工 业 技 术 创 新

第01卷
期 第01期 2014年4月 Industrial Technology Innovation 工 业 技 术 创 新 Industrial Technology
Vol.01 No.01 Innovation
Apr.2014

Numerical Simulation of Masonry Structures

Based on ANSYS Contact Analysis
Junzhe Wang
(Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK)

Abstract: This paper reports the details of three dimensional finite element analysis based on experimental
work that have been done by the author in the lab from an on-going research programme for masonry arch
bridges. It proposed a model for modelling deformation characteristic of masonry walls subjected to combined
axial compression and lateral shear loading. A combined finite-discrete element modelling technique was used
for analysis through the commercial software ANSYS. The proposed model was first verified by triplet shear
tests and then extends to shear wall and small scaled arch/backfill model. The numerical load displacement
diagrams and failure modes are reported and compared with experimental ones. The proposed model shows
great accuracy for the estimation of the failure load and works well for the predictions of failure modes.

Keywords: Masonry; Shear; ANSYS; Finite element; Contact analysis

石砌拱桥的三维非线性有限元分析
Junzhe Wang
(Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK)

摘要： 在采用ANSYS进行砌体结构非线性有限元分析时，目前还缺乏可以借鉴的普遍性研究结论。
本文研究了基于实验数据的砌体结构的三维有限元分析，提出了用于研究砌体结构在剪压复合应力状
态下力和位移关系的有限元模型。模型通过大型通用有限元分析软件ANSYS建立，利用有限元和离散元
相结合的技术，对小型砌体结构在剪压状态下的实验数据和模拟数据进行了对比。通过对力和位移曲
线的分析，提出的模型能有精确的预测结构的破坏应力以及破坏时的形变。

1. Introduction of resisting lateral forces derived from wind, earthquake

Masonry’s strength, durability and resilience to water
and fire have contributed to its widespread and continued
use throughout history. The relative ease of construction
was particularly important before the development of a
highly mechanised construction industry. Today historic
masonry structures continue to play an important role
in transportation infrastructure; it is estimated that there
are over 40,000 masonry arch bridges still in service in
UK [1]. The primary function of structural masonry is to
carry the compressive loads, although it is also capable
or other applied loading. Masonry can resist relatively
high compressive stresses, but it has lower shear and
flexural capacity, both of which are a function of applied
normal stress. In recent decades, some historic masonry
transportation infrastructure, including masonry arch
bridges, have exhibited shear failure [2].
Unreinforced masonry shear walls are often used
as the main structural component of masonry buildings
responsible for carrying lateral loading. The shear
strength of masonry structures has been of great concerns

