Homogenization and Seismic Assessment: Review and Recent Trends

  • Paulo B. Lourenço
  • Gabriele Milani
Part of the CISM International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 551)


The mechanics of masonry structures has been for long underdeveloped in comparison with other fields of knowledge. Presently, non-linear analysis is a popular field in masonry research and advanced computer codes are available for researchers and practitioners. The chapter presents a discussion of masonry behaviour and clarifies how to obtain the non-linear data required by the computations. The chapter also addresses different homogenisation techniques available in the literature in the linear and rigid-plastic case, aiming at defining a catalogue and at discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches. Special attention is given to stress assumed models based either on a polynomial expansion of the micro-stress field or in the discretization of the unit cell by means of a few constant stress finite elements CST with joints reduced to interfaces. Finally, the aspects of seismic assessment are presented and case studies involving the use of macro-block analysis, static (pushover) analysis and time integration analysis are discussed.


Failure Surface Masonry Wall Pushover Analysis Masonry Building Collapse Mechanism 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. E. Anderheggen and H. Knöpfel. Finite element limit analysis using linear programming. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 8(12): 1413–1431, 1972.Google Scholar
  2. A. Anthoine. Derivation of the in-plane elastic characteristics of masonry through homogenization theory. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 32(2):137–163, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. A. Anthoine. Homogenization of periodic masonry: plane stress, generalized plane strain or 3d modelling? Communications in numerical methods in engineering, 13(5):319–326, 1997.Google Scholar
  4. T. Belytschko and P.G. Hodge. Plane stress limit analysis by finite elements. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, 96(6):931–944, 1970.Google Scholar
  5. D. Caillerie. Thin elastic and periodic plates. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences, 6(1):159–191, 1984.Google Scholar
  6. S. Casolo and F. Peña. Rigid element model for in-plane dynamics of masonry walls considering hysteretic behaviour and damage. Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics, 36(8):1029–1048, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. CEB-FIP. Model Code 90. Thomas Telford Ltd., UK, 1993.Google Scholar
  8. A. Cecchi and K. Sab. A multi-parameter homogenization study for modelling elastic masonry. European Journal of Mechanics-A/Solids, 21(2): 249–268, 2002.Google Scholar
  9. A. Cecchi, G. Milani, and A. Tralli. Validation of analytical multiparameter homogenization models for out-of-plane loaded masonry walls by means of the finite element method. Journal of engineering mechanics, 131(2): 185–198, 2005.Google Scholar
  10. A. Cecchi, G. Milani, and A. Tralli. A Reissner–Mindlin limit analysis model for out-of-plane loaded running bond masonry walls. International journal of solids and structures, 44(5):1438–1460, 2007.Google Scholar
  11. CEN. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 1: General rules, seismic action and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, Belgium, 2004.Google Scholar
  12. CEN. Eurocode 6: Design of masonry structures, Part 1–1: General rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures. European Committee for Standardization, Belgium, 2005.Google Scholar
  13. C. Chintanapakdee and A.K. Chopra. Evaluation of modal pushover analysis using generic frames. Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics, 32(3):417–442, 2003.Google Scholar
  14. V.L. Chong, C. Southcombe, and I.M. May. The behaviour of laterally loaded masonry panels with openings. In 3th Int. Masonry Conf. Proc. Brit. Mas. Soc., pages 178–182, London, 1994.Google Scholar
  15. P. de Buhan and G. de Felice. A homogenization approach to the ultimate strength of brick masonry. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 45(7):1085–1104, 1997.Google Scholar
  16. G. de Felice. Metodi di omogeneizzazione per sistemi regolari di corpi rigidi. In Proceedings of the XII AIMETA Congress. Naples, Italy, pages 3–6, 1995.Google Scholar
  17. DIANA. Displacement method ANAlyser, 2005. release 9.1, CD-ROM, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  18. L. Gambarotta and S. Lagomarsino. On the dynamic response of masonry walls (in Italian). In Proc. National Congress “La Meccanica delle Murature tra Teoria e Progetto”, Messina, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. K. Hellan. Analysis of elastic plates in flexure by a simplified finite element method. Number 46 in Acta polytechnica Scandinavica. Norges tekniske vitenskapsakademi, 1967.Google Scholar
