International Journal of Structural Integrity

In t
er
n
at
ON POST CRACKING OF MASONRY ELEMENTS AND
DETERMINATION OF FRACTURE PARAMETERS
ion

Journal: International Journal of Structural Integrity

al
Manuscript ID IJSI-03-2019-0020

Manuscript Type: Research Paper

Jo
Fracture energy, stress intensity factor, stone, sand-lime bricks, fracture
Keywords:
process zone
ur
na
lo
fS
tru
ctu
ra
l In
te
gr
ity
Page 1 of 13 International Journal of Structural Integrity

1
2
In t
3
4 ON POST CRACKING OF MASONRY ELEMENTS AND DETERMINATION OF FRACTURE
5
PARAMETERS
er
6
7
8
n
9 Purpose: The main objective of the present paper is a contribution to the numerical study of the fracture
10 behavior of components of load-bearing masonry based on fracture mechanics’ principle, and to validate the
at
11 experimental results realized on the block of natural stone and the silico-calcareous brick which made it
12 possible to highlight their behavior after the cracking and the determination of parameters of rupture such as
ion
13
14
the energy of rupture and the factor of concentration of constraint.
15
16 Design/methodology/approach : The methodology developed here is an extension of the methods used in
17 analyzing concrete structures. Simulation of fracture mode I which causes tension in structure masonry, are
al
18 made possible bytaking into consideration the nonlinear finite element in the likely path of crack propagation
19 area with a simplified simulation model. This latest is based on the introduction of the non-linear finite
Jo
20
element springs in the cohesive zone. Software ANSYS is used in this research work.
21
22
Findings: Results are summarized in the form of the behavior of Force-Displacement curves and SIF for
ur

23
24 both stone and brick specimens. Comparisons with those obtained experimentally show good agreement
25 regarding the fracture load and the critical displacement. Force-displacement of sand-lime bricks and natural
na

26 stone block show different post-peak behavior. Stiffness characteristics E and tensile strength of these
27
materials vary in opposite direction. A more or less ductile behavior of tested pieces is observed in sand lime
28
bricks. Determination of SIF by LEFM has proven satisfactory, allowing us to conclude that LEFM is a good
lo

29
30 way of analysis cracking in masonry structures.
31 .
fS

32
33 Originality /value: Nowadays, researchers and construction builders are interested in the robustness of
34 materials used in masonry structures. This research work is intended to them since the behavior and cracking
35
tru

36
in masonry structures are well developed and analyzed.
37
38 1. INTRODUCTION
ctu

39
40
41 The main objective of the present paper is a contribution to the numerical study of the fracture behavior of
42 components of load-bearing masonry based on fracture mechanics’ principle. The studied elements are of
ra

43 prismatical form, notched specimens made of natural stone block and sand lime brick, subjected to three
44 points bending. In a previous study (Hakimi, 2005), experiments were performed on the same elements and
45
allowed to highlight their post-cracking behavior and determination of fracture parameters like fracture
l In

46
47 energy and stress concentration factor. The methodology developed here is an extension of the methods used
48 in analyzing concrete structures (Pietro, 1989 ; Kyoungsoo et al., 2005). Simulation of fracture mode I,
49 which causes tension in structure masonry, are made possible by taking into consideration nonlinear finite
te

50 element in the likely path of crack propagation area (Gospodinov and Kerelezova, 1999). This latest called
51 Fracture Process Zone (FPZ) has been highlighted in the work of Hillerborg (Hillerborg, 1980) for
52
gr

quasi-brittle materials and also from Chabaat et al (Chabaat et al., 2005) for amorphous Polymers. In the
53
other hand, a lot of literature in the field of cracks detections as well as fracture parameters using other
54
technics such as NDT (nondestructive technic), Eddy currents and magnetism exist (Harzallah and Chabaat,
ity

55
56 2018).
57
58
59
60
 International Journal of Structural Integrity Page 2 of 13

