Research Article: A Stress-Strain Model For Brick Prism Under Uniaxial Compression
Research Article: A Stress-Strain Model For Brick Prism Under Uniaxial Compression
Research Article: A Stress-Strain Model For Brick Prism Under Uniaxial Compression
Research Article
A Stress-Strain Model for Brick Prism under
Uniaxial Compression
Received 25 November 2018; Revised 1 February 2019; Accepted 11 March 2019; Published 14 April 2019
Copyright © 2019 Keun-Hyeok Yang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
This study proposes a simple and rational stress-strain relationship model applicable to brick masonry under compression. The
brick prism compression tests were conducted with different mortar strengths and with constant brick strength. From the
observation of the test results, shape of the stress-strain curve is assumed to be parabola. In developing the stress-strain model, the
modulus of elasticity, the strain at peak stress, and the strain at 50% of the peak stress on the descending branch were formulated
from regression analysis using test data. Numerical and statistical analyses were then performed to derive equations for the key
parameter to determine the slopes at the ascending and descending branches of the stress-strain curve shape. The reliability of the
proposed model was examined by comparisons with actual stress-strain curves obtained from the tests and the existing model. The
proposed model in this study turned out to be more accurate and easier to handle than previous models so that it is expected to
contribute towards the mathematical simplicity of analytical modeling.
1. Introduction stress-strain models for concretes [2–5] used the basic ex-
pression established by Popovics [6] or Sargin et al. [7], and
Masonry is a material built from units and mortar that the constants in the basic expression were determined
induce an anisotropic behavior for the composite. The lack empirically. In some models, the ascending and descending
of knowledge on the properties of the composite material branches were dealt with separately with nonlinear equa-
imposes low assessments of the strength capacity of the tions; in this case, the test data were essential to establish the
masonry wall. Atkinson et al. [1] state that the prediction of empirical constants. Hence, some limitations such as ap-
compressive and deformation of full-scale masonry based on plicable ranges of concrete strength and concrete density
compressive test of stack-bond masonry prism and the exist. Knutson [8] evaluated the stress-strain diagrams for
interpretation of the results prism tests have a significant various materials and showed that they can be cast into a
influence on the allowable stress and stiffness used in the mathematical form. However, Mohamad et al. [9] men-
masonry design. When structural masonry is subjected to tioned a complete understanding of the mechanisms in-
vertical and horizontal loading, one of the most important volved in the deformation and failure which are not fully
parameters for design is the stress-strain relationship. Es- explained. It is believed that the development of a theoretical
pecially, the stress-strain relationship of concrete brick model of universal application is a rather hard task, although
prism in compression is essential for the analysis of masonry there have been very nice efforts to propose simplified
structures. The relationship is generally known to depend on mathematical models for the stress-stain relation [10, 11].
several interrelated test parameters including compressive When modeling masonry structure in common FEM soft-
strength of bricks and mortar. Many mathematical models ware such as Abaqus [12] and LS-DYNA [13], it is not
have been proposed for accurate finite element models and possible to correctly model and predict the behavior of
structural analysis of concretes in compression. Existing masonry structures primarily due to the lack of the
2 Advances in Civil Engineering
25
20
Compressive stress (MPa)
15
10
0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006
Strain
2.0 fb 3.0 fb
2.5 fb Brick
Figure 2: Compressive stress-strain curves measured in the mortars and the brick element.
sharply along the loading direction at 85% of the peak stress, the peak strength. Most of the cracks were observed in the
which was accompanied by a rapid increase in the strain. The concrete bricks. At last, the cracks from one surface of the
fracture process zone developed to the middle as reaching specimen developed to reach the other surface to conclude
4 Advances in Civil Engineering
Comp 6.5
6.3
0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01
Strain
Cp-3.0
its fracture. These tendencies were equally observed re- Figure 6: Compressive stress-strain curves measured in the
gardless of the mortar strengths. concrete brick prism.
