S MEARED CRACK MODEL FOR REINFORCED CON CRETE

M ASONRY SHEAR WALL A N ALYSIS

K . S . Ibrahim 1 and G. T . Sute r 2

1. ABSTRACT
Analytical models are needed to predict the behaviour of reinforced ma-
sonry buildings under different complex states of stress. Such models are useful
to assess the behavioural seismic characteristics of masonry buildings undergo-
ing progressive failure up to the ultimate stage. In this paper, an analytical
model based on both a hypoelastic model for uncracked masonry and an orthog-
onally anisotropic model for cracked masonry is presented and implemented in
a general purpose finite element programo Cracks were modeled in a smeared
fashion and reinforcement was modeled using smeared or discrete models. Due
to local stress concentrations at a crack location, force transmitting mechanisms
between masonry and reinforcement were modeled. Note that the analytical
model presented in this paper will be referred to as the CUTTent model.
The performance of the model was verified using experimental data from rein-
forced masonry shear wall panels. The load/ displacement relationship was traced
up to the maximum lateralload resistance and beyond to study the softening be-
haviour of the cracked reinforced masonry systems undergoing relatively ductile
flexure-dominated and brittle shear-dominated progressive failures. Analytical
results indicate good agreement with test evidence for the flexure-dominated
panel. While the load/displacement relationship for the shear-dominated panel
indicates some divergence from the experimental results, the model was success-
fuI in capturing the softening behaviour of the system under increased controlled
lateral displacement. AIso, the analytical results of the current model were com-
pared with those of a plasticity model; good agreement was evident for both
crack and yielding patterns.

Keywords: Reinforced Masonry, Shear Walls, Analytical Modeling, Smeared

Crack, Finite Element.

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Civil Eng. Dept., Carleton Uni., Ottawa, Ont., Canada,
lOS 5B6
2 Professor, Civil Eng. Dept. , Carleton Uni., Ottawa, Ont., Canada, lOS 5B6

731
2. INTRODUCTION
Analytical and experimental investigations of components, subassemblages,
and prototypes of reinforced masonry buildings are commonly used to provide a
better understanding of principal behavioural characteristics and to help derive
rational design models and codes. Since cost and laboratory facilities impose
significant limitations on the extent of full-scale testing, current research efforts
are mainly concentrated on studying experimentally the physical behaviour of
masonry components and utilizing the experimental results to verify and validate
sim pIe or com pIe x analytical models.
Typically, problems are highly nonlinear in nature and various mo deIs have
been developed to trace associated behaviour. The finite element method offers
a powerful tool for modeling complex structural systems under various loading
patterns and tracing the complete nonlinear behaviour up to the ultimate stage.
Using this technique, different physical characteristics of reinforced masonry such
as post-cracking or post-crushing phenomena can be successfully modeled.

3. SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES

A smeared crack mo deI approach has been used in finite element analyses of
concrete structures. While such a technique proved to be reliable and numerically
efficient in many instances, its capability in predicting the mechanical behaviour
for a variety of matrix-aggregate composites has not been thoroughly studied
especially in the field of complex composite materiaIs such as reinforced masonry.
While numerous problems are associated with the smeared crack mo deI such
as mesh-size dependency of numerical solution, failure to model elements with
dominant shear failure, and spurious kinematic modes, it is still the simplest
and most efficient approach to model the fracture behavior of reinforced ma-
sonry shear walls exhibiting diffuse crack patterns. The main objective of the
current study being undertaken at Carleton University is to evaluate the capabil-
ity of smeared crack models in capturing various failure mechanisms of reinforced
masonry shear walls undergoing different monotonic and cyclic loading patterns.
A smeared-crack finite element formulation adopting a hypoelastic model for
uncracked masonry and nonlinear orthotropic constitutive mo deIs for cracked
masonry has been utilized. In this numerical modeling, most of the current de-
velopments in the field of reinforced masonry modeling, such as fixed, coaxial
rotating, non-coaxial rotating crack representation, are incorporated into a finite
element package. As part of this work, the Modified Compression Field Theory
(MCFT) has been implemented; further, constitutive mo deIs for reinforced ma-
sonry under tension and compression have been incorporated into the program
and their significance on the numerical solution has been assessed. Post-tension
cracking and post-compression crushing behaviour have also been modeled. Ad-
ditionally, strain-softening behaviour and different tension-stiffening models are
incorporated in the numerical solution. AIso, the influence of the anisotropy of
partially grouted masonry has been considered.