  20. L.R. Herrmann. Finite-element bending analysis for plates. Journal Engineering Mechanics Division, 93:13–26, 1967.Google Scholar
  21. H.K. Hilsdorf. Investigation into the failure mechanism of brick masonry loaded in axial compression. In F.H. Johnson, editor, Designing, engineering and constructing with masonry products, pages 34–41. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas, 1969.Google Scholar
  22. G. Hoffman and P. Schubert. Compressive strength of masonry parallel to the bed joints. In N.G. Shrive and A. Huizer, editors, Proc. 10th Int. Brick and Block Masonry Conf., pages 1453–1462, Calgary, Alberta, 1994.Google Scholar
  23. K. Krabbenhoft, A.V. Lyamin, M. Hjiaj, and S.W. Sloan. A new discontinuous upper bound limit analysis formulation. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 63(7):1069–1088, 2005.Google Scholar
  24. J. Lopez, S. Oller, E. Onate, and J. Lubliner. A homogeneous constitutive model for masonry. International journal for numerical methods in engineering, 46(10):1651–1671, 1999.Google Scholar
  25. P.B. Lourenço. Computational strategies for masonry structures. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, 1996. Available from Scholar
  26. P.B. Lourenço. On the use of homogenisation techniques for the analysis of masonry structures. Masonry International, 11(1):26–32, 1997.Google Scholar
  27. P.B. Lourenço. Experimental and numerical issues in the modelling of the mechanical behaviour of masonry. In P. Roca and et al., editors, Proc. Structural analysis of historical constructions II, CIMNE, pages 57–91, Barcelona, 1998a.Google Scholar
  28. P.B. Lourenço. Sensitivity analysis of masonry structures. In Proc. 8th Canadian Masonry Symp., pages 563–574, Jasper, Canada, 1998b.Google Scholar
  29. P.B. Lourenço. Anisotropic softening model for masonry plates and shells. Journal of Structural Engineering, 126(9):1008–1016, 2000.Google Scholar
  30. P.B. Lourenço. Computations on historic masonry structures. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials, 4(3):301–319, 2002.Google Scholar
  31. P.B. Lourenço and J.L. Pina-Henriques. Validation of analytical and continuum numerical methods for estimating the compressive strength of masonry. Computers & structures, 84(29):1977–1989, 2006.Google Scholar
  32. P.B. Lourenço and L.F. Ramos. Characterization of cyclic behavior of dry masonry joints. Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(5):779–786, 2004.Google Scholar
  33. P.B. Lourenço and J.G. Rots. A multi-surface interface model for the analysis of masonry structures. Journal of engineering mechanics, 123(7): 660–668, 1997.Google Scholar
  34. P.B. Lourenço, J.O. Barros, and J.T. Oliveira. Shear testing of stack bonded masonry. Construction and Building Materials, 18(2):125–132, 2004.Google Scholar
  35. P.B. Lourenço, J.C. Almeida, and J.A. Barros. Experimental investigation of bricks under uniaxial tensile testing. Masonry International, 18(1): 11–20, 2005.Google Scholar
  36. P.B. Lourenço, G. Milani, A. Tralli, and A. Zucchini. Analysis of masonry structures: review of and recent trends in homogenization techniques this article is one of a selection of papers published in this special issue on masonry. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 34(11):1443–1457, 2007.Google Scholar
  37. P.B. Lourenço, N. Mendes, L.F. Ramos, and D.V. Oliveira. Analysis of masonry structures without box behavior. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 5(4-5):369–382, 2011.Google Scholar
  38. R. Luciano and E. Sacco. Homogenization technique and damage model for old masonry material. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 34 (24):3191–3208, 1997.Google Scholar
  39. G. Magenes and A.D. Fontana. Simplified non-linear seismic analysis of masonry buildings. In Proc. British Masonry Society, number 8, pages 190–195, 1998.Google Scholar
  40. G. Maier, E. Papa, and A. Nappi. On damage and failure of unit masonry. In Proc. Experimental and numerical methods in earthquake engineering, pages 223–245, Brussels and Luxembourg, 1991. Balkema Editions.Google Scholar
  41. R. Marques and P.B. Lourenço. Possibilities and comparison of structural component models for the seismic assessment of modern unreinforced masonry buildings. Computers & Structures, 89(21):2079–2091, 2011.Google Scholar
  42. T.J. Massart. Multi-scale modeling of damage in masonry structures. PhD thesis, University of Bruxelles, Belgium, 2003.Google Scholar
  43. T.J. Massart, R.H.J. Peerlings, and M.G.D. Geers. Mesoscopic modeling of failure and damage-induced anisotropy in brick masonry. European Journal of Mechanics-A/Solids, 23(5):719–735, 2004.Google Scholar
  44. N. Mendes. Seismic assessment of ancient masonry buildings: Shaking table tests and numerical analysis. PhD thesis, University of Minho, Portugal, 2012.Google Scholar
  45. MIBAC 2007. Guidelines for the evaluation and mitigation of seismic risk to cultural heritage. Ministry for Cultural Heritage and Activities, Gangemi Editore, Rome, Italy, 2007.Google Scholar
