Effect of Opening on the Lateral Stiffness of Masonry Walls with and without Ties

Document Type : Research Article


1 Senior structural engineer, Isfahan, Iran.

2 Isfahan University of Technology


In this study, lateral response of masonry walls with openings is studied. The numerical modeling and analysis is followed and the developed models are validated using available experimental results. Samples selected for validation analysis include two masonry walls confined with reinforced concrete perimeter ties and one masonry wall with no ties. Validity of the numerical models has been established against the experimental samples within Abaqus software using nonlinear static analysis. Variation in the size, location and aspect ratio of the opening are taken into account and the lateral stiffness and strength of the walls are calculated. In addition, a series of equations have been developed based on strength of materials for simple calculation of lateral stiffness, strength and ductility of masonry walls with opening. This has the important advantage of avoiding complex and time consuming 3D nonlinear finite element analysis for the same purpose. To do this task, three different cases of failure are accounted for the walls including: when presence of the opening is not effective, when behavior of the two piers besides the opening is governing, and when the overhead lintel governs the lateral behavior of wall. Each of the mentioned cases are in turn divided into other sub-cases and several nonlinear finite element analyses have been undertaken. Results of the developed analytical equations are compared and calibrated with those of the finite element analysis and desirable accuracy of the relations developed in this study is confirmed.


Main Subjects

  1. Qamaruddin; M. ;“In-plane stiffness of shear walls with openings”; Building and Environment, 34, 1999, 109-127.
  2. Shariq; M. Abbasi; H. Irtaza; H. & Qamaruddin; M; “Influence of Openings on Seismic Performance of Masonry Building Walls”; Building and Environment , 43, .0421–2321 ,8002
  3. Kuroki; M. Kikuchi; K. Nonaka; H. Shimosako; M.; “Experimental Study on Reinforcing Methods using Extra RC Elements for Confined Masonry Walls with Openings”; 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 2012, 2-5.
  4. Sarrafi; B., Eshghi; S., “Experimental Study on Lateral Strength of Confined Masonry Walls”; 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisboa, 2012, .7-2
  5. Behnamfar, F. & Afshari, M. “Collapse Analysis and Strengthening of Stone Arch Bridges Against Earthquake”; International Journal of Architectural Heritage, Conservation, Analysis, and Restoration, 2014, 3-6.
  6. Sarrafi; B., Eshghi; S., “Experimental Study on Lateral Strength of Confined Masonry Walls”; 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisboa, 2012, 2-7.
  7. Ganz; H.R.; and Thurlimann; B.; “Testson masonry walls under normal andshear loading.”; Rep. No. 7502-4, Inst. of Struct. Engrg., ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland (in German), 1984, 3-8.
  8. Federal Emergency Management Agency; FEMA 356.; “Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”; American Society of Civil Engineers Reston, Virginia, 2000, Chapter. 7, 276-307.
  9. Publication No. 360, “Instructions for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings”; 2nd Revision, Technical Office of the Planning and Management Organization, 2013.