4. ANALYTICAL MODEL
ADINA is a general purpose finite element program for linear and nonlinear,
static and dynamic analysis which was originally developed at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (Bathe, 1977). While the program has a lot of comput-
ing capabilities and has been widely used in solving many practical problems,

732
the program is limited when it deals with brittle material modeling such as
concrete or masonry. Therefore, Vecchio and Collins's Modified Compression
Field Theory was implemented in ADINA where a rotating smeared crack con-
cept is employed. In the following subsections, different constitutive relations
for uncracked/ cracked masonry and reinforcement along wi th clifferent strategies
associated with the post-cracking and post-crushing behaviour modeling will be
discussed.

4.1 Masonry Compressive Stress-Strain Relationships

A series of tests by Vecchio and Collins (Vecchio and Collins, 1986) have
demonstrated that the concrete compressive strength is greatly reduced when
coexisting principal tensile strains are high. This work resulted in the develop-
ment of the relationship between the principal compressive stress and principal
compressive strain for concrete as shown in Fig. 1. This model will be adapted
for masonry where the principal compressive stress-strain law of grouted masonry
(Im, m ) was assumed as

(1)

where f' m and o are the uniaxial peak compressive stress and corresponcling
strain of grouted masonry and

f3 = 0.8 - 0.34( m 1 ) 2: 1 (2)

o

where ml is the tensile principal strain in the clirection normal to that being
considered. In Eq. 2, the empirical constants were developed originally for
concrete under biaxial states of stress. Since there are no detailed experimental
data available for concrete masonry under biaxial states of stress and also since
the masonry is fully grouted, it is reasonable to employ the same equation (Eq.
2) for concrete masonry.

4.2 Tension Stiffening Models for Masonry

Similar to concrete, as the masonry reaches its tensile strength, pnmary
cracks form and their number and extent are controlled by the size and placement
of the reinforcing steel. At the primary cracks, the masonry stress drops to zero
and the steel carnes the full load. However, the masonry between cracks still
maintains some tensile resistance which will drop as the load increases. The drop
will be associated with a breakdown in bond as a secondary system of internaI
cracks develops around the reinforcement.
Gopalaratnam and Shah (Gopalaratnam and Shah, 1985) have proposed
an analytical model which assumes a unique stress-strain relationship only in
the ascending part and a uni que relationship only between stress and crack
width in the descending parto This was deduced from results obt ained from an
experimental program that was carned out on different concrete, mortar, and
paste specimens subjected to tensile stress.
For the ascending part , the following simple expression that has been used for
defining compressive behaviour of concrete (Shah et al. , 1983) is recommended
for the uniaxial tensile stress-strain curve up to the peak stress value:

733
 Em A
1m = Imer[l - (1 - - ) 1 (3)
mCT

where
1m = tensilestress EmCT = value of strain, Em, at 1mCT
ImcT =peak value of 1m A = E t EmcT /lmcT
Em = tensile strain Et = initial tangent modulus
For the descending part, no uni que stress-strain relationship existed due to
the localized nature of the post-peak deformations. Instead, Gopalaratnam and
Shah found a uni que relationslp between average stress and average crack width
in the form:

(4)
where w is the crack width, k and are constants.
Now a new term, Iracture process zone strain, Ef' can be defined as the ratio
between the sum of individual microcracks' openings, f, and the crack band
width W C :

f
Ef=- (5)
Wc

and

(6)
where
W c = crack band width

TJ = constant (between 1.5 and 4)

da = maximum aggregate size.
Therefore, based on the results by Gopalaratnam and Shah and on the ex-
isting relationslp between the post-peak cracking stress and crack width, and
also utilizing the crack band model of the fracture process zone, the total strain
of a domain loaded in tension is equal to the sum of three main components as
follows :

Et = Ee + Emp + Ef (7)

and

Et = -1m + Emer - --
ImcT 111m!.
+ -( --ln--)-" (8)
Et Et Wc k Imcr

where the terms have been previously definedj the different strain components
are illustrated in Fig. 2.

