Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frames Infilled by Masonry Walls with Different Heights
This study carried out comparative seismic
performance of reinforced concrete frames infilled by masonry walls
with different heights. Partial and fully infilled reinforced concrete
frames were modeled for the research objectives and the analysis
model for a bare reinforced concrete frame was also established for
comparison. Non–linear static analyses for the studied frames were
performed to investigate their structural behavior under extreme
seismic loads and to find out their collapse mechanism. It was
observed from analysis results that the strengths of the partial infilled
reinforced concrete frames are increased and their ductilities are
reduced, as infilled masonry walls are higher. Especially, reinforced
concrete frames with higher partial infilled masonry walls would
experience shear failures. Non–linear dynamic analyses using 10
earthquake records show that the bare and fully infilled reinforced
concrete frame present stable collapse mechanism while the reinforced
concrete frames with partially infilled masonry walls collapse in more
brittle manner due to short-column effects.
[1] F. J. Crisafulli, Seismic behaviour of reinforced concrete structures with
masonry infills, University of Canterbury.
[2] S. Sattar, and A. B. Liel, “Seismic performance of reinforced concrete
frame structures with and without masonry infill walls,” 9th U. S. National
and 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Toronto,
Canada, 2010.
[3] ASCE/SEI 41-13, “Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings,”
American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, U. S. A.
[4] B. Tremayne, F. Turner, A. Russell, S. Oliver, and H. Derakhshan,
“Proposed update to masonry provisions of ASCE/SEI 41: Seismic
Evaluation and Retrofit of Exist Buildings,” WCEE World Conference,
2012.
[5] P. G. Asteris, S. T. Antoniou, D. S. Sophiano poulos, and C. Z.
Chrysostomou, “Mathematical macromodeling of infilled frames: State of
the art,” the Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 137, no. 12, pp.
1508–1517, Dec. 2011.
[6] E. Smyrou, Implementation and verification of a masonry panel model for
nonlinear dynamic analysis of infilled RC frames, Rose School. [7] FEMA–356, “Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation
of buildings,” Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington,
DC, Nov. 2000.
[8] F. J. Crisafulli, and A. J. Carr, “Proposed macro-model for the analysis of
infilled frame structures,” Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for
Earthquake Engineering, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 69–77, Jun. 2007.
[9] F. J. Crisafulli, A. J. Carr, and R. Park, “Anaytical modelling of infilled
frame structures-A general review,” Bulletin of the New Zealand Society
for Eathquake Engineering, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 30–47, Mar. 2000.
[10] C. Evan, Bentz, and M. P. Collins, “Response-2000: Reinforced Concrete
Sectional Analysis Using the Modified Compression Field Theory,”
1998.
[11] A. J. Carr, “RUAUMOKO–inelastic dynamic analysis program,” the
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand, 2008.
[12] FEMA–P695, “Quantification of building seismic performance factors,”
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, Jun. 2009.
[13] “Verification report for version 6,” in Seismostruct, ch. 4, pp. 111–131.
[14] PEER, “PEER NGA database,” Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center,
University of California, Berkeley, U. S. A.
[15] V. K. R. Kodur, M. A. Erki, and J. H. P. Quenneville, “Seismic analysis of
infilled frames,” the Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 25, no. 2, pp.
95–102, Jul. 1998.
[16] P. M. Pradhan, P. L. Pradhan, and R. K. Maskey, “A review on partial
infilled frames under lateral loads,” Kathmandu University Journal of
Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 141–152, Feb.
2012.
[17] H. R. Tamboli, and U. N. Karadi, “Seismic Analysis of RC Frame
Structure with and without Masonry Infill Walls,” Indian Journal of
Natural Sciences, vol. 3, no. 14, pp. 976–997, Sep. 2012.
[18] C. Dymiotis, A. J. Kappos, and M. K. Chryssanthopoulos, “Seismic
reliability of masonry–infilled RC frames,” the Journal of Structural
Engineering, vol. 127, no. 3, pp. 296–305, Mar. 2001.
[1] F. J. Crisafulli, Seismic behaviour of reinforced concrete structures with
masonry infills, University of Canterbury.
