ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Built Environ.

Sec. Computational Methods in Structural Engineering

Volume 11 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2025.1618329

Comparative study of NLFE models for simulating settlement-induced damage in masonry façades: macro-and simplified micro-models

Provisionally accepted
  • Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Damage assessment for masonry structures subjected to settlement is crucial for ensuring structural safety, guiding repairs, and preserving the built environment. Non-linear finite element modelling offers an effective approach for this purpose, though balancing model complexity, computational cost, and predictive reliability remains a key challenge. This study addresses the absence of a systematic comparison between macro- and simplified micro-modelling strategies for such analyses, clarifying their respective strengths, limitations, and sensitivity to key parameters. The performance and accuracy of semi-coupled NLFEM models are compared in simulating the response of a 1/10th scaled masonry façade under settlement, available from prior research [1]. The two approaches considered are: simplified micro-modelling, where bricks are represented as expanded blocks with non-linear interfaces for mortar joints and their contact edges, and macro-modelling, where masonry is homogenised into an equivalent orthotropic composite material. The macro-models employ two well-established constitutive models, the Total Strain Rotating Crack Model (TSRCM) and the Engineering Masonry Model (EMM), to capture the non-linear cracking behaviour of masonry. Sensitivity analyses assess the influence of base interface models and the interface’s tangential stiffness. The results show how the selection of the modelling approach depends on the analysis objective: The macro-model with the EMM best predicts damage severity, deviating by only 10% from the experiment, further improved by calibrating the minimum head-joint tensile strength. While all models yield similar predictions for vertical displacements of the façade, the TSRCM better captures overall and horizontal displacements, whereas the simplified micro-model more accurately represents the crack pattern. The EMM-based macro-models are the most computationally efficient, with TSRCM requiring 1.5 times the CPU time of EMM, and the micro-model requiring twice as much. The analysis also shows that the TSRCM-based macro-model is more sensitive to variations in the type of base interface models and base interface tangential stiffness, convergence criteria, incremental-iterative procedure, and analysis settings, whereas the EMM macro model and the simplified micro-model are less affected. By identifying the strengths and limitations of each modelling approach, this study supports informed modelling choices for a more reliable assessment of settlement damage, contributing to the effective protection of existing masonry structures.

Keywords: non-linear finite element analyses, Unreinforced masonry, settlement, Micro-model, Macro-model

Received: 25 Apr 2025; Accepted: 19 May 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Prosperi, Longo, Korswagen, Giardina and Rots. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence:
Alfonso Prosperi, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands
Michele Longo, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.