PROHITECH WP8 (Leader R.

Landolfo)
NUMERICAL SIMULATION

BENCHMARK II: NUMERICAL ANALYSES FOR MASONRY VAULT

Pavel Pevsner, Robert Levy, Emad Nsieri and Avigdor Rutenberg

Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel

Description of the tested structure

The tested masonry structure proposed as a Benchmark II is a prototype of a brick masonry
(Figure 1) four-sided cloister vault supported by four reinforced concrete beams (30×30cm2)
and by four square brick masonry columns (40×40cm2). The side length of the square base is
200cm and the vault is produced by the intersection of four cylindrical shells of 12cm thick.
The vault height is 100cm. The load was applied by means of a steel beam placed at the top
of the vault.

Figure 1. The tested masonry vault specimen

General description of ABAQUS software

The computer code ABAQUS was used to perform the numerical analysis for the tested
masonry vault. ABAQUS is a suite of general-purpose, advanced nonlinear finite element
analysis (FEA) programs. ABAQUS is used throughout the world for stress, heat transfer, and
other types of analysis in mechanical, structural, civil, biomedical, and related engineering
applications. The ABAQUS suite consists of three core products: ABAQUS/Standard,
ABAQUS/Explicit and ABAQUS/CAE. Each of these packages offers additional optional
modules that address specialized capabilities.
The following items are some of the more significant features of the code:

• A wide range of element types, including continuum elements (1D, 2D, and 3D),

beams, membranes and shells.

• Element formulations suitable for large displacements, rotations and strains.

• Material models for metals, sand, clay, concrete, jointed rock, plastics and rubber.

• User-defined subroutines permit inclusion of additional material models and element

types.
• Automatic time incrementation within an implicit time integration algorithm (Hilber-

Hughes-Taylor) for nonlinear dynamic analysis.

• Fracture mechanics capability.

ABAQUS analysis options

ABAQUS/Standard enables a wide range of linear and nonlinear engineering simulations to
be carried out efficiently, accurately, and reliably. The direct-integration dynamic procedure
provided in ABAQUS/Standard uses the implicit Hilber-Hughes-Taylor operator for
integration of the equations of motion. In an implicit dynamic analysis the integration
operator matrix must be inverted, and a set of simultaneous nonlinear equilibrium equations
must be solved at each time increment. This solution is done iteratively using Newton’s
method. The Hilber-Hughes-Taylor operator is unconditionally stable and, thus, there is no
limit on the size of the time increment that can be used for most analyses in
ABAQUS/Standard (accuracy governs the time increment in ABAQUS/Standard). The
flexibility provided by this integration allows ABAQUS/Standard to be applied to those
portions of the analysis that are well-suited to an implicit solution technique, such as static,
low-speed dynamic, or steady-state transport analyses.

ABAQUS/Explicit provides finite element solution techniques to simulate a wide variety of

dynamic and quasi-static events in an accurate, robust, and efficient manner conducting the
best analyses possible in the shortest amount of time. The explicit dynamics procedure
performs a large number of small time increments efficiently. An explicit central-difference
time integration rule is used together with the use of diagonal or “lumped” element mass
matrices. Each increment is relatively inexpensive because there is no solution for a set of

2
simultaneous equations. However, the size of the time increment in an explicit dynamic
analysis is limited, because the central-difference operator is conditionally stable. The use of
small increments (dictated by the stability limit) is advantageous because it allows the
solution to proceed without iterations and without requiring tangent stiffness matrices to be
form. Contact conditions and other extremely discontinuous events are easily handled by
ABAQUS/Explicit.

ABAQUS nonlinear concrete modelling options

The material library in ABAQUS includes several models of inelastic behavior of different
materials, such as metals, cast iron, soils, and concrete. Unfortunately, there is no specific
model available for modelling of an unreinforced masonry structures. However, the concrete
models available in ABAQUS software can be used to model masonry structures as will be
shown later.
Three different constitutive models are offered in ABAQUS for the analysis of concrete at
low confining pressures: the smeared crack concrete model in ABAQUS/Standard (“Concrete
smeared cracking”); the brittle cracking model in ABAQUS/Explicit (“cracking model for
concrete”); and the concrete damaged plasticity model in both ABAQUS/Standard and
ABAQUS/Explicit (“concrete damaged plasticity”). Each model is designed to provide a
general capability for modeling plain and reinforced concrete (as well as other similar quasi-
brittle materials) in all types of structures: beams, trusses, shells, and solids.

