar
Brick
LB
LU
RB
RU
1:4
MB
400
6.829E-07
-1.375E-03
-2.766E-04
-1.641E-03
2.518E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
500
8.562E-07
-1.778E-03
-3.458E-04
-2.011E-03
3.147E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
100
1.612E-07
-4.320E-04
-8.286E-05
-4.779E-04
8.237E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
200
3.111E-07
-8.317E-04
-1.647E-04
-9.632E-04
1.646E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
300
4.622E-07
-1.217E-03
-2.461E-04
-1.443E-03
2.461E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
400
6.191E-07
-1.625E-03
-3.206E-04
-1.943E-03
3.304E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
500
7.797E-07
-2.106E-03
-3.961E-04
-2.384E-03
4.169E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
100
1.592E-07
-3.828E-04
-7.289E-05
-4.188E-04
6.454E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
200
3.540E-07
-7.226E-04
-1.442E-04
-8.000E-04
1.287E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
300
5.338E-07
-1.078E-03
-2.155E-04
-1.251E-03
1.934E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
400
7.173E-07
-1.489E-03
-2.864E-04
-1.618E-03
2.584E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
500
9.008E-07
-1.854E-03
-3.567E-04
-1.825E-03
3.244E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
100
1.694E-07
-4.541E-04
-8.709E-05
-5.034E-04
8.198E-07
0.11
1:6
LB
200
3.341E-07
-8.604E-04
-1.727E-04
-9.626E-04
1.632E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
300
5.027E-07
-1.274E-03
-2.584E-04
-1.486E-03
2.445E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
400
6.795E-07
-1.762E-03
-3.365E-04
-1.944E-03
3.288E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
500
8.584E-07
-2.261E-03
-4.152E-04
-2.222E-03
4.163E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
100
6.752E-08
-1.849E-04
-3.536E-05
-2.030E-04
3.198E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
200
1.349E-07
-3.711E-04
-7.073E-05
-4.091E-04
6.401E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
300
2.615E-07
-5.398E-04
-1.057E-04
-6.297E-04
9.602E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
400
3.450E-07
-7.035E-04
-1.404E-04
-8.356E-04
1.278E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
500
4.300E-07
-8.702E-04
-1.751E-04
-1.067E-03
1.596E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
100
8.220E-08
-2.201E-04
-4.241E-05
-2.427E-04
4.212E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
200
1.641E-07
-4.420E-04
-8.471E-05
-4.906E-04
8.433E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
300
2.404E-07
-6.477E-04
-1.267E-04
-7.562E-04
1.266E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
400
3.161E-07
-8.441E-04
-1.683E-04
-1.004E-03
1.684E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
500
3.930E-07
-1.041E-03
-2.102E-04
-1.274E-03
2.102E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
100
8.139E-08
-1.971E-04
-3.712E-05
-2.127E-04
3.278E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
200
1.615E-07
-3.872E-04
-7.400E-05
-4.293E-04
6.563E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
300
2.693E-07
-5.573E-04
-1.104E-04
-6.434E-04
9.820E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
400
3.588E-07
-7.309E-04
-1.464E-04
-8.752E-04
1.309E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
500
4.499E-07
-9.042E-04
-1.826E-04
-1.105E-03
1.636E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
100
8.771E-08
-2.352E-04
-4.487E-05
-2.574E-04
4.207E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
200
1.734E-07
-4.641E-04
-8.939E-05
-5.215E-04
8.431E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
300
2.569E-07
-6.716E-04
-1.334E-04
-7.811E-04
1.261E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
400
3.423E-07
-8.782E-04
-1.773E-04
-1.052E-03
1.679E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
500
4.288E-07
-1.082E-03
-2.215E-04
-1.328E-03
2.096E-06
60