with its vertex at the peak stress point. The slopes of the
3.2. Prism Strength. The strengths of the 16 prism specimens
ascending and descending branches of the curve mostly
are listed in Table 3. Gumaste et al. [17] noted that the brick
depend on fpm . The curve was almost linear up to ap-
masonry strength increases with increase in brick and/or
proximately one-half of the peak stress point, showing that
mortar strength. In this study, only one parameter, i.e., the
their initial slope increased as fpm increased. The strength of
strength of the mortar (fm), was introduced. Because all
Cp-2.5 and Cp-3.0 were 7.3% and 11.5% higher than that of
other conditions were fixed other than that, the strength of
Cp-2.0, respectively. The strain at the peak stress also in-
the prism (fpm) would be expressed as a function of the
creased in ascending branch (the strain of Cp-2.5 and Cp-3.0
strength of a mortar and a brick as
was 7.4% and 11.1% more than that of Cp-2.0, respectively)
fpm f fm , fb . (1) but the strain at 0.5 fpm in descending branch reduced as the
compressive strength increased (the strain at 0.5 fpm of Cp-2.5
Using the test data, with a constant brick strength, a and Cp-3.0 was 2.1% and 4.3% less than that of Cp-2.0, re-
regression analysis [18] was performed as shown in Figure 5, spectively). It shall be noted that the strength of the prism was
and the relationship between the prism strength and the lower than that of the brick or mortar, against expectation.
mortar strength was found to be The innate nature of each materials as well as the way of
fpm 0.09fm + 3.92. (2) assemblage of them may cause inevitable uneven contact
condition and develop local cracks.
Epm (MPa)
R2 = 0.81
Similar studies have been conducted on determining
the factors A1 and α by, for example, Yang et al. [14] and 2650
Noguchi et al. [19]. In this study, based on the test results, a
regression analysis was conducted to find a best-fit value of
A1 and α in equation (3), as shown in Figure 7, finding 2600
A1 1513 and α 0.33. The test results for Epm and the
analysis results from equation (5) are compared in Table 4. 2550
The averages of differences between them for Cp-2.0, Cp- 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85
2.5, and Cp-3.0 are 0.2%, 1.0%, and 0.9%, respectively. It fpm(1/3)
can be concluded that the analysis equation for elastic
Figure 7: Regression analysis for Epm.
modulus derived above matched with the test results with
accuracy. 1.75
ε0.5 0.004 exp0.25 ,
Equation (3) was compared with existing equations f10
(6)
found in internationally accepted documents such as fpm
FEMA306 [20], which proposes Epm ≈ 550fpm. In-
ternational Building Code [21] and the MSJC document [22] where Epm is given in equation (3).
recommend Epm as 700 times fpm, while Eurocode6 [23] The test results for ε0 and ε0.5 and the analysis results
suggest conservatively higher values of Epm (1,000 times fpm). from equations (5) and (6) are compared in Table 5. The
The Canadian masonry code S304.1 [24] recommends Epm as averages of differences of ε0 between them for Cp-2.0, Cp-
850 times fpm with an upper limit of 20,000 MPa. The 2.5, and Cp-3.0 are 3.1%, 2.0%, and 0.7%, respectively. Those
proposed Epm in this study was compared with some se- of ε0.5 between them are 7.1%, 4.9%, 4.7%, respectively. It can
lective existing models as shown in Figure 8. All featured be concluded that the analysis equation for strains derived
models showed higher Epm than the proposed model in most above represents the test results with high fidelity.
of the ranges of fpm; in other words, the proposed model
estimates the Epm rather conservatively. 4. Mathematical Equation for
Stress-Strain Relationship
3.5. Strain at Peak Stress ε0 and at 50% of Peak Stress of 4.1. Generalized Equation. The shape of a compressive
Descending Branch ε0.5 . MacGregor and Wight [25] estab- stress-strain curve of concrete is generally characterized as a
lished that the strain at peak stress (ε0 ) of concrete increases parabola with its vertex at the peak stress [14]. This phys-
with increase in concrete strength. The same trend is ob- ically means that the tangential modulus of elasticity Et has
served in brick prism made with concrete. As it was revealed maximum value at the origin, gradually decreases to zero at
from the test results shown in Table 3, for the ascending the peak stress, and becomes negative in the descending
branch of the stress-strain curve, the strain at the peak stress branch of the curve (Figure 11).
ε0 was proportional to fpm . On the other hand, for the In this study, the same assumption and the following
descending branch, ε0.5 decreased as fpm increased, i.e., they nonlinear equation (7) were applied in generating a com-
are in reverse proportion to each other. Their relationships plete curve of concrete brick prism:
can be expressed as
β3 x
fpm y , (7)
ε0 A2 expB2 , xβ2+ β1
Epm
(4) where y (fpc /fpm ) is the normalized stress, x (εpc /ε0 ) is
the normalized strain, and fpc is the prism stress corre-
ε0.5 A3 expB3 ,
f10
fpm sponding to strain εpc .