The smeared crack concrete model in ABAQUS/Standard is intended for applications in

which the concrete is subjected to essentially monotonic straining and a material point
exhibits either tensile cracking or compressive crushing. Plastic straining in compression is
controlled by a “compression” yield surface. Cracking is assumed to be the most important
aspect of the behavior and the representation of cracking and post-cracking anisotropic
behavior dominates the modeling. Cracking is assumed to occur when the stress reaches a
failure surface that is called the “crack detection surface”. When a crack has been detected, its
orientation is stored for subsequent calculations. Subsequent cracking at the same point is
restricted to being orthogonal to this direction since stress components associated with an
open crack are not included in the definition of the failure surface used for detecting the
additional cracks. Cracks are irrecoverable: they remain for the rest of the calculation (but
may open and close). Following crack detection, the crack affects the calculations because a

3
damaged elasticity model is used. The concrete model is a smeared crack model in the sense
that it does not track individual “macro” cracks. Constitutive calculations are performed
independently at each integration point of the finite element model. The presence of cracks
enters into these calculations by the way in which the cracks affect the stress and material
stiffness associated with the integration point.

The brittle cracking model in ABAQUS/Explicit is intended for applications in which the
concrete behavior is dominated by tensile cracking and compressive failure is not important.
The model includes consideration of the anisotropy induced by cracking. In compression, the
model assumes elastic behavior. A simple brittle failure criterion is available to allow the
removal of elements from a mesh. ABAQUS/Explicit uses a smeared crack model to
represent the discontinuous brittle behavior in concrete. Contrary to smeared crack concrete
model in ABAQUS/Standard, which is intended primarily for the analysis of concrete
structures, the brittle cracking model in ABAQUS/Explicit can also be useful for modeling
other materials such as ceramics or brittle rocks.
The ABAQUS/Explicit cracking model assumes fixed, orthogonal cracks, with the maximum
number of cracks at a material point limited by the number of direct stress components
present at that material point of the finite element model (a maximum of three cracks in three-
dimensional, plane strain, and axisymmetric problems; two cracks in plane stress and shell
problems; and one crack in beam or truss problems).

The concrete damaged plasticity model in ABAQUS/Standard and ABAQUS/Explicit

provides a general capability for modeling concrete and other quasi-brittle materials in all
types of structures (beams, trusses, shells, and solids). This model uses concepts of isotropic
damaged elasticity in combination with isotropic tensile and compressive plasticity to
represent the inelastic behaviour of concrete. This model is designed for applications in
which the concrete is subjected to arbitrary loading conditions, including cyclic loading. The
model takes into consideration the degradation of the elastic stiffness induced by plastic
straining both in tension and compression. It also accounts for stiffness recovery effects under
cyclic loading.
The model is a continuum, plasticity-based, damage model for concrete. It assumes that the
main two failure mechanisms are tensile cracking and compressive crushing of the concrete
material. The evolution of the yield (or failure) surface is controlled by two hardening
variables linked to failure mechanisms under tension and compression loading.
4
Types of analyses used for masonry vault
1. ABAQUS/Standard implicit linear analyses (performed for shell element only).
2. ABAQUS/Standard implicit nonlinear analyses - load incremental static geometric
and material nonlinear, (performed for shell element only).
3. ABAQUS/Explicit nonlinear analyses. This is a quasi-static method of analysis that
simulates the dynamics of a slow compression test (performed for shell as well as 3D
solid elements).

Structural modelling methods and member properties

The Finite Element Mesh
Several alternative finite element models having different modelling assumptions and
different loading conditions were developed to represent the masonry vault. The finite
elements mesh was created by starting with the grid of a flat triangle quarter of the base of the
vault (Figure 2a) and transforming it into quarter of the real vault using a home written
Matlab routine (Figure 2b). Then the whole vault is generated using symmetry (Figures 3, 4
and 6).
The finite elements mesh as shown in Figure 3 (see also Figures 4 and 6) is quite
sophisticated in which the size of the elements are almost identical. This efficient finite
elements mesh will facilitate the analysis process to a large extent.