[2] S. Sattar, and A. B. Liel, “Seismic performance of reinforced concrete
frame structures with and without masonry infill walls,” 9th U. S. National
and 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Toronto,
Canada, 2010.
[3] ASCE/SEI 41-13, “Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings,”
American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, U. S. A.
[4] B. Tremayne, F. Turner, A. Russell, S. Oliver, and H. Derakhshan,
“Proposed update to masonry provisions of ASCE/SEI 41: Seismic
Evaluation and Retrofit of Exist Buildings,” WCEE World Conference,
2012.
[5] P. G. Asteris, S. T. Antoniou, D. S. Sophiano poulos, and C. Z.
Chrysostomou, “Mathematical macromodeling of infilled frames: State of
the art,” the Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 137, no. 12, pp.
1508–1517, Dec. 2011.
[6] E. Smyrou, Implementation and verification of a masonry panel model for
nonlinear dynamic analysis of infilled RC frames, Rose School. [7] FEMA–356, “Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation
of buildings,” Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington,
DC, Nov. 2000.
[8] F. J. Crisafulli, and A. J. Carr, “Proposed macro-model for the analysis of
infilled frame structures,” Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for
Earthquake Engineering, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 69–77, Jun. 2007.
[9] F. J. Crisafulli, A. J. Carr, and R. Park, “Anaytical modelling of infilled
frame structures-A general review,” Bulletin of the New Zealand Society
for Eathquake Engineering, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 30–47, Mar. 2000.
[10] C. Evan, Bentz, and M. P. Collins, “Response-2000: Reinforced Concrete
Sectional Analysis Using the Modified Compression Field Theory,”
1998.
[11] A. J. Carr, “RUAUMOKO–inelastic dynamic analysis program,” the
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand, 2008.
[12] FEMA–P695, “Quantification of building seismic performance factors,”
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, Jun. 2009.
[13] “Verification report for version 6,” in Seismostruct, ch. 4, pp. 111–131.
[14] PEER, “PEER NGA database,” Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center,
University of California, Berkeley, U. S. A.
[15] V. K. R. Kodur, M. A. Erki, and J. H. P. Quenneville, “Seismic analysis of
infilled frames,” the Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 25, no. 2, pp.
95–102, Jul. 1998.
[16] P. M. Pradhan, P. L. Pradhan, and R. K. Maskey, “A review on partial
infilled frames under lateral loads,” Kathmandu University Journal of
Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 141–152, Feb.
2012.
[17] H. R. Tamboli, and U. N. Karadi, “Seismic Analysis of RC Frame
Structure with and without Masonry Infill Walls,” Indian Journal of
Natural Sciences, vol. 3, no. 14, pp. 976–997, Sep. 2012.
[18] C. Dymiotis, A. J. Kappos, and M. K. Chryssanthopoulos, “Seismic
reliability of masonry–infilled RC frames,” the Journal of Structural
Engineering, vol. 127, no. 3, pp. 296–305, Mar. 2001.
@article{"International Journal of Architectural, Civil and Construction Sciences:69145", author = "Ji–Wook Mauk and Yu–Suk Kim and Hyung–Joon Kim", title = "Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frames Infilled by Masonry Walls with Different Heights", abstract = "This study carried out comparative seismic
performance of reinforced concrete frames infilled by masonry walls
with different heights. Partial and fully infilled reinforced concrete
frames were modeled for the research objectives and the analysis
model for a bare reinforced concrete frame was also established for
comparison. Non–linear static analyses for the studied frames were
performed to investigate their structural behavior under extreme
seismic loads and to find out their collapse mechanism. It was
observed from analysis results that the strengths of the partial infilled
reinforced concrete frames are increased and their ductilities are
reduced, as infilled masonry walls are higher. Especially, reinforced
concrete frames with higher partial infilled masonry walls would
experience shear failures. Non–linear dynamic analyses using 10
earthquake records show that the bare and fully infilled reinforced
concrete frame present stable collapse mechanism while the reinforced
concrete frames with partially infilled masonry walls collapse in more
brittle manner due to short-column effects.
", keywords = "Fully infilled RC frame, partially infilled RC frame,
masonry wall, short–column effects.", volume = "9", number = "2", pages = "158-4", }