The physical meaning of the equation gives the following
where f10 10 MPa is a reference value for prism strength. boundary conditions: (1) y 0, for x 0; (2) y 1 for x 1;
To derive equations for ε0 and ε0.5 , nonlinear regression and (3) (dfpc /dεpc ) 0, for x 1. From the first and second
analysis (Figures 9 and 10) were conducted and the following conditions, it can be said that β3 is equal to β1 + 1. From the
best-fit equations was developed as tangential modulus at a point, d(fpc )/d(εpc ), and the third
fpm boundary condition, it can be inferred that β2 is equal to β1 + 1.
ε0 0.0014 exp348 , (5) Therefore, the stress-strain curve of concrete can be expressed
Epm in the following basic form with the key parameter β1 :
6 Advances in Civil Engineering
8000 0.009
7000
0.0085
6000
Epm (MPa)
5000 0.008
ε0.5
4000
0.0075
3000 y = 0.004e0.25x
2000 0.007
1000
3.8 4.8 5.8 6.8 7.8
0.0065
fpm (MPa) 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2
0.0027 the slope of the line joining the 5% and the 33% of the peak
strength. This statement is thought to be reasonable because
0.0026 y = 0.0014e348x the stress-strain curve of prism in compression would remain
linear up to 0.33fpm [27]. Substituting the defined Epm in
0.0025
equation (8) gives the following equation for the key pa-
0.0024 rameter β1 of the ascending branch
0.4 Xa + 0.4 − Xa β1 − Xa 0,
0.0018 0.0019 0.002 0.0021 0.0022 0.0023 β1 +1
fpm/Epm for εpc ≤ ε0 , (9)
5
fpm= 3~7 MPa
4.5
4 Best fit curve
for descending branch,
3.5
y = 0.31e1.53x
3
2.5
β1
2
Best fit curve
1.5 for ascending branch,
1 y = 0.62e0.91x
0.5
0
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
(fpm/f10)0.67
Figure 12: Best-fit equation for key parameter β1 obtained from numerical analysis.
6
Compressive stress (MPa)
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008
compared with the earlier stage of the stress-strain relation- Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT &
ship, the final stage of it is not well explained. On the other Future Planning (no. 2015R1A5A1037548) and by Kyonggi
hand, the predictions from the model proposed in this study University’s Graduate Research Assistantship 2018.
are in better agreement regardless of compressive strength.
The calculated normalized root-mean-square error (NRMSE)
by the proposed model ranged between 0.239 and 0.257, while
References
in Knutson model, it was between 0.357 and 0.358 (Table 6). [1] R. H. Atkinson, J. L. Noland, D. P. Abrams, and S. McNary, “A
deformation failure theory for stack-bond brick prisms in
5. Conclusions compression,” in Proceedings of 3rd NAMC, Arlington, TX,
USA, 1985.
In this study, concrete brick prisms with three different [2] P. Kumar, “A compact analytical material model for un-
mortar strengths and with the same brick strength were confined concrete under uni-axial compression,” Materials
tested under compressive load. An analytical model was and Structures, vol. 37, no. 9, pp. 585–590, 2004.
proposed to provide a stress-strain relationship of them. [3] M. A. Mansur, T. H. Wee, and M. S. Chin, “Derivation of the
Based on the research summarized in this paper, the fol- complete stress-strain curves for concrete in compression,”
lowing conclusions were drawn: Magazine of Concrete Research, vol. 47, no. 173, pp. 285–290,
1995.
(1) The compressive strength of the prism differed [4] S. M. Palmquist and C. Jansen, “Postpeak strain-stress re-
according to the mortar strength when the brick unit lationship for concrete in compression,” ACI Materials
strength was constant. However, the increase rate of Journal, vol. 98, no. 3, pp. 213–219, 2001.
the prism strength was not exactly proportional to [5] S.-T. Yi, J.-K. Kim, and T.-K. Oh, “Effect of strength and age
the increase rate of the mortar. on the stress-strain curves of concrete specimens,” Cement
and Concrete Research, vol. 33, no. 8, pp. 1235–1244, 2003.