Input
Reactions
Displacement
(mm)
Thickness
(m)
Mortar
Brick
Load
(KN)
HzL
(N)
HzR
(N)
V
(N)
ML
(N-m)
MR
(N-m)
0.11
1:4
MB
100
-40118
-59882
69917
29529
38302
5.147
0.11
1:4
MB
200
-80713
-119290
139610
59584
76987
10.500
0.11
1:4
MB
300
-122000
-178000
209000
90150
116000
15.900
-238000
278000
121000
155000
21.400
-297000
348000
152000
195000
26.900
0.11
1:4
MB
400
-162000
0.11
1:4
MB
500
-203000
0.11
1:4
LB
100
-40347
-59653
69710
30032
38628
5.271
-118840
139200
60575
77627
10.694
0.11
1:4
LB
200
-81158
0.11
1:4
LB
300
-122330
-177670
208410
91755
117120
16.262
0.11
1:4
LB
400
-163400
-236600
277440
123330
156920
21.943
-295600
346340
155210
196940
27.708
38500
5.226
0.11
1:4
LB
500
-204400
0.11
1:6
MB
100
-40302
-59698
69794
29826
0.11
1:6
MB
200
-81179
-118820
139250
60428
77585
10.656
-178150
208550
91358
116960
16.181
0.11
1:6
MB
300
-121850
0.11
1:6
MB
400
-162170
-237830
277670
122660
156650
21.819
0.11
1:6
MB
500
-199080
-300920
345420
156670
199130
28.474
0.11
1:6
LB
100
-40535
-59465
69576
30355
38842
5.355
-118360
138810
61484
78264
10.915
0.11
1:6
LB
200
-81636
0.11
1:6
LB
300
-122660
-177340
207840
93068
118060
16.599
0.11
1:6
LB
400
-163510
-236490
276680
125080
158180
22.403
-298970
344350
159450
200650
29.049
37355
4.789
0.11
1:6
LB
500
-201030
0.23
1:4
MB
100
-39422
-60578
70519
28067
0.23
1:4
MB
200
-78888
-121110
141030
56140
74720
9.580
-181320
211380
84611
112360
14.501
0.23
1:4
MB
300
-118680
0.23
1:4
MB
400
-158910
-241090
281530
113540
150340
19.523
0.23
1:4
MB
500
-199220
-300780
351570
142700
188520
24.591
-60453
70408
28338
37531
4.856
56687
75070
9.714
0.23
1:4
LB
100
-39547
0.23
1:4
LB
200
-79106
-120890
140810
0.23
1:4
LB
300
-119050
-180950
211050
85424
112880
14.699
-240550
281060
114670
151080
19.801
0.23
1:4
LB
400
-159450
0.23
1:4
LB
500
-199890
-300110
350990
144100
189430
24.935
0.23
1:6
MB
100
-39486
-60514
70470
28187
37434
4.818
0.23
1:6
MB
200
-79180
-120820
140850
56584
75014
9.705
-180590
210970
85569
113040
14.747
0.23
1:6
MB
300
-119410
0.23
1:6
MB
400
-159750
-240250
280950
114880
151320
19.851
0.23
1:6
MB
500
-199830
-300170
350860
144320
189740
25.008
-60380
70349
28480
37623
4.890
57161
75387
9.845
0.23
1:6
LB
100
-39620
0.23
1:6
LB
200
-79442
-120560
140610
0.23
1:6
LB
300
-119780
-180220
210630
86408
113570
14.955
-239720
280460
116060
152090
20.141
-299450
350230
145850
190730
25.382
0.23
1:6
LB
400
-160280
0.23
1:6
LB
500
-200550
61
Stress (N/m2)
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
1:4
MB
Load
(KN)
100
3.331E+02
-1.732E+06
-2.428E+05
-1.531E+06
2.452E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
200
6.311E+02
-3.306E+06
-4.836E+05
-3.367E+06
4.885E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
300
9.259E+02
-4.779E+06
-7.203E+05
-5.676E+06
7.276E+03
0.11
Mortar
Brick
LB
LU
RB
RU
1:4
MB
400
1.227E+03
-6.377E+06
-9.584E+05
-7.503E+06
9.678E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
500
1.525E+03
-7.956E+06
-1.191E+06
-8.529E+06
1.203E+04
0.11
1:4
LB
100
4.111E+02
-1.601E+06
-2.327E+05
-1.425E+06
2.351E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
200
7.862E+02
-3.060E+06
-4.635E+05
-3.115E+06
4.684E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
300
1.147E+03
-4.488E+06
-6.929E+05
-5.120E+06
6.999E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
400
1.514E+03
-6.022E+06
-9.040E+05
-6.855E+06
9.130E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
500
1.883E+03
-7.457E+06
-1.118E+06
-8.117E+06
1.129E+04
0.11
1:6
MB
100
2.131E+02
-1.787E+06
-2.430E+05
-1.649E+06
2.454E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
200
3.972E+02
-3.314E+06
-4.812E+05
-3.789E+06
4.864E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
300
5.928E+02
-4.711E+06
-7.162E+05
-5.590E+06
7.233E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
400
7.954E+02
-6.018E+06
-9.489E+05
-6.035E+06
9.584E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
500
1.243E+03
-5.864E+06
-1.167E+06
-6.335E+06
1.179E+04
0.11
1:6
LB
100
2.850E+02
-1.684E+06
-2.364E+05
-1.544E+06
2.388E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
200
5.384E+02
-3.113E+06
-4.685E+05
-3.448E+06
4.731E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
300
7.906E+02
-4.607E+06
-6.993E+05
-5.213E+06
7.063E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
400
1.039E+03
-6.036E+06
-9.124E+05
-6.181E+06
9.214E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
500
1.485E+03
-5.787E+06
-1.117E+06
-6.356E+06
1.129E+04
0.23
1:4
MB
100
1.681E+02
-8.693E+05
-1.234E+05
-7.642E+05
1.252E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
200
3.363E+02
-1.764E+06
-2.457E+05
-1.559E+06
2.485E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
300
4.866E+02
-2.615E+06
-3.673E+05
-2.450E+06
3.713E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
400
6.320E+02
-3.412E+06
-4.887E+05
-3.855E+06
4.934E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
500
7.786E+02
-4.130E+06
-6.085E+05
-5.264E+06
6.134E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
100
2.095E+02
-8.071E+05
-1.212E+05
-7.183E+05
1.208E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
200
4.186E+02
-1.645E+06
-2.378E+05
-1.461E+06
2.398E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