  46. G. Milani. Simple lower bound limit analysis homogenization model for in-and out-of-plane loaded masonry walls. Construction and Building Materials, 25(12):4426–4443, 2011.Google Scholar
  47. G. Milani, P.B. Lourenço, and A. Tralli. Homogenised limit analysis of masonry walls, part I: Failure surfaces. Computers & structures, 84(3–4):166–180, 2006a.Google Scholar
  48. G. Milani, P.B. Lourenço, and A. Tralli. Homogenised limit analysis of masonry walls, part II: Structural examples. Computers & structures, 84 (3–4):181–195, 2006b.Google Scholar
  49. G. Milani, P.B. Lourenço, and A. Tralli. Homogenization approach for the limit analysis of out-of-plane loaded masonry walls. Journal of structural engineering, 132(10):1650–1663, 2006c.Google Scholar
  50. J. Munro and A.M.A. da Fonseca. Yield line method by finite elements and linear programming. Structural Engineer, 56(2), 1978.Google Scholar
  51. P.C. Olsen. The influence of the linearisation of the yield surface on the load-bearing capacity of reinforced concrete slabs. Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering, 162(1):351–358, 1998.Google Scholar
  52. OPCM 3431 . Technical regulations for the design, assessment and seismic adaptation of buildings. Gazzetta Ufficiale Serie Generale n.107 del 10/05/2005, Italy, 2005.Google Scholar
  53. G.N. Pande, J.X. Liang, and J. Middleton. Equivalent elastic moduli for brick masonry. Computers and Geotechnics, 8(3):243–265, 1989.Google Scholar
  54. M. Paulo-Pereira. Assessment of the seismic performance of building enclosures (in Portuguese). PhD thesis, University of Minho, Portugal, 2012.Google Scholar
  55. P. Pegon and A. Anthoine. Numerical strategies for solving continuum damage problems with softening: application to the homogenization of masonry. Computers & structures, 64(1):623–642, 1997.Google Scholar
  56. PIET-70. P.I.E.T. 70 Masonry work. Prescriptions from Instituto Eduardo Torroja. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Madrid (in Spanish), 1971.Google Scholar
  57. S. Pietruszczak and X. Niu. A mathematical description of macroscopic behaviour of brick masonry. International journal of solids and structures, 29(5):531–546, 1992.Google Scholar
  58. T.M.J. Raijmakers and A.T. Vermeltfoort. Deformation controlled tests in masonry shear walls. Report B-92, 1156, 1992. TNO-Bouw,Delft, The Netherlands (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  59. J.G. Rots, editor. Structural masonry: An experimental/numerical basis for practical design rules. Balkema, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, 1997.Google Scholar
  60. P. Schubert. The influence of mortar on the strength of masonry. In J.W. de Courcy, editor, Proc. 8th Int. Brick and Block Masonry Conf., pages 162–174, London, 1988. Elsevier Applied Science.Google Scholar
  61. S.W. Sloan. Lower bound limit analysis using finite elements and linear programming. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 12(1):61–77, 1988.Google Scholar
  62. S.W. Sloan and P.W. Kleeman. Upper bound limit analysis using discontinuous velocity fields. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 127(1):293–314, 1995.Google Scholar
  63. P. Suquet. Analyse limite et homogeneisation. Comptes Rendus de l’Academie des Sciences-Series IIB–Mechanics, 296:1355–1358, 1983.Google Scholar
  64. D.J. Sutcliffe, H.S. Yu, and A.W. Page. Lower bound limit analysis of unreinforced masonry shear walls. Computers & Structures, 79(14):1295–1312, 2001.Google Scholar
  65. M. Tomazevic. Earthquake-resistant design of masonry buildings. Imperial College Press, London, 1999.Google Scholar
  66. R. van der Pluijm. Out-of-plane bending of masonry: Behavior and Strenght. PhD thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1999.Google Scholar
  67. G. Vasconcelos and P.B. Lourenço. In-plane experimental behavior of stone masonry walls under cyclic loading. Journal of structural engineering, 135(10):1269–1277, 2009.Google Scholar
  68. G. Vasconcelos, P.B. Lourenço, C.A.S. Alves, and J. Pamplona. Experimental characterization of the tensile behaviour of granites. International journal of rock mechanics and mining sciences, 45(2):268–277, 2008.Google Scholar
  69. A. Zucchini and P.B. Lourenço. A micro-mechanical model for the homogenisation of masonry. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 39(12):3233–3255, 2002.Google Scholar
  70. A. Zucchini and P.B. Lourenço. A coupled homogenisation–damage model for masonry cracking. Computers & structures, 82(11):917–929, 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© CISM, Udine 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paulo B. Lourenço
    • 1
  • Gabriele Milani
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering (ISISE), Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of MinhoGuimaraesPortugal
  2. 2.Department of Architecture, Built environment and Construction engineering (A.B.C.)Politecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations