Module 1:

Unreinforced Masonry
Building Assessment
Worked example end wall element

Exercise
1m

5m

5m

5m

8m

Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
with no side wall restraint
EQ Stability load combination = 0.9D + 1.25E
And
DESIGN CAPACITY DEMAND
H

so
M retrofit restoring + M 0.9D restoring 1.35 x 1.25 x ME overturning
1.35 = Knowledge factor used with Italian Macro Element
method
(needs better picture)

Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
with no side wall restraint
CAPACITY
What acceleration, , is required to initiate
overturning (without retrofit)?
Quick check of 1m vertical strip of wall
H

M0.9D restoring 1.35 . 1.25 . ME overturning

0.9W.t/2 1.35 . 1.25 . W . H/2
0.9 . t/1.35 . 1.25 . H
0.9 . 980 / 1.35 . 1.25 . 16000
= 0.033 (g)

Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
DEMAND

What is the overturning Moment Demand at the

design earthquake?
CT = C . Z . I . P . Kp
CT = 0.08 . 1.0 . 1.5 . 1.0 . 4

CT W

(P = 1 for part on ground)

CT = 0.48 (g)

(assuming there is no resonance of the part.

NBC 105 Clause 12.5.2
See check on next slide)

CAPACITY / DEMAND = 0.033/0.48 = 0.07

7% Nepal Building Code. Therefore topples with
code earthquake
t

Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
DEMAND

Check for resonance

[NBC 105 Clause 12.5.2]

If 0.6 < T1 building /Tpart < 1.4 then Kp 2xKp

For vertical spanning rocking cantilever
[Eqn 10.24 NZSEE Guideline section 10 URM]
H

CT W

Tp = sqrt(0.65 . h [1+(t/h)2])
Tp = 3.4s
T1 building 0.09H/Sqrt(D)
[NBC 105 Cl 12.5.2]
T1 building 0.09 . 16 / Sqrt(~30m to 60m)
0.26s to 0.18s
Therefore T1 building /Tpart 0.01 to 0.05
so resonance will not occur, no need to double Kp

Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
RETROFIT OPTION
FP

What is the overturning Moment Demand at the

design earthquake?
Unit weight = 18kN/m3

CT W

W = 18 . 16 . 0.98 = 282kN/m
CT = 0.48
H = 16 m
t = 0.98m
M1.25E overturning = 1.35 . 1.25W CTH/2 = 1827 kNm/m
M 0.9D restoring = 0.9Wt/2

= 129 kNm/m

Required M retrofit restoring 1827 129 = 1700 kNm/m

t

Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
RETROFIT OPTION
FP

What tie force is required at the head of the

wall?
M retrofit restoring = Fp . H
1700 = FP . 15m

CT W

FP = 113 kN / m REQUIRED
Say wall length = 7m. Gives 791kN total

Two ties at head = 396 kN/ tie

Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
RETROFIT OPTION
FP

What size tie rod required for 396 kN?

Consider Reidbar allthread reinforcing rod at
500 MPa yeild strength
Try 24 mm rod

CT W

T = Asfy = 0.9 . 452 mm . 500 MPa

T = 203 kN
So 2 x RB24 rods required each side at top of
wall. Quite a large force to transfer

Exercise
Questions?
Tension ties at all three/four floors?
All equal or different forces at each floor?
Tie into diaphragm or in-plane walls?
Other end wall separation failure modes?
Other out of plane modes?
Will wall rotate about bottom of foundation or about
seating on plinth?
Effect of considering ground bearing capacity or
masonry compressive strength on overturning
resistance? (will reduce capacity further)

Refinements
Refine assumptions
Seek drawings, site measure, ground information

Refine Exercise
Refined assumptions after investigations
2m

14.4m to apex

2.4m

2m

2.6m

2m

3.1m

2m
1m

3.7m
0.6m

3m
6.6m

Refine Exercise
Find wall weight, W
2m
2.4m

2m

ground to eave
gable
openings

W = 66.2m2 . 18kN/m3 = 1200 kN

2.6m

2m

3.1m

2m
1m

3.7m
0.6m

Area = 12.4m . 6.6m

+ 2.0m . 6.6m / 2
- 1m (3+2+2+2)m

3m
6.6m

Refine Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
with no side wall restraint
Consider effect of actual strength of
underlying material (brick or soil) on over
CAPACITY
turning capacity.
Lets say that after inspection of building we
have assessed that;
H

xW

300 kPa
t

- Foundation thickness is same as wall

thickness
- Wall is most likely to rotate about bottom
of foundation
- Bearing capacity of soil under foundation
is 300 kPa