2. DESCRIPTION OF FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

1
2
In t
3 2.1 Specimens characteristics
4
5
Specimens are of prismatic strips prepared from natural stone and sand-lime brick masonry elements.
er
6
7 Notches, created to help initiatecrack propagation in a zone which has a width of 3mm and a variable depths
8 a0.Geometricaldimensions and mechanical characteristics are given in tables 1 and 2, respectively.
n
9
10
at
11
2.2 Softening law of cohesive zone
12
FPZ is simulated by introducing elements of cohesion on either sides of the fracture zone. A failure by
ion
13
14 de-cohesion (separation) criterion, combining both methods of analysis based on the strength and the fracture
15 mechanics principles is used to simulate the behavior of softening of the interface element. This latest is
16 characterized by the constitutive stress r - displacement equations. The stress-displacement curve is divided
17
al
18
into three main branches as shown in Figures 1a and 1b.
19
The constitutive equations of each branch are given as follows:
Jo
20
21
22 Elastic part( < e) where tension along the interface increases to a maximum value. The tensile stress at
ur

23 any point is relayed to the displacement by the rigidity of the interface according to the following equation.
24
25
  k ib   (1)
na

26
27 Softening part e <  < c) where the tensile stress along the interface decreases until it vanishes. The
28
separation process begins when - becomes zero. Damage that occurs at the interface is represented by the
lo

29
30 "d" parameter whose value varies from zero (no damage) to 1 (completely damaged material) as:
31
  (1  d )k ib  
fS

32
(2)
33
34 Separation part ( > c) where de-cohesion between the two sides of the element is general. Tension, at any
35 point on the interface is zero and there remains no contact between the elements. If a re-closure of the crack
tru

36 is observed, this can be interpreted by application of the original rigidity kib.

37
38
2.3 Finite element model in ANSYS code
ctu

39
40
41 Two types of elements from the library of the ANSYS finite element software are used: Plane82 for
42
modeling the masonry unit and the Combin39 for the interface element in the FPZ
ra

43
44
45 PLANE82 is a plane element of 8 nodes. It allows for more accurate resulting in mixed automatic mesh
l In

46 (triangular quadrilateral) and can tolerate irregular shapes with no loss of accuracy. 8 nodes, each with 2 dof
47 translations in the nodal x and y directions can be used as planar element or as axisymmetric element. In
48 addition, it can be used in plasticity Creep, stiffness stress, large displacements and large deformations.
49
te

50
51 COMBIN39 is a unidirectional element with nonlinear properties in large displacement generalized forces
52 that can be used in all types of analysis. The element has longitudinal or torsional properties in applications
gr

53 1D, 2D or 3D. Longitudinal option element is a uniaxial tension or compression with 3-DOF in each node
54 (translation along x, y and z). No bending or torsion is considered. The torsion option is purely rotational
ity

55 element with 3ddl in each node (rotation around the axes x, y and z). No bending or axial loading is
56 considered.
57
58
59
60
Page 3 of 13 International Journal of Structural Integrity

1
2.4 Real constants
2
In t
3
4 The real constants of the model are given in Table 3.
5
er
6 2.5 Modelling
7
8
n
9 The beam was modeled by an area in plane stress. Supports and loading points are modeled by points
10 (Figure 4).
at
11
12
ion
13 Table 4. gives coordinates of points defining the geometry of each model. The origin of coordinates
14 coincides with point 1.
15
16
The springs that simulate crack propagation, are positioned between 2 nodes in the likely path of the crack
17
al
18 propagation zone (Figure 5).
19
The Force-Displacement relationship (F spring - w) of Figure 6. is obtained from the stress curve - crack
Jo
20
21 opening (- ) in Figure 1. through the following intermediate calculations:
22
ur

23
24 For a linear softening law, we have the following relation;
25
na

26 Fult  b     i (3)
27
28
where;
lo

29
30
31 bis the beam thickness equal to 20 mm;  corresponds to the size of the finite elements mesh of the crack
fS

32 propagation zone and t is the tension strength of masonry.

33
34
2G F
35 wc 
tru

, in which;GFcorresponds to thefractureenergyof specimen determined from flexural tests.