734
 fm

mer

.p/ Ef

r
~~------------------------__ E
Strain m

Fig. 1 Stress-Strain Relationship for Fig. 2 Tension-Stiffening Model Based on

Cracked Masonry in Compression Gopalaratnam and Shah Test Results
4.3 Transmitting Loads Across Cracks
Dealing with average stress in masonry or reinforcement results in ignoring
local concentrations of stresses and, accordingly, force transmitting mechanisms
between masonry and reinforcement. At a crack, the tensile stresses in rein-
forcement are expected to be higher than average while midway between cracks
the tensile stresses wiU be lower than average. On the other hand, the ma-
sonry tensile stresses wiII be zero at a crack and higher than average midway
between cracks. These local variations may govern the reinforcement's ability
to transmit tension across the cracks and accordingly the ultimate capacity of a
biaxially stressed element. Therefore, this load transmitting mechanism across
the developing cracks was modeled and was implemented into the numerical
solution.

4.4 Constitutive Relations

The biaxiaI constitutive equations for reinforced grouted masonry are based
on Bathe's orthogonally anisotropic model (Bathe and Ramaswamy, 1979) and
on Vecchio and Col!ins's Modified Compression Field Theory (Vecchio and CoUins,
1986). This model can be classified as a smeared crack model where fixed and
rotating crack approaches are employed. Cracks are assumed to be weII dis-
tributed across the elements. Both materiais, masonry and steel, are assumed
to be perfectly bonded and subjected to the same strain field. The incrementaI
stress-strain relation in the local n-s coordinates can be expressed as folIows:

dO" = D'dj DI = D'm + Dfs (9)

where DI m is the tangent constitutive matrix of grouted masonry, DI s is the

tangent constitutive matrix of smeared reinforcement, O" = {O"n O"S O"ns}T and
= { n s ns } T.

4.4.1 Uncracked masonry

Let O"pl and O"p2 be the principal stresses with O"p2 ::::; O"pl and Epl and E p2 the
corresponding uniaxial Young's moduli . The uncracked masonry is considered
as isotropic with an equivalent multiaxial Young's modulus when subjected to
tension or low compression j such an uncracked state is defi.ned by O" p2 2:: "-O" m l .
The variable K, is typically 0.4 and the equivalent multiaxial Young's modulus ,
E, is then obtained using the folIowing weighting scheme:

735
 E = (Jp1Ep1 + (Jp2 E p2 (la)
(J pl + (J p2
and Poisson's ratio is assumed to be constant.
Then, the tangent stiffness matrix D for uncracked masonry is assumed to
have the following form:

,~" 1
v
1 (ll )
O

If the masonry is under high compression, i.e., (Jp2 :::; K,(Jm', an orthotropic
stress-strain matrix with the direction of orthotropy defined by the principal
stress directions is employed. The stress-strain matrix corresponding to these
directions is

-2-
l-V~E 12
1 (12)

where v is the constant Poisson's ratio, and the shear modulus in a coordinate
plane is calculated from the weighted Young's modulus corresponding to that
plane as

E 12 1 (Jp1Ep1 + (Jp2Ep2 (13)

G 12 = 2(1 + v) 2(1 + v) (Jpl + (Jp2
4.4.2 Cracked masonry
Tensile failure occurs if the tensile stress in a principal stress direction ex-
ceeds the tensile failure strength and a plane of failure develops perpendicular
to the principal stress direction. This material failure will result in reductions
in the normal and shear stiffnesses across the plane of failure and then, the cor-
responding normal stress is released. Assuming that the principal stress (J pl is
larger than the tensile failure stress, the new material stress-strain relation is

VT)n O 1 (14)
1
0
?-V
T)s-2-

N ow, assuming that the principal stress (J p2 is larger than the tensile failure
stress, the new material stress-strain relation that represents two perpendicular
cracks is

VT)n
T)n (15)
O

where, typically, T)n = 0.001 and T)s = 0.5. The factor T)n is not set equal to zero
in order to avoid the possibility of a singular stiffness matrix while the value
employed for T)s depends on a number of physical factors.

736
 Rots and Blaauwendraad (Rots and Blaauwendraad, 1989) assumed for Tis a
linear and nonlinear function of the tensile strain l as follows :

_ ( _ l - Ecr )P
Tis - 1 (16)
Eu - Ecr

in which l is the crack normal strain at the beginning of the load increment ,
cr is the strain at which a crack initiates, Eu is the tensile strain at wruch the
shear retention factor is assumed to be zero, and p is a constant.
4.4.3 Reinforcement
The constitutive matrix for the reinforcement is given by:

PsE. (17)

in wruch Dls is the tangent constitutive matrix of smeared reinforcement, Pn

and P. are the reinforcement ratios in the n, s directions, and En, E. are the
tangent moduli of steel in the n, s directions obtained from a bilinear stress-
strain relationsrup .