Refine Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
with no side wall restraint
So we will find width of bearing resistance
on bottom of rocking element using
CAPACITY
qu = 300 kPa soil capacity
t
Rectangular stress block assumed
CL
Stress block width b = W / qu / wall length
H
b = 1200kN / 300 kPa / 6.6m
xW
b = 600m
W
e
300 kPa
b

Find eccentricity e
t = 980mm
e = (t b)/2
e = 190mm

Refine Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
with no side wall restraint
CAPACITY
t
CL
H

W
e
300 kPa
b

Now what acceleration is required to initiate

overturning?
0.9MD restoring 1.35 . 1.25 . ME overturning
0.9W.e 1.35 . 1.25 W . h
= 0.9 . e/1.35 . 1.25. h
= 190mm / ~6000mm = 0.017 (g)
Compare with previous value 0.033 (g)
Refined capacity assessment is half the
initial value
Similar effect if rocking on masonry or
concrete, but less extreme
If checking rotation about plinth level then
would use fm value instead of soil qu

Refine Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
with no side wall restraint
What is the overturning Moment Demand at the
DEMAND
design earthquake?
t

CT = C . Z . I . P . Kp
CT = 0.08 . 1.0 . 1.5 . 1 . 4

CL
H

CT W

(P = 1 for part on ground but for parts supported

by structure above ground P = 1 + h/H )
CT = ~0.48 (g) same as before

(as before, no resonance of the part)

e
CAPACITY / DEMAND = 0.017/0.48 = 0.04
Only 4% Nepal Building Code.
b

Refine Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
RETROFIT OPTION
FP

13.4m

FP

9.9 m

FP

Try ties at each level

W = 1200kN
h overturning = ~6 m

CL
CT W

W
e

4.2m

CT = 0.48
e = 0.19 m

ME overturning = 1.35 . 1.25 .W .CT . h

ME overturning = 5832 kNm

7.3m

FP

What is the overturning Moment Demand at the

design earthquake?

0.9M D restoring = 0.9W.e

= 205 kNm/m

Required M retrofit restoring 5832 205 = 5627kNm/m

Will try 4 equal anchors distributed up the
building using virtual work calculation

Refine Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
RETROFIT OPTION
FP

13.4m

M retrofit restoring = (Fp . h restoring )

5627= FP (13.4+9.9+7.3+4.2)

FP

9.9 m

FP

CT W

7.3m

FP

What tie force is required at the head of the

wall?
Lets choose four equal strength anchors

FP = 162 kN REQUIRED
Four levels of ties. Gives 648kN total
(Total is 80% of top only tie option total)

4.2m

Two ties each level = 81 kN/ tie

Refine Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
RETROFIT OPTION
FP

Consider Reidbar allthread reinforcing rod at

500 MPa yeild strength

13.4m

FP

Try 16 mm rod

9.9 m

FP

CT W

7.3m

FP

4.2m

What size tie rod required for 81 kN?

T = Asfy = 0.9 . 201 mm . 500 MPa

T = 90 kN
So one RB16 rod required each side at each
level
BUT need to consider maximum force from all
potential failure modes at each location before
finalising decision

Refine Exercise - Further Work

Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
Regardless of retrofit option chosen, need to
consider all possible modes of failure
Design tie for max(FP FP2 FP3 FP4)

RETROFIT OPTION

FP

FP2

FP3

FP

FP2

FP3

FP4
CT W3

CT W2
CT W
FP

FP

FP2
W

P = 1+h/H

P=1

W4
W3

W2

CT W4

P = 1+h/H

P = 1+h/H

Also consider other modes

Out of plane buckling?

Refine Exercise
Using the Italian Macro Element method to assess end wall separation
RETROFIT OPTION
Tabulate force required for each scenario
Level

s1

s2

s3

s4

Maximum

81 kN

81 kN

81 kN

81 kN

81 kN

And also consider other modes such as out of plane buckling