(a) (b)
Figure 2. Geometric construction of the model: (a) projection (b) real geometry

Shell Element
Two-dimensional quadrilateral thick shell elements (4-node element) that consider shear
effects were used to model the masonry vault. Note that triangular shell elements were used

5
at the supports. Each element has five degrees of freedom (three translational degrees with
two rotational degrees of freedom) at each node (see Element S4R5 in ABAQUS).
The authors believe that using two-dimensional shell elements to represent the relatively
thick bricks compared with the masonry vault dimensions may underestimate the behaviour
of the masonry vault. Hence, a three-dimensional solid brick elements were also used to
model the masonry vault as will be shown subsequently.
Two geometrical models were developed for the linear analysis. One model includes the
sharp edges that were a result of the intersection of cylinders of “zero” thickness (Figure 3a).
In the second model the edges of the first model were truncated by joining adjacent nodes
along the elliptical line of intersection. This second model was used for the purpose to reduce
significantly the stress concentrations on the edges (Figure 3b). The supports were fully
fixed, i.e., all six degrees of freedom were constrained.

(a) (b)
Figure 3. Finite element model of the masonry vault: (a) sharp edges model (b) truncated
edges model

The sharp edges geometric model with a rectangular hole at the apex was used for the
nonlinear analysis (assuming geometric and material nonlinearity). Implicit and explicit
nonlinear analyses were carried out using ABAQUS/Standard and ABAQUS/Explicit.
In the implicit analysis, the smeared crack concrete model was assumed to model the
inelastic mechanical behaviour of the masonry vault. The surface failure was fitted to the
given material properties of the masonry brick units in which were measured from tests
(masonry compressive and tensile strength were 3.0N/mm2 and 0.1N/mm2, respectively).
In the explicit analysis the brittle cracking model was assumed to model the inelastic
mechanical behaviour of the masonry vault. This model is intended for applications in which
the element behaviour is dominated by tensile cracking and it assumes an elastic behaviour in
compression.

6
3D Solid Element
Three-dimensional solid continuum brick elements (see Element C3D8R in ABAQUS) were
also used to model the masonry vault. The element has eight nodes with three translational
degrees of freedom at each node. ABAQUS/Explicit was used to perform the nonlinear
analysis assuming the brittle cracking model to model the inelastic mechanical behaviour of
the masonry vault.

Load conditions
Shell Element
The models were vertically loaded with distributed load around a square hole at the apex
(Figure 4), and static incremental linear and nonlinear analyses were carried out on several
alternative models. The applied load shape as function of time is shown in Figure 5 (the
“Applied Force” curve). The vertical distributed load was slowly increased until the analysis
was automatically terminated when the capacity of the structure reached.

Figure 4. Full geometry of the vault with nodal loading

3D Solid Element
In the experimental test of the masonry vault, the load was applied by means of steel beam
placed at the top of the vault. Hence, to simulate such loading condition, a very stiff solid
member in contact with the vault at the apex was provided to the finite elements modelling as
shown in Figure 6. The distributed load condition (Figure 4) was also used. As will be shown
subsequently, the loading conditions have a significant effect on the structural behaviour and
the load leading to failure. Again, the function of the applied load is given in Figure 5 (the
“Applied Force” curve).

7
 Figure 5. Applied load shape and contact forces vs. time

Figure 6. Full geometry of the vault with contact element loading

8
Numerical simulation results
Shell Element
Results of an implicit linear analysis for the sharp edges model were scaled so that the
principal stress reaches yielding. It was observed that first yield occurred at a load level of 1.0
ton at the internal layer of the vault at the intersection of the cylinders. Results of principal
stresses are shown in Figure 7 in which Figure 7a relates to the inside of the vault whereas
Figure 7b describes the stresses at the outside and Figure 7c shows the location (by means of
coordinates) of the first yield in the diagonal ellipse section.
Results of implicit linear analysis for the truncated edges model were also scaled so that
principal stress reaches yielding. In this model, the stress concentration was relieved and the
first yield occurred at a load level of 1.4 ton at the internal layer of the vault at the
intersection of the cylinders. Figure 8 displays the principal stresses for this case.

9
 (a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 7. Principal stresses (sharp edges): (a) Inside layer, (b) Outside layer,
(c) Location of first yield
10
 (a) (b)
Figure 8. Principal stresses in truncated edges model: (a) Inside layer, (b) Outside layer

Load vs. displacement curves at the apex of the implicit and explicit nonlinear analyses are
shown in Figure 9. The dotted curve represents the implicit analysis results and the triangular
curve represents the explicit analysis results. In both implicit and explicit analyses the load
leading to collapse was around 3.35 ton and 3.05 ton, respectively.
Note that in both analyses first cracks emerged at a load level close to 1.0 ton on the inside
layer of the vault at the intersection of the cylinders and at the apex. With increasing vertical
loading, cracks on the inside layer started to propagate through the thickness and along the
edges, and new cracks emerged at the haunches of the cloister vault (at the outside layer).

Figure 9. Load displacement curve at apex

Figure 10 shows description of combined inside and outside cracks at the instant of collapse.
Results of the explicit analysis are very similar to those shown in Figure 10.

11
Figure 10. Implicit analysis results: display of combined cracking at the instant of collapse at
the inside (at the apex and edges) and outside (at the haunches) layers

3D Solid Element
Figures 11 and 12 show the onset of cracks for the model with nodal loading condition
(Figure 4) and the model with contact element loading condition (Figure 6).

Top surface Bottom surface

Figure 11. Model with nodal loading: Onset of cracks

12
 Top surface Bottom surface

Figure 12. Model with contact: Onset of cracks.

Figure 13 shows load vs. displacement curves at the apex for the nodal loading and contact
loading conditions used in the explicit analyses. The load level leading to collapse of the
masonry vault for the nodal loading and contact element loading conditions were 2.9 ton and
2.5 ton, respectively. Note that determining of the collapse load using the contact loading
model is quite simple since at collapse, the stiff loading solid member penetrates through the
masonry vault and the contact force drops drastically as can be clearly shown in Figure 5 (see
the “Contact Force” curve which shows the reaction activated by the masonry vault on the
contact element). Note also the protruding difference between the two load-displacement
curves especially in the first stages of the loading process. In he first stages of the loading
process the contact area between the stiff solid element and the masonry vault at the apex is
quite small. With increasing the applied load a local deformation will take place at the apex.
This local deformation will enlarge the contact area and hence lead to the participation of
more parts of the masonry vault to resist the applied loading.
Figures 14 and 15 show the predicted cracks for both loading conditions just before collapse.
Figure 16 shows the propagated crack at the instant of collapse through the thickness of a
diagonal section of the vault.

13
Figure 13: Load-displacement curves at the apex for both loading conditions

Top surface Bottom surface

Figure 14: Model with nodal loading at the instant of collapse

14
 Top surface Bottom surface

Figure 15: Model with contact element loading at the instant of collapse

Figure 16. Model with contact loading condition: diagonal section of the masonry vault

Figure 17. Cracks observed at the extrados along the groins and at the haunches of the
cloister vault

15
Discussion and Conclusions – collapse conditions
Several alternative finite element models having different modelling assumptions and
different loading conditions were developed to represent the tested masonry vault. Two types
of nonlinear analyses were carried out: implicit and explicit quasi-static nonlinear analyses.

Results of the nonlinear analyses using shell elements to model the masonry vault show a
good agreement with the experimental test result. The predicted cracks (Figure 10) are similar
to the observed cracks obtained from the experimental test (Figure 17). In the experimental
test, cracks were observed on the masonry at the extrados along the groins and at the
haunches of the cloister vault. In the numerical simulation using shell elements cracks were
initiated and propagated at the inside layer (bottom surface) of the vault at the intersection of
the cylinders and at the outside layer (at the haunches). The authors believe that during the
experimental test, cracks were firstly formed at the internal layer of the vault and propagated
through the thickness in a relatively rapid manner and reached the external layer. However,
using two-dimensional shell elements to represent the relatively thick bricks compared with
the masonry vault dimensions may lead to unconservative results. The range of the lateral
load leading to failure using shell elements is 3.05 ton to 3.35 ton (Figure 9).

Three-dimensional solid brick elements were also used to model more faithfully the masonry
vault. Explicit nonlinear analyses were carried out for two different loading conditions
(Figures 4 and 6). As shown in Figures 14, 15 and 16 the results obtained from the numerical
simulation show a very good agreement with the experimental test result (Figure 17),
especially when contact loading condition was used which simulate more reliably the real
loading condition. Hence, the authors believe that the vertical load leading to failure of the
masonry vault is about 2.5 ton.

16
17