The seismic assessment of the out-of-plane (OOP) behaviour of unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings is essential since the OOP is one of the primary collapse mechanisms in URM buildings. It is influenced by several parameters, including the poor connections between structural elements, a weakness highlighted by post-earthquake observations. The paper presents a mechanical model designed to predict the contributions of various resisting mechanisms to the strength capacity of timber-joist connections in masonry cavity walls. The research presented in this paper considers two different failure modes: joist-wall interface failure, and OOP rocking behaviour of the URM walls. Consequently, two mechanical models are introduced to examine these failure modes in timber-joist connections within masonry cavity walls. One model focuses on the joist-wall interface failure, adopting a Coulomb friction model for joist-sliding further extended to incorporate the arching effect. The other model investigates the OOP rocking failure mode of walls. The combined mechanical model has been validated against the outcomes of an earlier experimental campaign conducted by the authors. The considered model can accurately predict the peak capacity of the joist connection and successfully defines the contribution of each mechanism in terms of resistance at failure.

@en

Post-earthquake structural damage shows that out-of-plane (OOP) wall collapse is one of the most common failure mechanisms in unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings. This issue is particularly critical in Groningen, a province located in the northern part of the Netherlands, where low-intensity induced earthquakes have become an uprising problem in recent years. The majority of buildings in this area are constructed using URM and were not designed to withstand earthquakes, as the area had never been affected by tectonic seismic activity before. OOP failure in URM structures often stems from poor connections between structural elements, resulting in insufficient restraint to the URM walls. Therefore, investigating the mechanical behaviour of these connections is of prime importance for mitigating damages and collapses in URM structures. This paper presents the results of an experimental campaign conducted on timber joist-masonry cavity wall connections. The specimens consisted of timber joists pocketed into masonry wallets. The campaign aimed at providing a better understanding and characterisation of the cyclic axial behaviour of these connections. Both as-built and strengthened conditions were considered, with different variations, including two tie distributions, two pre-compression levels, two different as-built connections, and one strengthening solution. The experimental findings underscored that incorporating retrofitting bars not only restores the system's initial capacity but also guarantees deformation compatibility between the wall and the joist. This effectively enhances the overall deformation capacity and ductility of the timber joist-cavity wall system.

@en

In recent years, the number of human-induced earthquakes in Groningen, a large gas field in the north of the Netherlands, has increased. The majority of the buildings are built by using unreinforced masonry (URM), most of which consists of cavity (i.e. two-leaf) walls, and were not designed to withstand earthquakes. Efforts to define, test and standardize the metal ties, which do play an important role, are valuable also from the wider construction industry point of view. The presented study exhibits findings on the behavior of the metal tie connections between the masonry leaves often used in Dutch construction practice, but also elsewhere around the world. An experimental campaign has been carried out at Delft University of Technology to provide a complete characterization of the axial behavior of traditional connections in cavity walls. A large number of variations was considered in this research: two embedment lengths, four pre-compression levels, two different tie geometries, and five different testing protocols, including monotonic and cyclic loading. The experimental results showed that the capacity of the connection was strongly influenced by the embedment length and the geometry of the tie, whereas the applied pre-compression and the loading rate did not have a significant influence.

@en

The seismic assessment of unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings with cavity walls is a relevant issue in many countries, such as in Central and Northern Europe, Australia, New Zealand, China and several other countries. A cavity wall consists of two separate parallel masonry walls (called leaves) connected by metal ties: an inner loadbearing wall and an outer veneer having mostly aesthetic and insulating functions. Cavity walls are particularly vulnerable structural elements. If the two leaves of the cavity wall are not properly connected, their out-of-plane strength may be significantly smaller than that of an equivalent solid wall with the same thickness. The research presented in this paper focuses on a mechanical model developed to predict the failure mode and the strength capacity of metal tie connections in masonry cavity walls. The model considers six possible failures, namely tie failure, cone break-out failure, pull-out failure, buckling failure, piercing failure and punching failure. Tie failure is a predictable quantity when the possible failure modes can be captured. The mechanical model for the ties has been validated against the outcomes of an experimental campaign conducted earlier by the authors. The mechanical model is able to capture the mean peak force and the failure mode obtained from the tests. The mechanical model can be easily adopted by practising engineers who aim to model the wall ties accurately in order to assess the strength and behaviour of the structures against earthquakes. Furthermore, the proposed mechanical model is used to extrapolate the experimental results to untested configurations, by performing parametric analyses on key parameters including a higher strength mortar of the calcium silicate brick masonry, a different cavity depth, a different tie embedment depth, and solid versus perforated clay bricks.@en