116
Junzhe Wang：Numerical Simulation of Masonry Structures Based on ANSYS Contact Analysis
for design and assessment purposes. In general, there are
two main approaches adopted for masonry modeling:
macro-modeling and micro-modeling [3]. The macro-
modeling approach does not make a distinction between
individual brick units and joints but only treats masonry
as a homogeneous anisotropic composite. The micro
modeling technique treats each component of masonry
material separately with its own specific constitutive
law and failure criteria. The micro modeling is often
used for the detail analysis of small structures where the
stress and strain states are of great interests. On the other
hand, macro-modelling is suitable for the global analysis
of structure with sufficient size where the interaction
between brick and mortar joints is negligible.
This paper reports the numerical analysis based on
experimental work that have been done by the author in
the lab. A combined finite-discrete element modelling
technique was used through the commercial software
ANSYS. As it is important to prove the modelling
technique works on simple structures before its
application to complex structures, the modelling work
was first performed for triplet shear tests and extends to
shear wall and small scale arch/backfill models. Detailed
micro modelling techniques was adopted for triplet
shear test, the brick was modelled as elastic materials,
while the mortar was modelled with different materials
models provided in ANSYS, and the interface between
the brick and mortar was modelled by introducing
the contact elements. It is assumed that the failure is
caused by the sliding of the brick and happened at
the interface. Parametric studies were carried out the
sensitivity of mesh density of the finite element model.
Comparisons between the experimental results and the
predictions of the numerical model are presented, the
model was then modified by introducing the cohesive
zone material for the contact elements between arch
the barrel, which intend to improve the ability of the
model for the prediction of deformation. Two masonry
walls with dimensions of 665mm × 740mm × 102mm
were constructed and tested for shear failure under
different loading conditions; numerical analysis was
then performed for the shear walls and small scale arch
bridges using the previous modified model based on the
simplified micro modelling strategy. The performance of
117
第01期
the proposed model was evaluated by comparing with
the experimental results.
2. Masonry modelling techniques
Previous research work has proved the feasibility of
the micro approach in the studies of shear wall problems.
Senthivel and Lourenco [4] proposed a model by using an
eight node plane stress element to model stone unit and
six node line element to model the joint and interface to
study the deformation characteristics of stone masonry
walls based on plasticity theory, the numerical analysis
results shows good agreement with tests results. Research
works toward the influence of normal compression load,
reinforcement on the lateral behaviour of masonry wall have
been carried out by Haach et al. [5]. Based on the micro
modelling technique, Burnett and Gilbert [6] developed
a discrete-crack approach to model the performance of
masonry walls subjected to out-of-plane impacts, and
it was found the modelling approach has reasonable
accuracy in predicting the dynamic response; Lourenco
and Rots [7] proposed an interface cap model which could
be used for capturing masonry failure mechanism, such
as cracking, frictional slip and crushing.
The numerical modelling work in the present study
was based on the data obtained from previous lab tests.
It was performed by using the commercial software
ANSYS with a combined finite-discrete element
technique. In this study, the brick unit and mortar was
modelled using the solid65 element, an element which is
defined by eight nodes having three degrees of freedom
at each node; it is capable of cracking in tension,
crushing in compression and plastic deformation and
able to treat nonlinear material properties [8]. Since the
compressive strength of the brick is far more than that
of the mortar, and from the laboratory test it is learned
that the brick experience elastic behaviour at a quite
high stress level, the brick unit was modelled as elastic
materials for the entire modelling work. The interface
between brick and mortar was modelled by the contact
element in ANSYS. The element is applicable to 3D
structural and coupled field contact analyses with the
features of Coulomb friction, shear stress friction and
user defined friction. The study was first performed for
the triplet shear test and then extended to shear walls and
第01期 工 业 技 术 创 新 Industrial Technology Innovation

small scale arch/backfill model.
3. Triplet shear test and modeling
3.1 Brief description of experimental test and
modelling technique
The friction and cohesion properties between the
brick and mortar are of great importance, several triplet
stacks were prepared and tested in accordance with BS
EN 1052-3 [9] to study the friction properties before and
after initial failure. The materials used in this study
were Staffordshire Engineering blue brick and premixed
hydraulic lime mortar. Preliminary laboratory tests
were performed on these materials to determine their
mechanical properties. These were selected as they are
representative of the products used in some masonry
arch bridges with a very high strength brick and a weak
lime mortar. All brickwork specimens were covered with
plastic after fabrication, and then after 14 days uncovered
and stored in normal indoor conditions until testing at
91 days age. The schematic arrangement of this test was
In the present study, the brick was considered
as an elastic material, while for the mortar, apart
from modelling as elastic material, different material
properties were applied trying to represent the material
nonlinearity. The built in Drucker-Prager (DP) model
and Multi-linear Kinematic Hardening (MKIN) material
model were used try to model the nonlinear behaviour
of the mortar. The MKIN material model enables the
definition of the relationship between stress and strain
for certain material, which gives a better representative
of the material. Its application on the numerical analysis
of masonry structures has been discussed by Li et al [10].
It is generally accepted that the mesh size is a key issue
for finite element analysis during the analysis; parametric
study was carried out to identify the sensitivity of the
mesh density on the results. Figure 2 shows the finite
element model with different mesh levels and the number
of divisions for the model in different direction were
listed in Table 1.
Table 1 Division of finite element model

shown in Figure 1, and they were tested under different Fine mesh Medium mesh Coarse mesh
Number of
compressive stresses which are 0.2 N/mm2, 0.6 N/mm2 division Brick Mortar Brick Mortar Brick Mortar

and 1 N/mm2 respectively, the load displacement curves Length 20 30 10 20 10 10

width 10 15 5 10 5 5
obtained from the tests have been used for the validation.
height 6 3 3 2 3 1

Fig.1 Triplet shear test !

!
Fig.3 Stress and strain relationship of mortar

The elastic material properties used in the analysis

were listed in Table 2. In terms of the Drucker-Prager
material model, a value of 0.114 N/mm2 and 34° was
Fig.2 FE triplet model adopted for the cohesion and friction angle properties

118
Junzhe Wang：Numerical Simulation of Masonry Structures Based on ANSYS Contact Analysis 第01期

according to the triaxial test that have been done by the The whole analysis was completed in three
author in the lab, while a stress and strain curve was steps. Firstly, the bottom brick was fixed and the pre-
defined in accordance with mortar elasticity test for the compression stress was applied on the top surface.
MKIN material model (Figure 3). Numerical analysis Then the right side surface of the top and bottom brick
2
was performed for the specimen under 0.6 N/mm stress as well as the mortar were fixed horizontally, and the
level and comparisons have been made between the movement in Z direction (perpendicular to the paper)
experimental results. was also constrained. A 10mm displacement load was
divided into small steps and gradually applied on the
Table 2 Elastic material properties
surface of the central brick. It is assumed that the failure
Brick Mortar is caused by the sliding of the brick and happened only
Elastic modulus N/mm 2
2.5 ×104 1.0×104 at the interface. The reaction force and corresponding
Poisson’s ratio 0.15 0.2 displacement were monitored and plotted in Figure 4.
Contact cohesion N/mm2 0.085
The predicted maximum loads of different material
Friction 0.5
models were listed in Table 3.

! !

!
Fig.4 Modelling results of triplet shear

119
第01期 工 业 技 术 创 新 Industrial Technology Innovation

3.2 Results analysis and discussion experimental observation. The proposed model was then
It is noted that all the three material models perform modified by introducing a cohesive material model at the
very well for the prediction of failure load. As learned interface.
from the experimental studies, the typical shear response
for masonry under compression is almost linear increase 3.3 Cohesive material model and modified analysis
stage followed by a down trend after the initial failure results
and remains largely constant thereafter. As can be seen The cohesive zone material model can simulate
from the load displacement curves, the elastic material interface delamination and other fracture phenomenon.
model and the DP material model show quite similar This approach introduces failure mechanisms by using
behaviour for all the mesh levels, the load increased the hardening-softening relationships between the
linearly with the displacement and achieved the separation and incorporation the corresponding tractions
maximum point within 1mm displacement, then the load across the interface. The interfacial separation in this
kept constant. study is defined in two directions in terms of contact gap
and tangential slip distance (Figure 5). For the contact
Table 3 Maximum failure load behaviour which the separation normal to the interface is
Experimental Elastic DP MKIN predominant, it shows linear elastic loading followed by
Fine mesh 22.2 20.5 20.2 linear softening. The debonding begins at point A after
Medium mesh 20.5 21.4 22.0 20.5
the maximum normal stress is achieved and is completed
Coarse mesh 21.5 21.9 16.4
as point C. The separation in tangential direction has the
same behaviour in terms of slip distance and tangential
The similarity of these two material models indicates stress.
the little contribution of the inelastic properties of the DP
materials in such a scale model. For the MKIN material
model, it behaves similar with other two models with an
initial linear stage for the load increase, but there is no
remarkable load drop obtained after the maximum was
reached. By comparing the results for the different mesh
levels of these models, these is no obvious difference for
elastic and DP material models except the little increase
of the displacement when the maximum load achieved,
but in terms of solution time, the moderate mesh level
has reduced the solution time by 60% compared with the
finest mesh level. !
For MKIN material, the coarse mesh model showed
a little different behaviour with a lower failure load and
larger displacement at the maximum load point. Taking
the accuracy and time consumption into consideration,
an average element size of 20mm of the brick unit is
appropriate for the numerical analysis, and it has also
been proved by the work done by Mei [11]. It is noted
that the corresponding displacement for the failure load
is really small compared with the experimental results
which indicates that the failure happened immediately
!
after the displacement which is not quite consistent with Fig.5 Bilinear cohesive material zone model