300
6.102E+02
-2.443E+06
-3.558E+05
-2.295E+06
3.591E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
400
7.941E+02
-3.174E+06
-4.735E+05
-3.505E+06
4.781E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
500
9.782E+02
-3.884E+06
-5.904E+05
-4.820E+06
5.956E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
100
1.114E+02
-9.367E+05
-1.218E+05
-8.174E+05
1.232E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
200
2.136E+02
-1.839E+06
-2.467E+05
-1.694E+06
2.493E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
300
3.046E+02
-2.632E+06
-3.687E+05
-2.836E+06
3.721E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
400
3.972E+02
-3.381E+06
-4.887E+05
-4.331E+06
4.935E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
500
4.945E+02
-4.063E+06
-6.084E+05
-5.219E+06
6.146E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
100
1.489E+02
-8.805E+05
-1.215E+05
-7.728E+05
1.230E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
200
2.891E+02
-1.753E+06
-2.426E+05
-1.603E+06
2.450E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
300
4.169E+02
-2.499E+06
-3.627E+05
-2.619E+06
3.662E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
400
5.449E+02
-3.204E+06
-4.810E+05
-4.022E+06
4.854E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
500
6.748E+02
-3.857E+06
-5.998E+05
-4.934E+06
6.055E+03
62
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
Strain
1:4
MB
Load
(KN)
100
1.003E-07
-5.223E-04
-7.558E-05
-4.618E-04
1.381E-07
0.11
1:4
MB
200
1.902E-07
-1.000E-03
-1.509E-04
-1.017E-03
2.778E-07
0.11
1:4
MB
300
2.786E-07
-1.454E-03
-2.242E-04
-1.709E-03
4.162E-07
0.11
Mortar
Brick
LB
LU
RB
RU
1:4
MB
400
3.699E-07
-1.947E-03
-2.984E-04
-2.261E-03
5.507E-07
0.11
1:4
MB
500
4.590E-07
-2.445E-03
-3.726E-04
-2.575E-03
6.822E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
100
1.567E-07
-6.112E-04
-9.177E-05
-5.441E-04
1.541E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
200
2.997E-07
-1.173E-03
-1.829E-04
-1.191E-03
3.091E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
300
4.374E-07
-1.729E-03
-2.735E-04
-1.954E-03
4.608E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
400
5.771E-07
-2.335E-03
-3.573E-04
-2.618E-03
6.104E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
500
7.178E-07
-2.909E-03
-4.420E-04
-3.102E-03
7.590E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
100
6.421E-08
-5.386E-04
-7.555E-05
-4.982E-04
1.612E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
200
1.197E-07
-1.006E-03
-1.497E-04
-1.142E-03
3.233E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
300
1.786E-07
-1.434E-03
-2.228E-04
-1.685E-03
4.820E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
400
2.396E-07
-1.839E-03
-2.952E-04
-1.818E-03
6.353E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
500
3.746E-07
-1.786E-03
-3.624E-04
-1.908E-03
6.819E-07
0.11
1:6
LB
100
1.087E-07
-6.429E-04
-9.315E-05
-5.902E-04
1.781E-07
0.11
1:6
LB
200
2.052E-07
-1.196E-03
-1.847E-04
-1.316E-03
3.564E-07
0.11
1:6
LB
300
3.014E-07
-1.783E-03
-2.758E-04
-1.989E-03
5.286E-07
0.11
1:6
LB
400
3.960E-07
-2.355E-03
-3.603E-04
-2.360E-03
6.994E-07
0.11
1:6
LB
500
5.660E-07
-2.236E-03
-4.407E-04
-2.423E-03
7.726E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
100
5.064E-08
-2.621E-04
-3.845E-05
-2.304E-04
6.969E-08
0.23
1:4
MB
200
1.013E-07
-5.319E-04
-7.648E-05
-4.703E-04
1.395E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
300
1.466E-07
-7.891E-04
-1.143E-04
-7.403E-04
2.103E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
400
1.903E-07
-1.033E-03
-1.521E-04
-1.164E-03
2.810E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
500
2.345E-07
-1.254E-03
-1.895E-04
-1.587E-03
3.515E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
100
7.987E-08
-3.082E-04
-4.787E-05
-2.741E-04
7.856E-08
0.23
1:4
LB
200
1.596E-07
-6.279E-04
-9.375E-05
-5.577E-04
1.571E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
300
2.326E-07
-9.334E-04
-1.403E-04
-8.774E-04
2.369E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
400
3.027E-07
-1.217E-03
-1.868E-04
-1.339E-03
3.163E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
500
3.729E-07
-1.493E-03
-2.329E-04
-1.840E-03
3.948E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
100
3.356E-08
-2.824E-04
-3.782E-05
-2.467E-04
8.141E-08
0.23
1:6
MB
200
6.436E-08
-5.544E-04
-7.668E-05
-5.119E-04
1.637E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
300
9.178E-08
-7.972E-04
-1.146E-04
-8.558E-04
2.462E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
400
1.197E-07
-1.027E-03
-1.520E-04
-1.305E-03
3.287E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
500
1.490E-07
-1.236E-03
-1.893E-04
-1.573E-03
4.097E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
100
5.678E-08
-3.361E-04
-4.787E-05
-2.951E-04
9.092E-08
0.23
1:6
LB
200
1.102E-07
-6.690E-04
-9.557E-05
-6.127E-04
1.828E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
300
1.589E-07
-9.583E-04
-1.429E-04
-1.001E-03
2.747E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
400
2.077E-07
-1.232E-03
-1.896E-04
-1.535E-03
3.665E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
500
2.572E-07
-1.485E-03
-2.365E-04
-1.883E-03
4.556E-07
63

