# Mechanical Performance of Confined Autoclaved Fly-Ash-Brick Masonry Walls under Cyclic Loading
## 3 Numerical Simulation Analysis and Verification
### Seismic Performance of Assembly Autoclaved Fly-Ash-Brick Wall
#### 3.3.2 Construction Measures on Seismic Performance of Walls  
The load-displacement curves of the common brick masonry walls and autoclaved fly-ash-brick walls under different forms of construction measures are shown in Figure 16. The stiffness-displacement curves of those walls are shown in Figure 17.  
According to Table 4, compared to the common brick wall WQ-1, the cracking, ultimate, and failure loads of wall XWQ-1 were increased by 77%, 73%, and 36%, respectively. Meanwhile, the cracking, ultimate, and failure loads of wall ZWQ-1 were increased by 92%, 74%, and 28%, respectively. Compared to wall WQ-1, from the ultimate load to the failure load of wall XWQ-1, the ratio of the failure displacement to ultimate displacement \(\Delta\)f/\(\Delta\)u was increased by 86%, while the ratio of the failure displacement to ultimate displacement \(\Delta\)f/\(\Delta\)u of wall ZWQ-1 was increased by 101%. Moreover, compared to wall WZ-1, the cracking, ultimate, and failure loads of wall XWZ-1 were increased by 86%, 79%, and 49%, respectively. Furthermore, compared to wall WZ-1, the cracking, ultimate, and failure loads of wall ZWZ-1 were increased by 81%, 75% and 38%, respectively. From the ultimate load to the failure load, the ratio of the failure displacement to ultimate displacement \(\Delta\)f/\(\Delta\)u of wall XWZ-1 was increased by 40%, and the ratio \(\Delta\)f/\(\Delta\)u of wall ZWZ-1 was increased by 55%. From Figures 16 and 17, it can be observed that the curvilinear trends of the walls under different construction measures were similar to others, in which the initial stiffness of the cast-in-place and assembled masonry walls were larger than those of unconstrained walls. With the increase in the imposed load, the displacement, stiffness, and bearing capacity of the constrained walls reached the same values, indicating that the energy dissipation and bearing capacity of these walls were similar. After reaching the ultimate \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Number**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Wall Material**} & **Construction Measure** & \multirow{2}{*}{**Form of Construction Work**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Dimension (mm)**} \\  & & **Measure** & & **(Length \(\times\) Height \(\times\) Thickness)** \\ \hline WQ-1 & fired common-brick & no & no & 2560 \(\times\) 2600 \(\times\) 240 \\ WZ-1 & autoclaved fly-ash-brick & no & no & 2560 \(\times\) 2600 \(\times\) 240 \\ XWQ-1 & fired common-brick & yes & cast in situ & 2800 \(\times\) 2800 \(\times\) 240 \\ XWZ-1 & autoclaved fly-ash-brick & yes & cast in situ & 2800 \(\times\) 2800 \(\times\) 240 \\ ZWQ-1 & fired common-brick & yes & assembly & 2800 \(\times\) 2800 \(\times\) 240 \\ ZWZ-1 & autoclaved fly-ash-brick & yes & assembly & 2800 \(\times\) 2800 \(\times\) 240 \\ \hline \end{tabular} Note, XWQ means the fired common brick wall with cast-in-place construction measures; while ZWZ-1 means the autoclaved fly-ash-brick wall with assembly construction measures. The rest of the statements are similar to them.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Dimensions and parameters of the walls. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Number**} & **Wall Material** & **Construction Measures** & **Cracking Load P\({}_{\alpha}\) (kN)** & **Cracking Displacement (kN)** & **Ultimate (kN)** & **Ultimate (kN)** & **Failure Load** (kN)** & **Silplacement (kN)** & **\(\Delta\)f/\(\Delta\)u** \\ \hline WQ-1 & fired & no & 103 & 1.01 & 171 & 5.01 & 147 & 11.07 & 2.21 \\ XWQ-1 & common & cast in situ & 182 & 0.45 & 296 & 3.19 & 200 & 13.13 & 4.12 \\ ZWQ-1 & brick & assembly & 198 & 0.48 & 298 & 3.09 & 188 & 13.75 & 4.45 \\ WZ-1 & autoclaved & no & 107 & 0.87 & 167 & 4.26 & 136 & 11.94 & 2.80 \\ XWZ-1 & fly-ash-brick & cast in situ & 199 & 0.67 & 299 & 3.41 & 202 & 13.43 & 3.94 \\ ZWZ-1 & fly-ash-brick & assembly & 199 & 0.62 & 303 & 3.16 & 188 & 13.75 & 4.35 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Bearing capacity values of the walls.