120
Junzhe Wang：Numerical Simulation of Masonry Structures Based on ANSYS Contact Analysis
For the triplet shear tests, it was treated as pure
shear and only the behaviour in tangential direction
was considered. As learned from tests, the residual
strength after initial failure was provided by friction,
a combined material behaviour has been used (Figure
6). The tangential contact stress increased linearly until
maximum stress is reached, deboning happens at this
point and the stress decreased linearly, the post failure
behaviour was then governed by the friction assigned
to the contact elements. As learned from previous
modelling work, the medium mesh model is appropriate
for obtaining an accurate result, the modified cohesive
material model in accompany with Mohr-Coulomb
failure criteria was then used for simulation of shear
behaviour under different normal stress levels based on
this mesh level. The parameters used during the analysis
have been listed in Table 4.
!
Fig.6 Combined material behaviour with friction
! here, the mortar joint is lumped into as average interface
Fig.7 Modelling results with modified material model
121
第01期
The load displacement relationships for both the
experimental and numerical results were plotted in Figure
7. The modelling results fit very well at the linear stage
for all these stress levels compared with experimental
ones, and have great accuracy for the prediction of
maximum failure load. The abrupt decrease of load after
the cracking is also clearly reflected. The post failure is
then predominated by friction which gives a constant
load thereafter, which is consistent with experimental
results at relatively low stress levels (0.2 N/mm2 and 0.6
N/mm2). For the specimen at high stress level, as the
load caused by friction is quite close to the maximum
load and the shear failure is accompanied with mortar
crushing, the modelling results give good indication for
the loads, but not for the gradually downward trend.
Table 4 Parameter values for triplet model
Normal stress level Maximum shear stress Tangential slip Uct
2 2
[N/mm ] [N/mm ] [mm]
0.2 0.22 1.5
0.6 0.50 1.5
1.0 0.75 2.0
4. Shear wall modelling
4.1 Brief description of experimental test and
modelling technique
Previous work on modelling masonry walls under
shear and compression has been done by several
researchers [12, 13]. Though their work has shown success
for the prediction of load and defamation characteristic,
some of the parameters used in the model are difficult to
obtain directly from experimental tests. From previous
triplet shear modelling, the cohesive material model with
contact elements has good performance to simulate shear
behaviour especially at low stress level; it was extended
for the analysis of shear wall test. Two brickwork walls
with dimensions of 665 mm × 740 mm × 102 mm were
constructed for the evaluation of the in-plane shear
failure under static compression load. They were tested
under two loading conditions as shown in Figure 8 with
a designed axial pre-compression stress of 0.2 N/mm2.
A simplified micro modelling approach was adopted
which consists of mortar and two brick-mortar interfaces,
第01期
while the brick units are expanded in order to keep the
geometry unchanged. As the experimental test did not
experience any cracks in the units, potential cracks in
the units were not considered in the entire modelling
work. Masonry is thus considered as a set elastic blocks
bonded by potential fracture lines at the joint. The
elastic material was modified for the blocks, and the
young's modulus was adopted as 2500 N/mm2 according
to the compressive test on small walls. The horizontal
and vertical joints were modelled by the previously
introduced cohesive material zone model and contact
elements. According to Mann and Muller's [14] theory for
shear stressed masonry walls, the friction at the joint was
modified to 0.4. As they have a little bit longer curing
age compared with the triplet specimens, the maximum
shear stress for the horizontal joint was set to 0.25 N/
mm2, while for the vertical joint, the proposed cohesive
material model was then modified as bilinear behaviour
between the normal contact stress and contact gap, after
the maximum stress is reached, it drops to zero other
than kept as constant governed by friction. Considered
the construction process of masonry wall, as there is no
load applied on the vertical surface, the bond strength at
vertical joint is really small compared with the horizontal
joints, so a small value of 0.001 N/mm 2 maximum
contact stress was assumed for vertical joints. The slip
distance and contact gap was set as 1mm and 0.5mm
through a series of sensitivity analysis for horizontal and
vertical joints respectively.
! mode obtained from the analysis were compared with
(a) shear wall 1
工 业 技 术 创 新 Industrial Technology Innovation
!
(b) shear wall 2
Fig.8 Experimental tests set up for
For numerical analysis, the simulation of the loading
conditions and confinement controls were identified as
quite important by several researchers [12,15]. It is also
the most difficult aspect as the upper was not actually
maintained in a horizontal position throughout the test.
Different researchers have adopted different strategies
in their models. The assumption used in Lourenco's [3]
model is that the top and bottom boundaries are always
horizontal, while Attard et al [15] . applied a layer of
soft material placed between the rollers and the loading
beam. In this study, as the stiffness of top and bottom
loading beams are not known, the loading configurations
were applied to the bricks directly and the analysis
was finished in three steps. In specific, bottom of last
course of bricks were fixed in all directions in the first
step, a 0.2 N/mm2 was applied on the surface of the top
course bricks, and the stress were perpendicular to the
surface throughout the test. For the shear wall 1, the
bottom course bricks were fixed in the x and z direction
(perpendicular to the paper) in the second step; a
displacement load of 30mm was applied in small sub steps
at the top right brick to achieve a converged solution in
the last step. For the second wall, the procedure is exactly
the same, the only difference is the change of boundary
conditions, both the top and bottom course were fixed in
x and z directions and a displacement load of 10mm was
applied at the middle. The maximum load and failure
experimental ones.
122
Junzhe Wang：Numerical Simulation of Masonry Structures Based on ANSYS Contact Analysis 第01期