Input
Reactions
Displacement
(mm)
Thickness
(m)
Mortar
Brick
Load
(KN)
HzL
(N)
HzR
(N)
V
(N)
ML
(N-m)
MR
(N-m)
0.11
1:4
MB
100
-39266
-60734
62023
29192
39202
4.992
0.11
1:4
MB
200
-78893
-121110
123880
58808
78722
10.111
0.11
1:4
MB
300
-119070
-180930
185480
89090
118770
15.378
-240680
247000
119530
158960
20.693
-300430
308420
150250
199380
26.086
0.11
1:4
MB
400
-159320
0.11
1:4
MB
500
-199570
0.11
1:4
LB
100
-39524
-60476
61811
29771
39577
5.130
-120570
123450
59984
79485
10.389
0.11
1:4
LB
200
-79426
0.11
1:4
LB
300
-119920
-180080
184790
90948
119980
15.819
0.11
1:4
LB
400
-160620
-239380
245990
122300
160760
21.347
-298520
307000
154100
201880
26.993
39409
5.070
0.11
1:4
LB
500
-201480
0.11
1:6
MB
100
-39433
-60567
61908
29505
0.11
1:6
MB
200
-79483
-120520
123530
59741
79386
10.331
-180220
184990
90364
119690
15.690
0.11
1:6
MB
300
-119780
0.11
1:6
MB
400
-160170
-239830
246310
121330
160300
21.158
0.11
1:6
MB
500
-205210
-294790
306200
155390
204200
27.917
0.11
1:6
LB
100
-39697
-60303
61683
30120
39805
5.215
-119990
123070
60988
80189
10.627
0.11
1:6
LB
200
-80011
0.11
1:6
LB
300
-120700
-179300
184250
92394
121000
16.170
0.11
1:6
LB
400
-161550
-238450
245200
124350
162240
21.862
-293660
305020
158810
206080
28.566
38110
4.593
0.11
1:6
LB
500
-206340
0.23
1:4
MB
100
-38487
-61513
62642
27504
0.23
1:4
MB
200
-76982
-123020
125280
55015
76225
9.188
-184270
187810
82815
114550
13.878
0.23
1:4
MB
300
-115730
0.23
1:4
MB
400
-154960
-245040
250150
111090
153250
18.686
0.23
1:4
MB
500
-197742
-302257
309158
139892
191614
23.689
-61370
62527
27816
38312
4.667
55645
76633
9.338
0.23
1:4
LB
100
-38630
0.23
1:4
LB
200
-77275
-122730
125050
0.23
1:4
LB
300
-116190
-183810
187450
83784
115180
14.109
-244430
249670
112380
154090
18.992
0.23
1:4
LB
400
-155570
0.23
1:4
LB
500
-195200
-304800
311770
141280
193240
23.927
0.23
1:6
MB
100
-38559
-61441
62591
27642
38199
4.625
0.23
1:6
MB
200
-77258
-122740
125120
55450
76520
9.305
-183490
187420
83819
115280
14.131
0.23
1:6
MB
300
-116510
0.23
1:6
MB
400
-139186
-260813
266527
119077
163891
20.069
0.23
1:6
MB
500
-195620
-304380
311700
141370
193470
23.962
-61287
62466
27982
38419
4.706
56130
76959
9.465
0.23
1:6
LB
100
-38713
0.23
1:6
LB
200
-77563
-122440
124870
0.23
1:6
LB
300
-116980
-183020
187040
84855
115950
14.376
-243340
249080
113920
155210
19.355
-300774
307676
139491
190884
23.639
0.23
1:6
LB
400
-156660
0.23
1:6
LB
500
-199225.1
64
Stress (N/m2)
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
0.11
LB
LU
RB
RU
MB
Load
(KN)
100
3.025E+03
-1.271E+06
-2.533E+05
-1.079E+06
2.552E+03
Mortar
Brick
1:4
1:4
MB
200
6.100E+03
-2.480E+06
-5.056E+05
-2.175E+06
5.107E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
300
9.216E+03
-3.614E+06
-7.556E+05
-3.342E+06
7.632E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
400
1.238E+04
-4.705E+06
-1.006E+06
-4.592E+06
1.016E+04
0.11
1:4
MB
500
1.561E+04
-5.787E+06
-1.256E+06
-5.947E+06
1.269E+04
0.11
1:4
LB
100
2.894E+03
-1.195E+06
-2.423E+05
-1.018E+06
2.447E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
200
5.849E+03
-2.332E+06
-4.839E+05
-2.061E+06
4.886E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
300
8.894E+03
-3.396E+06
-7.254E+05
-3.122E+06
7.323E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
400
1.213E+04
-4.439E+06
-9.515E+05
-4.260E+06
9.608E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
500
1.554E+04
-5.503E+06
-1.179E+06
-5.529E+06
1.190E+04
0.11
1:6
MB
100
3.066E+03
-1.303E+06
-2.545E+05
-1.118E+06
2.578E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
200
6.185E+03
-2.484E+06
-5.060E+05
-2.273E+06
5.117E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
300
9.365E+03
-3.589E+06
-7.543E+05
-3.549E+06
7.619E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
400
1.260E+04
-4.587E+06
-1.001E+06
-4.854E+06
1.011E+04
0.11
1:6
MB
500
1.587E+04
-4.457E+06
-1.229E+06
-5.914E+06
1.241E+04
0.11
1:6
LB
100
2.959E+03
-1.242E+06
-2.470E+05
-1.066E+06
2.499E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
200
5.985E+03
-2.366E+06
-4.913E+05
-2.168E+06
4.966E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
300
9.114E+03
-3.413E+06
-7.351E+05
-3.324E+06
7.422E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
400
1.244E+04
-4.404E+06
-9.641E+05
-4.619E+06
9.736E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
500
1.580E+04
-4.385E+06
-1.180E+06
-5.714E+06
1.192E+04
0.23
1:4
MB
100
1.535E+03
-6.443E+05
-1.290E+05
-5.503E+05
1.304E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
200
3.070E+03
-1.294E+06
-2.566E+05
-1.088E+06
2.588E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
300
4.625E+03
-1.918E+06
-3.844E+05
-1.638E+06
3.883E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
400
6.195E+03
-2.506E+06
-5.121E+05
-2.199E+06
5.187E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
500
7.799E+03
-3.043E+06
-6.338E+05
-2.877E+06
6.402E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
100
1.483E+03
-6.106E+05
-1.263E+05
-5.171E+05
1.274E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
200
2.968E+03
-1.231E+06
-2.479E+05
-1.037E+06
2.505E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
300
4.478E+03
-1.829E+06
-3.716E+05
-1.568E+06
3.753E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
400
6.007E+03
-2.379E+06
-4.953E+05
-2.103E+06
5.002E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
500
7.561E+03
-2.939E+06
-6.188E+05
-2.658E+06
6.248E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
100
1.558E+03
-6.712E+05
-1.277E+05
-5.742E+05
1.304E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
200
3.126E+03
-1.325E+06
-2.588E+05
-1.131E+06
2.607E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
300
4.709E+03
-1.931E+06
-3.875E+05
-1.715E+06
3.912E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
400
6.604E+03
-2.637E+06
-5.434E+05
-2.372E+06
5.486E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
500
7.926E+03
-3.087E+06
-6.416E+05
-2.999E+06
6.484E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
100
1.521E+03
-6.430E+05
-1.271E+05
-5.433E+05
1.288E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
200
3.053E+03
-1.277E+06
-2.539E+05
-1.090E+06
2.574E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
300
4.605E+03
-1.864E+06
-3.803E+05
-1.658E+06
3.842E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
400
6.180E+03
-2.426E+06
-5.054E+05
-2.245E+06
5.105E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
500
7.691E+03
-2.985E+06
-6.265E+05
-2.762E+06
6.331E+03
65
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
0.11
Strain
Mortar
Brick
1:4
MB
Load
(KN)
100
LB
LU
RB
RU
9.112E-07
-3.993E-04
-8.054E-05
-3.308E-04
8.153E-07
1:4
MB
200
1.837E-06
-7.766E-04
-1.608E-04
-6.661E-04
1.629E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
300
2.776E-06
-1.129E-03
-2.404E-04
-1.020E-03
2.454E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
400
3.729E-06
-1.468E-03
-3.203E-04
-1.398E-03
3.284E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
500
4.702E-06
-1.807E-03
-4.002E-04
-1.809E-03
4.119E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
100
1.103E-06
-4.750E-04
-9.751E-05
-3.950E-04
9.964E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
200
2.230E-06
-9.239E-04
-1.948E-04
-7.989E-04
1.992E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
300
3.391E-06
-1.343E-03
-2.924E-04
-1.208E-03
3.001E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
400
4.624E-06
-1.754E-03
-3.841E-04
-1.645E-03
4.049E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
500
5.925E-06
-2.176E-03
-4.764E-04
-2.135E-03
5.137E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
100
9.234E-07
-4.093E-04
-8.089E-05
-3.425E-04
8.157E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
200
1.863E-06
-7.766E-04
-1.609E-04
-6.938E-04
1.635E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
300
2.821E-06
-1.120E-03
-2.400E-04
-1.080E-03
2.468E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
400
3.796E-06
-1.431E-03
-3.188E-04
-1.477E-03
3.304E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
500
4.778E-06
-1.373E-03
-3.924E-04
-1.809E-03
3.953E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
100
1.128E-06
-4.935E-04
-9.940E-05
-4.135E-04
1.004E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
200
2.282E-06
-9.357E-04
-1.979E-04
-8.387E-04
2.013E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
300
3.475E-06
-1.347E-03
-2.964E-04
-1.283E-03
3.039E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
400
4.745E-06
-1.739E-03
-3.894E-04
-1.780E-03
4.104E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
500
6.025E-06
-1.712E-03
-4.780E-04
-2.207E-03
5.025E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
100
4.623E-07
-2.026E-04
-4.103E-05
-1.690E-04
4.129E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
200
9.246E-07
-4.069E-04
-8.157E-05
-3.338E-04
8.258E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
300
1.393E-06
-6.019E-04
-1.222E-04
-5.023E-04
1.238E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
400
1.866E-06
-7.850E-04
-1.628E-04
-6.718E-04
1.651E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
500
2.392E-06
-9.676E-04
-2.046E-04
-9.066E-04
2.093E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
100
5.656E-07
-2.428E-04
-5.090E-05
-2.008E-04
5.098E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
200
1.132E-06
-4.896E-04
-9.977E-05
-4.027E-04
1.020E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
300
1.707E-06
-7.264E-04
-1.495E-04
-6.087E-04
1.529E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
400
2.290E-06
-9.427E-04
-1.994E-04
-8.138E-04
2.040E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
500
2.883E-06
-1.164E-03
-2.493E-04
-1.026E-03
2.557E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
100
4.692E-07
-2.112E-04
-4.057E-05
-1.762E-04
4.149E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
200
9.415E-07
-4.163E-04
-8.224E-05
-3.468E-04
8.293E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
300
1.419E-06
-6.050E-04
-1.232E-04
-5.235E-04
1.244E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
400
1.920E-06
-7.996E-04
-1.663E-04
-7.108E-04
1.688E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
500
2.388E-06
-9.644E-04
-2.041E-04
-9.108E-04
2.088E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
100
5.798E-07
-2.559E-04
-5.115E-05
-2.110E-04
5.165E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
200
1.164E-06
-5.076E-04
-1.022E-04
-4.233E-04
1.033E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
300
1.756E-06
-7.387E-04
-1.531E-04
-6.412E-04
1.550E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
400
2.356E-06
-9.597E-04
-2.036E-04
-8.657E-04
2.074E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
500
2.803E-06
-1.130E-03
-2.421E-04
-1.006E-03
2.484E-06
66

Input
Reactions
Displacement
(mm)
Thickness
(m)
Mortar
Brick
Load
(KN)
HzL
(N)
HzR
(N)
V
(N)
ML
(N-m)
MR
(N-m)
0.11
1:4
MB
100
-38574
-61426
55649
29068
40188
4.923
0.11
1:4
MB
200
-77472
-122530
111160
58528
80685
9.961
0.11
1:4
MB
300
-116980
-183020
166410
88705
121770
15.161
-243350
221590
119050
163000
20.412
-303400
276650
149720
204530
25.761
0.11
1:4
MB
400
-156650
0.11
1:4
MB
500
-196600
0.11
1:4
LB
100
-38848
-61152
55434
29722
40610
5.074
-121940
110720
59866
81551
10.269
0.11
1:4
LB
200
-78056
0.11
1:4
LB
300
-117910
-182090
165700
90836
123150
15.652
0.11
1:4
LB
400
-158110
-241890
220520
122280
165120
21.155
-301350
275170
154190
207440
26.776
40380
4.989
0.11
1:4
LB
500
-198650
0.11
1:6
MB
100
-38711
-61289
55551
29363
0.11
1:6
MB
200
-78088
-121910
110810
59534
81409
10.195
-182190
165930
90088
122770
15.495
0.11
1:6
MB
300
-117810
0.11
1:6
MB
400
-158550
-241450
220770
121270
164900
21.087
0.11
1:6
MB
500
-203820
-296180
274110
156130
210800
28.048
0.11
1:6
LB
100
-39007
-60993
55318
30072
40838
5.153
-121320
110340
60971
82330
10.525
0.11
1:6
LB
200
-78677
0.11
1:6
LB
300
-118820
-181180
165150
92447
124300
16.036
0.11
1:6
LB
400
-159390
-240610
219760
124470
166740
21.713
-295010
272850
160190
213060
28.813
38951
4.482
0.11
1:6
LB
500
-204990
0.23
1:4
MB
100
-37731
-62269
56280
27151
0.23
1:4
MB
200
-75471
-124530
112560
54311
77909
8.966
-186570
168750
81711
117060
13.532
0.23
1:4
MB
300
-113430
0.23
1:4
MB
400
-151850
-248150
224770
109570
156580
18.214
0.23
1:4
MB
500
-190560
-309440
280660
137800
196410
22.964
-62115
56163
27506
39180
4.564
55025
78372
9.132
0.23
1:4
LB
100
-37885
0.23
1:4
LB
200
-75787
-124210
112320
0.23
1:4
LB
300
-113920
-186080
168390
82795
117760
13.781
-247490
224280
111050
157540
18.553
0.23
1:4
LB
400
-152510
0.23
1:4
LB
500
-191430
-308570
280040
139670
197620
23.392
0.23
1:6
MB
100
-37808
-62192
56228
27307
39053
4.517
0.23
1:6
MB
200
-75727
-124270
112410
54739
78203
9.076
-185820
168390
82725
117810
13.787
0.23
1:6
MB
300
-114180
0.23
1:6
MB
400
-152980
-247020
224230
111110
157740
18.573
0.23
1:6
MB
500
-191930
-308070
280010
139630
197810
23.404
-62026
56100
27695
39303
4.607
55418
78627
9.220
0.23
1:6
LB
100
-37974
0.23
1:6
LB
200
-75976
-124020
112190
0.23
1:6
LB
300
-114670
-185330
168010
83893
118550
14.052
-246320
223700
112720
158780
18.940
-307180
279320
141720
199160
23.883
0.23
1:6
LB
400
-153680
0.23
1:6
LB
500
-192820
67
Stress (N/m2)
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
0.11
LB
LU
RB
RU
MB
Load
(KN)
100
2.184E+03
-1.318E+06
-2.553E+05
-1.126E+06
2.579E+03
Mortar
Brick
1:4
1:4
MB
200
4.376E+03
-2.568E+06
-5.100E+05
-2.311E+06
5.152E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
300
6.588E+03
-3.719E+06
-7.662E+05
-3.863E+06
7.739E+03
0.11
1:4
MB
400
8.839E+03
-4.828E+06
-1.026E+06
-5.596E+06
1.036E+04
0.11
1:4
MB
500
1.114E+04
-5.855E+06
-1.288E+06
-7.585E+06
1.301E+04
0.11
1:4
LB
100
2.286E+03
-1.239E+06
-2.349E+05
-1.055E+06
2.371E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
200
4.600E+03
-2.409E+06
-4.696E+05
-2.169E+06
4.743E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
300
6.973E+03
-3.500E+06
-7.086E+05
-3.473E+06
7.157E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
400
9.478E+03
-4.553E+06
-9.362E+05
-5.012E+06
9.459E+03
0.11
1:4
LB
500
1.211E+04
-5.634E+06
-1.162E+06
-6.822E+06
1.174E+04
0.11
1:6
MB
100
2.291E+03
-1.365E+06
-2.706E+05
-1.190E+06
2.738E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
200
4.593E+03
-2.561E+06
-5.392E+05
-2.576E+06
5.443E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
300
6.949E+03
-3.669E+06
-8.107E+05
-4.352E+06
8.191E+03
0.11
1:6
MB
400
9.448E+03
-4.291E+06
-1.081E+06
-6.099E+06
1.091E+04
0.11
1:6
MB
500
1.236E+04
-4.289E+06
-1.329E+06
-7.943E+06
1.343E+04
0.11
1:6
LB
100
2.419E+03
-1.297E+06
-2.528E+05
-1.119E+06
2.548E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
200
4.874E+03
-2.435E+06
-5.048E+05
-2.389E+06
5.091E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
300
7.414E+03
-3.490E+06
-7.618E+05
-3.920E+06
7.687E+03
0.11
1:6
LB
400
1.011E+04
-4.397E+06
-1.006E+06
-5.696E+06
1.017E+04
0.11
1:6
LB
500
1.310E+04
-4.200E+06
-1.229E+06
-7.613E+06
1.241E+04
0.23
1:4
MB
100
1.166E+03
-6.692E+05
-1.296E+05
-5.672E+05
1.310E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
200
2.219E+03
-1.345E+06
-2.591E+05
-1.139E+06
2.619E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
300
3.332E+03
-1.992E+06
-3.884E+05
-1.725E+06
3.926E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
400
4.448E+03
-2.599E+06
-5.176E+05
-2.443E+06
5.231E+03
0.23
1:4
MB
500
5.569E+03
-3.202E+06
-6.472E+05
-3.308E+06
6.537E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
100
1.174E+03
-6.335E+05
-1.178E+05
-5.360E+05
1.190E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
200
2.349E+03
-1.279E+06
-2.409E+05
-1.078E+06
2.434E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
300
3.533E+03
-1.896E+06
-3.613E+05
-1.642E+06
3.650E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
400
4.731E+03
-2.465E+06
-4.818E+05
-2.296E+06
4.862E+03
0.23
1:4
LB
500
5.945E+03
-3.036E+06
-6.044E+05
-3.072E+06
6.103E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
100
1.245E+03
-6.976E+05
-1.379E+05
-6.001E+05
1.390E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
200
2.338E+03
-1.380E+06
-2.756E+05
-1.210E+06
2.790E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
300
3.511E+03
-1.999E+06
-4.129E+05
-1.933E+06
4.178E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
400
4.693E+03
-2.602E+06
-5.499E+05
-2.768E+06
5.562E+03
0.23
1:6
MB
500
5.893E+03
-3.175E+06
-6.883E+05
-3.686E+06
6.960E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
100
1.248E+03
-6.677E+05
-1.300E+05
-5.695E+05
1.313E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
200
2.498E+03
-1.347E+06
-2.606E+05
-1.151E+06
2.629E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
300
3.763E+03
-1.929E+06
-3.903E+05
-1.835E+06
3.943E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
400
5.043E+03
-2.503E+06
-5.210E+05
-2.617E+06
5.266E+03
0.23
1:6
LB
500
6.351E+03
-3.053E+06
-6.537E+05
-3.483E+06
6.603E+03
68
Input
Thickness
(m)
0.11
0.11
Strain
Mortar
Brick
1:4
MB
Load
(KN)
100
LB
LU
RB
RU
6.930E-07
-4.183E-04
-8.236E-05
-3.453E-04
4.077E-07
1:4
MB
200
1.388E-06
-8.126E-04
-1.646E-04
-7.060E-04
6.935E-07
0.11
1:4
MB
300
2.089E-06
-1.174E-03
-2.475E-04
-1.169E-03
1.046E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
400
2.803E-06
-1.524E-03
-3.316E-04
-1.692E-03
1.401E-06
0.11
1:4
MB
500
3.533E-06
-1.848E-03
-4.167E-04
-2.296E-03
1.761E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
100
9.259E-07
-4.972E-04
-9.575E-05
-4.089E-04
4.887E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
200
1.862E-06
-9.642E-04
-1.916E-04
-8.375E-04
9.782E-07
0.11
1:4
LB
300
2.822E-06
-1.399E-03
-2.895E-04
-1.332E-03
1.481E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
400
3.835E-06
-1.817E-03
-3.832E-04
-1.919E-03
2.009E-06
0.11
1:4
LB
500
4.898E-06
-2.252E-03
-4.763E-04
-2.616E-03
2.562E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
100
7.261E-07
-4.337E-04
-8.744E-05
-3.651E-04
3.582E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
200
1.455E-06
-8.098E-04
-1.744E-04
-7.821E-04
7.180E-07
0.11
1:6
MB
300
2.202E-06
-1.158E-03
-2.624E-04
-1.317E-03
1.085E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
400
2.995E-06
-1.348E-03
-3.501E-04
-1.856E-03
1.443E-06
0.11
1:6
MB
500
3.925E-06
-1.336E-03
-4.311E-04
-2.464E-03
1.746E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
100
9.767E-07
-5.209E-04
-1.033E-04
-4.344E-04
5.052E-07
0.11
1:6
LB
200
1.967E-06
-9.736E-04
-2.065E-04
-9.190E-04
1.013E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
300
2.992E-06
-1.392E-03
-3.120E-04
-1.503E-03
1.538E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
400
4.078E-06
-1.754E-03
-4.128E-04
-2.187E-03
2.088E-06
0.11
1:6
LB
500
5.295E-06
-1.657E-03
-5.052E-04
-2.971E-03
2.599E-06
0.23
1:4
MB
100
3.713E-07
-2.125E-04
-4.179E-05
-1.742E-04
2.071E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
200
7.041E-07
-4.272E-04
-8.359E-05
-3.495E-04
4.143E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
300
1.057E-06
-6.318E-04
-1.253E-04
-5.288E-04
5.280E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
400
1.411E-06
-8.228E-04
-1.670E-04
-7.413E-04
7.043E-07
0.23
1:4
MB
500
1.766E-06
-1.013E-03
-2.090E-04
-9.991E-04
8.830E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
100
4.755E-07
-2.544E-04
-4.803E-05
-2.080E-04
2.509E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
200
9.513E-07
-5.137E-04
-9.821E-05
-4.180E-04
5.020E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
300
1.431E-06
-7.607E-04
-1.473E-04
-6.361E-04
7.527E-07
0.23
1:4
LB
400
1.915E-06
-9.871E-04
-1.965E-04
-8.818E-04
1.005E-06
0.23
1:4
LB
500
2.406E-06
-1.214E-03
-2.468E-04
-1.174E-03
1.262E-06
0.23
1:6
MB
100
3.959E-07
-2.218E-04
-4.457E-05
-1.845E-04
2.129E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
200
7.411E-07
-4.382E-04
-8.908E-05
-3.715E-04
3.649E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
300
1.112E-06
-6.329E-04
-1.335E-04
-5.866E-04
5.473E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
400
1.487E-06
-8.231E-04
-1.779E-04
-8.367E-04
7.326E-07
0.23
1:6
MB
500
1.867E-06
-1.003E-03
-2.227E-04
-1.114E-03
9.196E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
100
5.040E-07
-2.684E-04
-5.313E-05
-2.214E-04
2.607E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
200
1.009E-06
-5.417E-04
-1.065E-04
-4.469E-04
5.217E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
300
1.519E-06
-7.728E-04
-1.596E-04
-7.056E-04
7.816E-07
0.23
1:6
LB
400
2.036E-06
-1.001E-03
-2.132E-04
-1.001E-03
1.047E-06
0.23
1:6
LB
500
2.563E-06
-1.220E-03
-2.676E-04
-1.332E-03
1.317E-06
69
REFERENCES
Arulselvan, S. and K.Subramanian, K., Experimental Investigation on Three
Dimensional RC Infilled Frame - RC Plane Frame Interactions With Slab for