36 t
37
38 For a bi-linear softening law, the curves parametersare defined as follows;
ctu

39
40
Fult  b     i ; F1 
Fult
, w1 
0.8G F
, wc 
3.6G F (4)
41 3 Fult Fult
42
ra

43
44 2.6 Analysis Type
45
l In

46 The mesh and the support conditions of the model studied are shown in Figure 7. To study the evolution of
47 the displacement of the beam according to a load applied at the center of gravity at the top free surface, the
48 applied loading is imposed displacement type at the same point and the value was chosen based on the results
49
obtained in the experimental part. The finite element proposed model is a simple beam under the action of a
te

50
51 transverse static loading type.
52
gr

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
 International Journal of Structural Integrity Page 4 of 13

2.7 Numerical determination of stress intensity factor

1
2
In t
3 Stress Intensity Factor (SIF) in mode I is an important parameter in the design of structures tofracture. In a
4 previous experimental study, SIF was determined from the load displacement curve. The area under this
5 curve relative to the area of un-notched section represents the fracture energy. The latter is relayed to the SIF
er
6
by the relationship given by Equation 6. which is derived using Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics.
7
8
K IC  E  GF
n
9 (6)
10
at
11 II.8. Numerical determining principle of K1c in the ANSYS[8]
12
ion
13
14 Modeling the crack zone is the most important phase in the fracture model. It is located around the lips of the
15 crack and materialized by the crack tip in a 2D problem as shown in Figure 8.
16
17 In a linear elastic behavior, it is shown that the displacement in the vicinity of the crack tip varies like r
al
18 where (r) is the distance to the crack tip. The stresses and strains are singular at crack tip and vary as 1 r . In
19
order to avoid the singularity shaped deformation, cracks faces must coincide with the elements around the
Jo
20
21 crack tip and must be quadratic elements where nodes located in the middle of the sides are moved to a
22 quarter of the length in the direction of the tip.
ur

23
24 The generation of the first line of singular elements around the crack tip is automatically performed through
25 the KSCON command. It is also possible to set the radius of the first row of elements and the number of
na

26
elements used. Furthermore, it is possible:
27
28  To take advantage of possible symmetry properties by modeling half of cracking region;
lo

29
 For reasonable results, the first component around the crack tip line must have a radius of the order of
30
31 approximately a/8 or less, wherein (a) represents the depth of the notch;
 The crack tip elements shall not suffer distortion. They should have the shape of an isosceles triangle;
fS

32
33
34 The stress intensity factor is obtained after setting:
35
tru

36
 A local coordinate system related to the crack tip in which the X axis is parallel to the crack face and
37
38 the Y-axis perpendicular to face;
 A path along the crack originating from the crack point and two other points parallel to the face of the
ctu

39
40 crack when the half of the problem has been modeled
41
42
3. RESULTS
ra

43
44
45 3.1 Case of stone specimens
l In

46
47
48 3.1.1 Force-displacement curves
49
te

50 Curves (F- for different depths of notches areprovided in Figures 9, 10 and 11.
51
52
gr

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 5 of 13 International Journal of Structural Integrity

1
2
In t
3
4 3.1.2 Stress Intensity Factor (SIF)
5
To determine SIF the following data are required:
er
6
7
8  Geometry and support conditions
n
9  Applied loading
10  Mechanical properties (Young's modulus and Poisson’s ratio).
at
11
12
These data were selected based on the results obtained in the experimental phase.
ion
13
14
15 Figure 12. shows a finite element model that corresponds to a notch depth of a = 4 mm.
16
17
al
Results summarized in Table 5.
18
19
3.2 Case of sand-lime specimen bricks
Jo
20
21
22
3.2.1 Force-displacement curves
ur

23
24
25 Numerical tests are performed on sand-lime specimen, in particular for the behavior in tensile bending after
na

26
cracking. These tests are used to derive the shape of the load-displacement curve and the values of SIF for
27
28
different depths of notches.
lo

29
30 Curves (F-  are illustrated by Figures 13 , 14 and 15. for each notch depth.
31
fS

32
33 3.2.2 Stress Intensity Factor (SIF)
34
35
tru

Table 6. summarizes the results obtained for specimen A, B and C geometrically defined in previous Table 5.
36
37
38 4. CONCLUSIONS
ctu

39
40
41 With a simplified simulation model based on the introduction of non-linear finite element springs in the
42 cohesive zone, it is possible to study the flexural behavior and predict the shape of the response post pic of
two types of masonry elements widely used in Algeria in the bearing masonry structures. Besides,
ra

43
44 theproposed numerical model is able to simulate the entire range of sample sizes, provided the fracture
45 parameters for each dimension that are properly chosen.
l In