4.5 Calibration of the Finite Element Models

To evaluate the capability of smeared crack models , the in-plane resist ance
of two reinforced masonry shear wall panels tested by Srung et ai. (Srung et
aI., 1988) is considered. The wall specimens were 6-ft long and 6-ft high , and
they were constructed of fully-grauted 6 x 8 x 16-in. hollow concrete blocks ,
having five standard reinforcing bars uniformly distributed in the vertical as
well as horizontal directions at a centre-to-centre spacing of 16 in. The lateral
displacement was controlled by a horizontal actuator which applied symmetric
cyclic reversals of gradually increasing amplitudes while the axialload was kep t
constant during each test.
Two test panels designated as specimens 5 and 12 in the aforementioned
experimental study will be utilized to calibrate the finite element smeared crack
models. Both wall panels were subjected to a constant axial stress of 100 psi ;
specimen 12 failed by a ductile ftexural mode that displayed severe yielding of
the vertical reinforcing bars accompanied by considerable toe crusrung. On the
other hand, specimen 5 experienced a brittle shear failure dominated by diagonal
tensile cracks.
The analysis is conducted under displacement contrai by specifying hori-
zontal displacement increments at the top nodes while a constant axialload is
applied at the beginning of the incremental analysis . Eight node quadrilaterals
with 3 x 3 Gauss points are used in the current analysis. The material properties
utilized in the numerical analyses were obtained from the test data published by
Srung et aI. (Shing et aI., 1988 ).

5. NUMERICAL RESULTS
The results for specimen 12 are shown in Fig. 3. As shown in Fig. 3a,
the numerical load-displacement curve dosely matches the experimental curve.
Furthermore, the vertical steel yields substantially due to the widening of ftexural
cracks, while no yielding is detected in the horizontal steel. This can b e seen

737
in Figs. 3b and 3c. Toe crushing first occurs at a lateral load of 68 kips in the
analysis versus 71 kips in the actual test. The extent of the crushing is very
similar to that observed experimentally.
The same panel was modeled numerically using the plasticity Jz model devel-
oped by Lotfi and Shing (Lotfi and Shing, 1991); the resultant load-displacement
curve and crack pattern are shown in Figs. 3a and 3c, respectively. By com-
paring Figs. 3b and 3c, close agreement between the current model and the
plasticity mo deI is evident.
90

60

70

60
a.
~ 50
1lo 40
..J

30 __ Exporimenllll

__ '" _. Pt .... tic:r.y mod.t (lolll ~Shrf\g)

20
.. ........ . RoI.tlng ct-.;k mod.1
10

o
o 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Displacement (in)

(a)
Currenl Modcl PlasticHy Modcl

(b)

Fig. 3 Current Vs. Plasticity Model for Specimen 12, Flexure Dominated Failure.
(a) Effect on Load-Displacement History, (b) and (c) Cracking Pattern.
(at 0.6 in. Displacement)

The results for specimen 5 are illustrated in Fig. 4. As shown in Fig. 4a,
the numericalload-displacement curve agrees in general with the experimental
curve. The predicted ultimate load by the analysis is slightly higher than that
shown in the test and occurs at a slightly lower lateral displacement . Again, the
same panel was modeled numerically using the plasticity Jz model developed by
Lotfi and Shing; the resultant load-displacement relationship is shown in Fig. 4a.
In both models, the lateral resistance continues to increase as the tensile strain
at the diagonal cracks increases. While the plasticity model failed to capture the
rapid drop in lateral load resistance once a major diagonal crack had occurred,
the current model successfully captured this drop as a diagonal crack opened.
This rapid drop is due to the relatively small amount of shear reinforcement
provided in specimen 5.
By comparing Figs. 4b and 4c, close agreement between the current model
and the plasticity madel in detecting the crack pattern was faund. AIso, it was

738
observed from the numerical results that the post-peak load degradation in panel
5 is accompanied by compressive toe crushing and substantial flexural cracking.
130
120
pclimtnl&1
110
. _ .... - . Pl Ucity modtl (lelll 6Shln;t)
100 01,'7::,">,:. .. ........ Rot.tl/"lQcroc:kmod.,
90
Co 60 /1/ ':\.,." . _.
R 70 .. . '-"
1lo
....I
60 -
50
40
30
20
10
o
o 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Displacoment (tn)

Curuml Idodel (a) Plaslicily Model

(b) (c)

Fig. 4 Current Vs. Plasticity Model for Specimen 5, Shear Dominated Failure.
(a) Effect on Load-Displacement History, (b) and (c) Cracking Pattern.
(at 0.48 in. Displacement)

6. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The analysis of the fiexure dominated waU indicated a very good match
with the experimental results. On the other hand, the analysis of the shear
dominated wall indicated a slight increase in the walllateralload resistance over
the experimental results; a sudden drop was experienced once a major diagonal
crack occurred. As a diagonal crack opened, the aggregate-interlock forces and
the residual shear at the crack interface were substantially reduced. Because
of the small amount of shear reinforcement, this led to a rapid drop in the
lateral load resistance. This, to a great extent, was predicted by the current
model. AIso, it is observed from the numerical results that the post-peak load
degradation is accompanied by a diagonal strut mechanism which failed quickly
by crushing of the masonry in the diagonal strut direction.
Lotfi and Shing (Lotfi and Shing, 1991) analyzed the same shear wall (spec-
imen 5) using a plasticity h model. The numerical solution of the aforemen-
tioned shear wall was influenced by spurious shear strength which consequently
prevented the realistic modeling of brittle behaviour. They claimed that this
spurious lateral resistance is due to the diagonal compressive strain that is as-
sociated with shear distortion which in turn is caused by the diagonal crack
opemng.
Lotfi and Shing claimed that the shear capacity will be maintained as long

739
as the diagonal compressive strength is present, regardless of the shear retention
along the diagonal crack surface. While the last statement is true to a great
extent, it could not explain the spurious shear strength. Utilizing the current
model indicated the development of the strut mechanism. Concurrently, due to
the increased compressive strains, a progressive diagonal compressive failure was
initiated starting from the crushed toe and extending diagonally until complete
failure of the modeI. Numerical results, using the current model, indicated no
spurious shear strength for the shear dominated specimen 5 and the sudden drop
due to the excessive opening of the diagonal crack has been properly captured.

7. CONCLUSIONS
A rotating smeared crack mo deI has been developed and implemented in
the general purpose finite element package. The finite element model has been
calibrated against experimental work where two reinforced masonry wall panels
of flexural and shear dominated failure modes were modeled. Some conclusions
can be drawn at this stage of the research.
Good agreement was found between the experimental behaviour and the
current mo deI behaviour regarding the flexural response of masonry shear
walls.
The response of masonry walls dominated by brittle shear failure accom-
panied by the opening of diagonal cracks could not be accurately modeled
especially in the pre-peak zone. However, it was possible to predict the ul-
timate load quite accurately and to capture the sudden drop in the lateral
load resistance.
The analytical results of the current model were compared with those based
on the plasticity mo deI developed by Lotfi and Shing and good agreement
was found between both models.

8. REFERENCES
Bathe, K.J., "Static and Dynamic Geometric and Material Nonlinear Anal-
ysis Using ADINA", Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Report No.
82448-1, 1977.
Vecchio, F.J., and Collins, M.P., "The Modified Compression-Field Theory
for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear", ACI Structural Jour-
nal, 1986, pp. 219-23l.
Gopalaratnam, V.S., and Shah, S.P., "Softening Response of Plain Concrete
in Direct Tension", ACI Journal, May-June 1985, pp. 310-323.
Bathe, K.J., and Ramaswamy, S., "On Three-Dimensional Nonlinear Analy-
sis of Concrete Structures", Nuclear Engineering and Design, No. 52, 1979,
pp. 385-409.
Rots, J.G. and Blaauwendraad, J., "Crack Models for Concrete: Discrete
or Smeared? Fixed, Multi-Directional or Rotating?", Heron, Vol. 34, No.l,
1989.
Shing. P.B., Noland J.L., Klamerus, E., and Spaeh, H., "Inelastic Behaviour
of Concrete Masonry Shear Walls", Journal of the Structural Engineering,
ASCE, VoI. 115, No. 9, July 1988, pp. 2204-2225.
Lotfi, H. R and Shing, P.B, "An Appraisal of Smeared Crack Models for
Masonry Shear Wall Analysis", Computers and Structures, Vol. 41 , No. 3,
1991, pp. 413-425.

740