Seismic Resistance, American Journal of Applied Sciences, ISSN 1546-9239
2008
Asteris,P.G., Finite Element Micro-Modeling of Infilled Frames, Electronic Journal of
Structural Engineering (8) 2008
Bryan Stafford Smith and C. Carter, A Method of Analysis for Infilled Frames,
University of Southampton, Southampton College of Technology, February
1970
FEMA 306, Evaluation Of Earthquake Damaged Concrete And Masonry Wall Buildings,
Basic Procedures Manual, Prepared by: Applied Technology Council (ATC-43
Project) 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 550, Redwood City, California 94065,
Prepared for: The Partnership for Response and Recovery, Washington, D.C.,
Funded by: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1998
FEMA 356, Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of the buildings,
Prepared by: American society of Civil Engineers(ASCE), Reston, Virginia,
Prepared for: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., 1998
Ghassan Al-Chaar, Mohsen Issa, and Steve Sweeney, Behavior of Masonry-Infilled

Nonductile Rein forced Concrete Frame, Journal of Structural Engineering,
Vol. 128, No. 8, ASCE, ISSN 0733- 9445/2002/8-10551063, August 1, 2002
Moghaddam,H.A. and Karimian, M.R., Prediction of Cracking pattern and shear
strength of masonry infilled frames,2007
Ngandu, B.M., Bracing Steel Frames with Calcium Silicate Element Walls, Eindhoven
University of Technology, the Netherlands, 2006
Paulay, T. and Priestley, M.J.N., Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry
Buildings, John Wiley & Sons, U.S.A., 1992
70
Polyakov, S.V., Masonry in framed buildings (Godsudarstvenoe Isdatel stvo

