{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02106149957877001, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.6, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Prediction of stiffness, force and drift capacity of modern in‐plane loaded URM walls

Unreinforced masonry (URM) walls show a limited horizontal in‐plane deformation capacity, which can lead to an unfavorable seismic response. To predict this response, the walls' effective stiffness, shear force and drift capacity are required. While mechanics‐based models for the force capacity are well established, such approaches are largely lacking for the effective stiffness and the drift capacity. The mostly empirical code equations for the two latter parameters lead to often unsatisfactory and, in the case of drift capacities, sometimes unconservative predictions when compared to test results. This article summarises recently developed simple closed‐form equations for the effective stiffness, the shear force and the drift capacity. Furthermore, it compares said formulations and currently used code equations to a database of shear compression tests. It shows that the novel models capture the effective stiffness and the drift capacity more accurately than current code equations. The shear force capacity is predicted with a similar reliability, yet using a very simple formulation.