We examine two widely used classes of methods for static analysis of masonry buildings: linear elasticity analysis using finite elements and equilibrium methods. It is often claimed in the literature that finite element analysis is less accurate than equilibrium analysis when it comes to masonry analysis; we examine and qualify this claimed inaccuracy, provide a systematic explanation for the discrepancy observed between their results, and present a unified formulation of the two approaches to stability analysis. We prove that both approaches can be viewed as equivalent, dual methods for getting the same answer to the same problem. We validate our observations with simulations and physical tilt experiments of structures.

In the design of buildings, structural analysis is traditionally performed after the aesthetic design has been determined and has little influence on the overall form. In contrast, this paper presents an approach to guide the form towards a shape that is more structurally sound. Our work is centered on the study of how variations of the geometry might improve structural stability. We define a new measure of structural soundness for masonry buildings as well as cables, and derive its closed-form derivative with respect to the displacement of all the vertices describing the geometry. We start with a gradient descent tool which displaces each vertex along the gradient. We then introduce displacement operators, imposing constraints such as the preservation of orientation or thickness; or setting additional objectives such as volume minimization.

We introduce structural feasibility into procedural modeling of buildings. This allows for more realistic structural models that can be interacted with in physical simulations. While existing structural analysis tools focus heavily on providing an analysis of the stress state, our proposed method automatically tunes a set of designated free parameters to obtain forms that are structurally sound.