(2) The strength of a brick prism was not a summation of [6] S. Popovics, “A numerical approach to the complete stress-
both brick strength and mortar strength. Rather, it strain curve of concrete,” Cement and Concrete Research,
was lower than the individual strength of a brick unit vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 583–599, 1973.
or a mortar. The contact condition of both non- [7] M. Sargin, S. K. Ghosh, and V. K. Handa, “Effects of lateral
homogeneous materials is thought to cause local reinforcement upon the strength and deformation properties
cracks under compressive condition. of concrete,” Magazine of Concrete Research, vol. 23, no. 75-
(3) The proposed stress-strain model for brick prism in 76, pp. 99–110, 1971.
[8] H. H. Knutson, “The stress-strain relationship for masonry,”
compression predicted the relationship accurately,
Masonry International, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 31–33, 2003.
regardless of mortar strength, although some dis- [9] G. Mohamad, P. B. Lourenco, and H. R. Roman, “Mechanical
crepancies were observed after ε0.5 in the descending behavior assessment of concrete block masonry prisms under
branch. compression,” in Proceedings of International Conference for
(4) The key parameter β1 , which is an exponential Structures, pp. 261–268, Coimbra, Portugal, 2005.
function of (fpm )0.67 , defines the stress-strain curve. [10] B. D. Ewing and M. J. Kowalsky, “Compressive behavior of
Two equations for β1 were provided for ascending unconfined and confined clay brick masonry,” Journal of
and descending branches, separately. Structural Engineering, vol. 130, no. 4, pp. 650–661, 2004.
[11] A. A. Tasnimi, “Mathematical model for complete stress-
(5) The proposed stress-strain relationship model con- strain curve prediction of normal, light-weight and high-
tributes towards the mathematical simplicity of strength concretes,” Magazine of Concrete Research, vol. 56,
analytical modeling. no. 1, pp. 23–34, 2004.
(6) The authors considered that the comparison between [12] A. J. Aref and K. M. Dolatshahi, “A three-dimensional cyclic
Ewing and Kowalski [10], Kaushik et al.’s [27] meso-scale numerical procedure for simulation of un-
modeling based on the “modified” Kent–Park model reinforced masonry structures,” Computers and Structures,
vol. 120, pp. 9–23, 2013.
proposed by Priestley and Elder [30], and their own
[13] S. Burnett, M. Gilbert, T. Molyneaux, G. Beattie, and
model should be given on a future assignment. B. Hobbs, “The performance of unreinforced masonry walls
subjected to low-velocity impacts: finite element analysis,”
Data Availability International Journal of Impact Engineering, vol. 34, no. 8,
pp. 1433–1450, 2007.
The data used to support the findings of this study are in- [14] K. H. Yang, J. H. Mun, M. S. Cho, and T. H. Kang, “Stress-
cluded within the article. strain model for various unconfined concrete in compres-
sion,” ACI Structural Journal, vol. 111, no. 4, pp. 819–826,
Conflicts of Interest 2014.
[15] Korean Standard Association, KS F404 Concrete Bricks, Ko-
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. rean Standard Association, Seoul, South Korea, 2013.
[16] Korean Standard Association, KS L5220 Dry Ready Mixed
Acknowledgments Cement Mortar, Korean Standard Association, Seoul, South
Korea, 2013.
This research was supported by the Basic Science Research [17] K. S. Gumaste, K. S. N. Rao, B. V. V. Reddy, and K. S. Jagadish,
Program through the National Research Foundation of “Strength and Elasticity of brick masonry prisms and wallettes
10 Advances in Civil Engineering
Rotating Advances in
Machinery Multimedia
The Scientific
Engineering
Journal of
Journal of
Hindawi
World Journal
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi
Sensors
Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 http://www.hindawi.com
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
2013 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
Journal of
Control Science
and Engineering
Advances in
Civil Engineering
Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
Journal of
Journal of Electrical and Computer
Robotics
Hindawi
Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
VLSI Design
Advances in
OptoElectronics
International Journal of
International Journal of
Modelling &
Simulation
Aerospace
Hindawi Volume 2018
Navigation and
Observation
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
in Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
International Journal of
International Journal of Antennas and Active and Passive Advances in
Chemical Engineering Propagation Electronic Components Shock and Vibration Acoustics and Vibration
Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018