46
47
48 It has been noticed that the shape of the softening curve in tension does not affect the maximum load of the
49 fracture; however, it was shown that the shape of the curve in the post-cracking phase is largely dependent.
te

50
51 On the other hand, comparisons of obtained Force – Displacement results with those obtained experimentally
52
gr

show good agreement regarding the fracture load and the critical displacement. However, the
53
force-displacement curves of sand- lime bricks and natural stone block show different post- peak behavior.
54
The stiffness characteristics E and tensile strength of these materials vary in opposite direction. A more or
ity

55
56 less ductile behavior of tested pieces is observed in sand lime bricks.
57
58
59
60
 International Journal of Structural Integrity Page 6 of 13

Finally, determination of the SIF by the method of linear elastic fracture mechanics hasproven satisfactory.
1
This allows to conclude that the LEFM is a good way of analysis cracking in masonry structures.
2
In t
3
4
5 REFERENCES
er
6
7 ANSYS 10.0, user manual, Ansys, Inc, 2005.
8
n
9 Chabaat, M., Djouder, S. and Touati, M. (2005), “Semi-empirical stress analysis of a brittle material in a
10 vicinity of a stress concentrator”, International Journal of Applied Mechanics and Matertials, Vol. 3-4,
at
11 pp. 245-252.
12
Gospodinov, G. and Kerelezova, I. (1999), “Numerical modeling and analysis of plain concrete notched
ion
13
14 beams by means of fracture mechanics”, Annuaire de l'Université d'Architecture, de Genie Civil et de
15 Géodésie, Sofia, Vol. XL fasc Il.
16
17 Hakimi, L. (2005), Etude du comportement à la rupture des structures en maçonnerie, Rapport de
al
18 recherche. Phase II CNERIB,Algérie.
19
Harzallah, S. and Chabaat, M. (2017), "3D-FEM computation and experimental study of eddy currents
Jo
20
21 for characterization of surface cracks", International Journal of Structural Integrity, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp.
22 603-610.
ur

23
Hillerborg, A. (1980), “Analysis of Fracture by Means of Fictitious Crack Model, Particulary for Fiber
24
25 Reinforced Concrete”, International Journal of Cement. Composites, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp.177-184.
na

26 Kyoungsoo, P., Glaucio, H.P. and Jeffery, R.R. (2005), “Prediction of concrete fracture mechanics
27
behavior and size effect using cohesive zone modeling”, Workshop on fracture mechanics for concrete
28
pavements: theory to practice, pp. 103-107.
lo

29
30 Meo, M. and Thieulot, E. (2005), “Delamination modeling in a double cantilever beam”, Journal of
31 Composites Structures, Vol. 71, pp. 429-434.
fS

32
33 Pietro, B., (1989), “Fracture mechanics of brick masonry: size effect and snap-back analysis”, Journal of
34 Materials and Structures, Vol.22, pp. 364-373.
35
tru

36
37
38
ctu

39
40
41
42
ra

43
44
45
l In

46
47
48
49
te

50
51
52
gr

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 7 of 13 International Journal of Structural Integrity

1
2 Table 1. Specimen dimensions.
In t
3 Specimen Width B (mm) Thickness H Length between supports ℓ Depth of notch (ao) (mm)
4 (mm) (mm)
5 A 20 40 200 4
B 20 40 200 11
er
6
7 C 20 40 200 19
8
n
9 Table 2. Mechanical characteristics.
10
at
Natural Stone-block Sand lime Brick
11 Young Modulus (MPa) 4000 19500
12 Poisson Coefficient : 0.2 0.2
ion
13 Tension strength (MPa) 13 3.4
14
15
Table 3.Real constants and parameters.
16
17 Real constant Set Element Type Constant Parameter
al
18 Plane stress constant
1 Plane82 Thickness
19 thickness
Force displacement Force- displacement
Jo
20 2 Combin39
21 curve .value
22
ur

23 Table 3. Coordinates of the points in the finite element model.

24 Point Model
25 I II III
na

26 x y x y x y
27 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 2 30 0 30 0 30 0
lo

29 3 128.5 0 128.5 0 128.5 0

30 4 131.5 0 131.5 0 131.5 0
31 5 230 0 230 0 230 0
6 260 0 260 0 260 0
fS

32
7 0 40 0 40 0 40
33
8 130 40 130 40 130 40
34 9 260 40 260 40 260 40
35
tru

10 128.5 19 128.5 19 128.5 19

36 11 131.5 19 131.5 19 131.5 19
37
38
Table 5. Values of stress intensity factors.
ctu