Literatury Po Stroidal stvui Architecture. Moscow, 1956). Translated by G. L.
Cairns in 1963. National Lending Library for Science and Technology, Boston
Spa, Yorkshire, U.K.
Pradhan, P.L., Composite Actions of Brick Infill Wall In RC Frame under In-Plane
Lateral Load, Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University, Ph. D. Thesis,
2009
Rai, D.C., Masonary infills in Framed Buildings, Indian Institute of Technology,
Kanpur(India), 2009
Rooij, A., Steel frames with precast reinforced concrete infill panels, January 2005.
Shakya, A., Application of Artificial Neural Network in the Analysis of In-filled

Frame., Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University, M. Sc. Thesis,2003
Smyrou, E., Implementation and Verification of a masonry panel model for nonlinear
dynamic analysis of infilled RC frames, 2006
Thiruvengadam, V., On The Natural Frequencies fo In-filled Frames, Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 13, pp.401-419, 1985
71

(Er Ajay Gupta) Study On Reinforced Concrete Frame PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

(Er Ajay Gupta) Study On Reinforced Concrete Frame PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY

STUDY ON REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME WITH SOLID INFILL

AJAY KUMAR GUPTA

STUDY ON REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME WITH SOLID INFILL

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of

Assoc. Prof. Prajwal Lal Pradhan

Department of Civil Engineering

I would like to express my deep gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Assoc. Prof.

Ajay Kumar Gupta

Supervisor: Dr. Prajwal Lal Pradhan

LIST OF FIGURES viii

1.1 Infilled Frames

1.3 Why this Study ?

1.4 Objectives of the Study

1.5.1 Review of Literature

1.5.2 Collection of Input Data

1.5.3 Modeling of the Structure

1.5.4 Analysis of the Structure

1.5.5 Result Validation

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.2 Experimental Studies

2.3 Analytical Studies

2.4 About ANN

2.4.1 Back-Propagation Neural Network

2.4.2 The Back-Propagation Training Algorithm

CHAPTER 3: REINFORCED CONCRETE INFILL FRAME MATERIALS .. 16

3.5 Reinforced Concrete

CHAPTER 4: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL . 22

4.2 Modelling Strategy

4.2.1 Calibration of the Model

4.2.2 Dimensions of the Model

4.3 Description of the Models

4.3.1 Element used in Modeling

4.3.2 Boundary Conditions Imposed

4.3.3 Overview of the Materials Used

4.3.4 Model Descriptions

4.3.5 The Outputs

4.4 Preparation of the Training sets

CHAPTER 5: TRAINING THE DATA SETS USING ANN ... 30

5.2 Development of ANN Tool

CHAPTER 6: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ..

6.1 Parametric Studies

6.2 Geometric Parameters

6.2.1 Influence of wall thickness

6.2.2 Influence of Aspect Ratio

6.2.3 Influence of Bricks

6.2.4 Influence of Mortar

6.3 Variation of stiffness

6.4 Effective width of equivalent diagonal strut

6.5 Validation of Neural Network

CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 48

7.3 Recommendations for the future works

B. Output Result from ANSYS

Table 3-1: Types and Properties of Bricks (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)

Table 3-2: Types and Properties of Mortar (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)

Table 3-3: Properties of concrete and rebars used in analysis

Table 4-1: Material properties used in analysis (Pradhan, P.L., 2009)

Table 4-2: Designation of Models used for analysis

Table 6.1: Parameters of Interest

Table 6-2: Parametric characteristics of infilled frames analysed

Table 6-3: Response variation due to wall thickness

Table 6-4: Response variation due to aspect ratio