4.2 Results analysis and discussion

The crack patterns and deformed meshes of the
simulations for shear wall 1 and load displacement
curves are presented in Figure 9. The predicted failure
mode for wall 1 is featured with stepped diagonal shear
crack. The predicted failure load is 14.3 kN and it gives
a 70% accuracy when compared with the experimental
results which is 20.5 kN. The load displacement curve
gives an elastic increase stage for the load, followed by
a gradually decrease stage and it kept almost constant
thereafter. In terms of the experimental results, as can
be seen that there are a couple of sudden changes of the
load before it reaches a stable stage, and this might be

(a) Shear failure

caused by the sudden change when cracking happened
at vertical joints, this is inevitable given current test
set-up as the load was applied by hand and could not
be controlled precisely, however, if taken out of these
sudden drops, the experimental results will also give a
curve consists of an increase stage followed by a load
drop and a constant stage, which is quite consistent with
the one obtained from numerical analysis.
The numerical analyses of shear wall 2 were
performed in two situations. At first, the analysis was
carried out as stated above, the crack pattern were
illustrated in Figure 10(b) , as can be seen that the
specimen failure in sliding at the interface between the
first and second course other than the one just above the
loading course which observed from the tests. The load
experienced a rapid growing stage followed by a slower
(b) Deformed mesh
rise before the maximum was reached (Figure 10d);
the predicted failure load is 25694N which is of great
accuracy compared with 28721N obtained from the lab,
however, the load drop after failure is not apparent. In the
second condition, the finite element model was modified
in order to get a more similar crack pattern, the horizontal
joints at the top four courses were manually bonded with
an infinite friction coefficient which enables the sliding
will happened at the joint just above the loading course.
The failure mode for the modified model was presented
! in Figure 7c and the load displacement relationship was
plotted in Figure 7d. As can be seen that the crack pattern
(c) Load displacement curves
is much more consistent with the experimental results,
Fig.9 Experimental and modelling results for shear wall 1
and a more accurate failure load 28486N was predicted.
The load drop after initial failure is clearly reflected with

123
第01期 工 业 技 术 创 新 Industrial Technology Innovation

similar decrease rate and load became almost constant

after that. The simulation matches the general trend for
both pre-peak and post failure experimental response
and great accuracy in predicting the failure load, but the
corresponding displacement was not well modelled as
accurate as the load. This may be related to the difficulty
modelling the experimental boundary conditions and
the estimations for some of the material parameters, and
the manual control of the loading may contribute to this
problem as well.

(b) Deformed mesh

!
(d) Load displacement curves

Fig.10 Experimental and modelling results for shear wall 2

(a) Shear failure

5. Small scale arch/backfill modelling

The cohesive material model was introduced for

the numerical analysis on scaled arch bridges. The
numerical results are compared with experimental work
that hasbeen done on scaled masonry arch bridges in by
Mini [16] The geometry information and instruments set
up have been shown in Figure11. The arch bridges first
experienced moving load through the top of backfill from
one abutment to the other, a fixed location increasing
load was applied at quarter span across the whole width
of arch.

(c) Deformed mesh with bonded middle joint

124
Junzhe Wang：Numerical Simulation of Masonry Structures Based on ANSYS Contact Analysis 第01期

The material properties used during the analysis is in

accordance with the experimental results presents by
Miri[16] as shown in Table 5. The backfill was divided
into three layers with an increasing elastic modulus, a
series of contact elements were generated between the
backfill and arch extrados with a friction of 0.5 and
cohesion of 0.02 N/mm2.
!
Fig.11 Small scale test of arch/backfill model
Table 5 Material properties for arch/back fill model

Modulus of Poisson's Density Friction Cohesion

3 2
Elasticity ratio [kg/m ] angle [N/mm ]
2
[N/mm ]
Arch barrel 4000 0.3 2100
Backfill
(Layer 1) 18

Backfill 42 0.4 2100 53 0.02

(Layer 2)

Backfill
66
(Layer 3)

The model was first evaluated by applying the

Fig.12 Finite element model of arch/backfill
Figure 12 shows the finite element mesh for the
arch/backfill model. The arch barrel was built with forty
individual blocks which was modelled using elastic
material, while the backfill was modelled with the
Drucker-Prager material. The same material model has
been used by Boothby [17] for the backfill in their analysis
work on transverse behaviour of masonry arch bridges.
moving load across the span. As there is lack information
on the normal and tangential strength for the contact
between arch barrels, the study started with an
assumption for the necessary parameters of the cohesive
material model based on the experimental test by the
author on similar materials. The normal contact strength
was assigned as 0.05 N/mm2 with a contact gap of 1 mm,
while the contact has a tangential strength of 0.6 N/mm2
with a tangential slip of 3 mm. The numerical results of
radial displacement at 50% span and 75% span as well as
the pressure are compared with experimental result, and
presented in Figure 13.

! !
125
第01期 工 业 技 术 创 新 Industrial Technology Innovation

! !
Fig.13 Modelling results under roller load

As shown in Figure 13, the displacement at mid Table 6 parametric studies of contact strength on bridge load capacity

span increased as the load approaching and move Assigned Assigned Assigned Assigned Failure Experi-
Normal Tangential Normal gap Tangential slip load mental
back as the load passed by, While the displacement strength
2
strength
2
[mm] distance [mm] [kN] load [kN]
[N/mm ] [N/mm ]
at 3/4 span gave a sinusoidal curve with maximum
0.3 6.7
deflection when the load reached at 20% and 75% of 0.6 6.7
0.05
span. In terms of the pressure, the highest figure always 1 6.7
5.0
1 3
0.3 7.6
obtained at corresponding roller position. The proposed
0.1 0.6 7.6
model performs quite well in the prediction for both 1 7.6
the displacement and pressure in the general trend
in accordance with experimental results. It gives an The numerical analysis shows that all the arch
underestimated peak deformation, while for the contact bridges failed with four hinges mechanism (Figure
pressure the proposed model shows great improvement 14), and previous research work [18,19] on masonry
compared with the model used by Miri [16] by giving arch bridges has proved this type of failure mode. The
results much more close to the experimental results. parametric studies show that the tangential strength of
The behaviour of arch bridges under an increasing the contact has little influence of the overall capacity
line load across the whole width at quarter span was of arch bridges while the increase of contact normal
investigated, and a parametric study towards the strength increases the load capacity of the bridges. The
influence of normal and tangential contact strength on radial displacement at quarter span was obtained from
the overall load capacity of arch bridges was performed. the analysis and plotted versus the increasing load; the
The detailed parameters that have been used in the study numerical results are compared with the experimental
were listed in Table 6. curves as shown in Figure 15. As can been seen from the

Fig.14 Deformed mesh of arch barrel under point load

126
Junzhe Wang：Numerical Simulation of Masonry Structures Based on ANSYS Contact Analysis
chart, the proposed model shows good correspondence
with the experimental results, and gives a more consistent
behaviour compare with the model used by Miri [16].
!
Fig.15 Load displace curves under point load
6. Conclusion
This paper reports the numerical analysis based on
experimental work that have been done by the author
in the lab from an on-going research programme for
masonry arch bridges. It proposed a model for modelling
masonry structure under shear and compression and
compared the modelling results with the experimental
ones. The following conclusion may be drawn from this
study.
The built in solid 65 and contact element in ANSYS
performed quite well for the estimation of failure load
for masonry specimen under shear and compression. An
element size of 20mm is for the brick unit is appropriate
for the prediction of failure load with great accuracy.
The proposed model with cohesive material has great
accuracy for the estimation of the failure load and
works well for the simulations of general trend for the
overall behaviour, and the ability for the prediction
of displacement and failure patterns are reasonable
and satisfactory at a lower stress. The proposed model
requires less parameter which could be obtained from
lab tests much easier. It could be used by engineers as a
satisfactory tool for analysis of masonry arches.
Reference
[1] Van beek, G.W., Arches and viaducts in the
ancient near east. Scientific American, 1987. 257 (1): p.
28-85
127
第01期
[2] Sowden, A.M., The maintenance of brick and
stone masonry structures. 1990: Southport: Witwell Ltd.
[3] Lourenco, P.B., Computational strategies
for Masonry structures. 1996, Delft University of
Technology.
[4] Senthivel, R. and Lourenço, P.B., Finite element
modelling of deformation characteristics of historical
stone masonry shear walls. Engineering Structures, 2009.
31 (9): p. 1930-1943.
[5] Haach, V.G., Vasconcelos, G., and Lourenco, P.B.,
Parametrical study of masonry walls subjected to in-
plane loading through numerical modeling. Engineering
Structures, 2011. 33 (6): p. 1377-1389.
[6] Burnett, S. and Gilbert, M., The performance of
unreinforced masonry walls subjected to low-velocity
impacts: Finite element analysis. International Journal
of Impact Engineering, 2007. 34 (6): p. 1433-1450.
[7] Lourenco, P.B. and Rots, J.G., Multisurface
interface model for analysis of masonry structures.
Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE), 1997. 123 (7)
p. 660-668
[8] Theory reference for the mechanical APDL and
mechanical applications. 2009, Southpointe: ANSYS Inc.
[9] BS EN1052-3 Methods of test for masonry Part
3: Determination of initial shear strength. 2002, London:
British standard Institution.
[10] Li, Y., Han, J., and Liu, L., Application of
ANSYS to finite element analysis for nonlinear masonry
structures. Journal of Chongqing Jianzhu University,
2006. 28 (5) p. 90-97
[11] Mei, B., Xu, M., and Liu, Z., Analysis of factors
affecting ultimate load of concrete based on ANSYS.
Journal of Nanchang Insitute of Technology, 2009. 28 : p.
35-40
[12] Chaimoon, K. and Attard, M.M. Shear
compression fracrure in unreinforced masonry. 2004.
[13] Mohebkhah, A. and Tasnimi, A., Nonlinear
analysis of masonry-infilled steel frames with openings
using discrete element method. Journal of Constructional
Steel Research, 2008. 64 (12) p. 1463-1472.
[14] Mann, W. and Muller, H., Failure of shear-
stressed masonry: an enlarged theory, tests and
application to shear walls. Proceedings of British
Ceramic Socirty, 1982. 30 p. 223-235
[15] Attard, M.M., Chaimoon, K., and Nappi, A.
Fracure of unreinforced masonry walls under shear.
2004.
[16] Mahmoud, M., Modelling of repair techniques
for masonry arch bridges. 2005, University of Cardiff.
[17] Boothby, T.E. and Roberts, B.J., Transverse
behaviour of masonry arch bridges. Structural Engineer,
2001. 79 (9): p. 21-26.
[18] Melbourne, C. and Gilbert, M., The behaviour
of multi-ring brickwork arch bridges. The Structural
第01期 工 业 技 术 创 新 Industrial Technology Innovation

Engineer, 1995. 73 (3) p. 39-47.

[19] Rouxinol, G.A.F., Providencia, P., and Lemos,
J.V. The discrete element method with 2D rigid polygonal
and circular elements. 2006. New Delhi: Macmillan.

作者简介：

王俊吉吉(1988年-)，男，汉族，英国巴
斯大学在读博士，研究方向：砌体结构
的三维有限元分析。
E-mail: junzhe1988@gmail.com

128