39
40
Specimen Load (N) ao (mm) K ( MPa mm)
41
42
A 650 4 23.239
ra

43
44 B 465 11 23.969
45 C 298 19 23.529
l In

46
47 Table 6. Stress intensity factors for studied specimen.
48
49 Specimen Load (N) ao(mm) K ( MPa mm)
te

50
51 A 340 4 22.56
52
gr

B 241 11 27.35
53
C 143 19 27.90
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
 International Journal of Structural Integrity Page 8 of 13

1
2
In t
3
4
5
er
6
7
8
n
9
10
at
11 (a) Linear (b) bi-linear
12 Figure 1. Softening curve :Stress- crack opening relationship.
ion
13
14
15
16
17
al
18
19
Jo
20
21
22
ur

23
24
25
na

26
27
28
lo

29 Figure 2. Geometry of plane82 finite element.

30
31
fS

32
33
34
35
tru

36
37
38
ctu

39
40
41
42
ra

43
44
45 Figure 3. Geometry of Combin39 finite element.
l In

46
47
48
49
te

50
51
52
gr

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 9 of 13 International Journal of Structural Integrity

1
2
In t
3
4
5
er
6
7
Figure 4.Numbering of the Keypoints in the proposed model.
8
n
9
10
at
11
12
ion
13
14
15
16
17
al
18
19
Jo
20
21
22
ur

23
24
25
na

26
27 Figure 5. Discretemodel of a crack.
28
lo

29
30
31
fS

32
33
34
35
tru

36
37
38
ctu

39
40
41
42
ra

43
44 a) Softening linear b) Softening bi-linear
45
l In

46 Figure 6. Behavior laws of the nonlinear spring in translation.

47
48
49
te

50
51
52
gr

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
 International Journal of Structural Integrity Page 10 of 13

1
2
In t
3
4
5
er
6
7
8
n
9 Figure 7. Meshing and support conditions of the model.
10
at
11
12
ion
13
14
15
16
17
al
18
19
Jo
20 Figure 8. Crack tip and crack front.
21
22
ur

23
24
25
na

26
27
28
lo

29
30
31
fS

32
33
34
35
tru

36
37
38
ctu

39
40
41
42 Figure 9. Load-displacement curve ( notch depth =19mm).
ra

43
44
45
l In

46
47
48
49
te

50
51
52
gr

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 11 of 13 International Journal of Structural Integrity

1
2
In t
3
4
5
er
6
7
8
n
9
10
at
11
12
ion
13
14
15
16
Figure 10. Load-displacement curve ( notch depth =11mm).
17
al
18
19
Jo
20
21
22
ur

23
24
25
na

26
27
28
lo

29
30
31
fS

32
33
34
35
tru

36 Figure 11. Load-displacement curve ( notch depth =4mm)

37
38
ctu

39
40
41
42
ra

43
44
45
l In

46
47
48
49
te

50
51
52
gr

Figure 12. Used model for determination of SIF.

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
 International Journal of Structural Integrity Page 12 of 13

1
2
In t
3
4
5
er
6
7
8
n
9
10
at
11
12
ion
13
14
15
16
17
al
18
.
19
Figure13. Load-displacement curve ( notch depth =4mm).
Jo
20
21
22
ur

23
24
25
na

26
27
28
lo

29
30
31
fS

32
33
34
35
tru

36
37
38
ctu

39
40
41
42 Figure 14. Load-displacement curve (notch depth =19mm).
ra

43
44
45
l In

46
47
48
49
te

50
51
52
gr

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 13 of 13 International Journal of Structural Integrity

1
2
In t
3
4
5
er
6
7
8
n
9
10
at
11
12
ion
13
14
15
16
17
al
Figure 15. Load-displacement curve (notch depth =11mm).
18
19
Jo
20
21
22
ur

23
24
25
na

26
27
28
lo

29
30
31
fS

32
33
34
35
tru

36
37
38
ctu

39
40
41
42
ra

43
44
45
l In

46
47
48
49
te

50
51
52
gr

53
54
ity

55
56
57
58
59
60