Experimental tests and global modeling of masonry infilled frames

Bergami, Alessandro Vittorio; Nuti, Camillo

doi:10.12989/eas.2015.9.2.281

Cited by 39 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of clay masonry infill walls in reinforced concrete (RC) frames is a common construction practice worldwide, and experimental studies on their in-plane (IP) behavior were conducted since the 1950's (e.g., Thomas, 1952, Polyakov, 1960, with particular attention to failure modes and infillframe interaction. As an example, some recent works are those of Anil and Altin (2007), Blackard et al (2009), Kakaletsis et al (2011), Cavaleri and Di Trapani (2014), Bergami and Nuti (2015), and Gazic and Sigmund (2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Testing and Numerical Modeling of Robust Unreinforced and Reinforced Clay Masonry Infill Walls, With and Without Openings

Porto

Donà

Verlato

et al. 2020

Front. Built Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an overview of the experimental results obtained by combined in-plane/out-of-plane (IP/OOP) tests carried out on robust clay masonry infill walls. The combined tests were carried out on eight full-scale one-bay, one-story infilled reinforced concrete (RC) frames, plus one reference RC bare frame. In four cases, the masonry walls fully fill the RC frame: two walls are made of unreinforced masonry (URM), whereas the other two are made of reinforced masonry (RM), with both vertical and horizontal reinforcement. Each pair of specimens was tested up to different levels of IP drift before carrying out the OOP tests. Four other specimens, still made of URM and RM walls, are characterized by the presence of a central opening, and in one case, the effect of a lintel is analyzed. On the basis of the tests carried out, an analytical model was developed for the analysis of the OOP behavior. It was used to calibrate IP damage degradation models based on the experimental results to define limits for the applicability of well-known flexural and arching mechanism models for the evaluation of the OOP capacity of the infill walls and to evaluate the efficiency of vertical reinforcement. In this work, the experimental campaign is presented, and the results of both experimental tests and numerical analyses are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Testing and Numerical Modeling of Robust Unreinforced and Reinforced Clay Masonry Infill Walls, With and Without Openings

Porto

Donà

Verlato

et al. 2020

Front. Built Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Number of tests Masonry unit Scale factor Aly and Mooty [27] 2 Solid clay unit 1 : 2 Akhoundi et al [28] 1 Hollow clay unit 1 : 2 Al-Chaar et al [29] 2 Solid clay unit-solid concrete unit 1 : 2 Angel et al [13] 7 Solid clay unit-solid concrete unit 1 : 2 Baran and Sevil [30] 3 Hollow clay unit 1 : 3 Basha and Kaushik [31] 4 Solid fly ash unit 1 : 2 Bergami and Nuti [32] 2 Hollow clay unit 1 : 2 Calvi and Bolognini [33] 2 Hollow clay unit 1 : 1 Cavaleri and Di Trapani [34] 12 Hollow clay or concrete unit-solid calcarenite unit 1 : 2 Centeno et al [35] 1 Hollow concrete unit 1 : 2 Chiou and Hwang [36] 2 Solid clay unit 1 : 1 Colangelo [37] 11 Hollow clay unit 1 : 2 Combescure and Pegon [38] 4 Hollow clay unit 2 : 3 Gazic and Sigmund [39] 10 Hollow clay unit-solid clay unit 1 : 2 Guidi et al [40] 2 Hollow clay unit 1 : Advances in Civil Engineering initial stiffness until first cracking occurrence is generally observed, depending on the in-plane stiffness (thickness and material) of the infill panel. After the first macrocracking, a subsequent lateral stiffness degradation generally occurred up to the peak load.…”

Section: Authormentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent Findings and Open Issues concerning the Seismic Behaviour of Masonry Infill Walls in RC Buildings

Furtado

Risi

2020

Advances in Civil Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

e extension of the damages observed after the last major earthquakes shows that the seismic risk mitigation of infilled reinforced concrete structures is a paramount topic in seismic prone regions. In the assessment of existing structures and the design of new ones, the infill walls are considered as nonstructural elements by most of the seismic codes and, generally, comprehensive provisions for practitioners are missing. However, nowadays, it is well recognized by the community the importance of the infills in the seismic behaviour of the reinforced concrete structures. Accurate modelling strategies and appropriate seismic assessment methodologies are crucial to understand the behaviour of existing buildings and to develop efficient and appropriate mitigation measures to prevent high level of damages, casualties, and economic losses. e development of effective strengthening solutions to improve the infill seismic behaviour and proper analytical formulations that could help design engineers are still open issues, among others, on this topic. e main aim of this paper is to provide a state-of-the-art review concerning the typologies of damages observed in the last earthquakes where the causes and possible solutions are discussed. After that, a review of in-plane and out-of-plane testing campaigns from the literature on infilled reinforced concrete frames are presented as well as their relevant findings. e most common strengthening solutions to improve the seismic behaviour are presented, and some examples are discussed. Finally, a brief summary of the modelling strategies available in the literature is presented.

show abstract

“…All the properties are converted to U.S. customary units. Angel et al (1994) 7 RC Quasi-static cyclic Anil and Altin (2007) 7 RC Quasi-static cyclic Baran and Sevil (2010) 3 RC Quasi-static cyclic Basha and Kaushik (2016) 9 RC Quasi-static cyclic Bergami and Nuti (2015) 2 RC Quasi-static cyclic Billington et al (2009) 1 RC Quasi-static cyclic Blackard et al (2009) 4 RC Quasi-static cyclic Bose and Rai 20141 RC Quasi-static cyclic Calvi and Bolognini (2008) 4 RC Quasi-static cyclic Campione et al 201412 RC Quasi-static cyclic Chiou and Hwang 20154 RC Quasi-static cyclic Colangelo (2005) 11 RC Pseudo-dynamic Combescure et al (1996) 2 RC Quasi-static cyclic Crisafulli (1997) 2 RC Quasi-static cyclic Da Porto et al 20136 RC Quasi-static cyclic Dautaj et al 20187 RC Quasi-static cyclic Dawe and Seah (1989) 28 Steel Monotonic Fiorato et al (1970) 7 RC Monotonic Flanagan and Bennett (1999) 8 Steel Quasi-static cyclic Gazic and Sigmund (2016) 11 RC Quasi-static cyclic Haider (1995) 4 RC Quasi-static cyclic Kakaletsis and Karayannis (2008) 6RC Quasi-static cyclic Khoshnoud and Marsono 2016 20143 RC Quasi-static cyclic Tizapa (2009) 3 RC Quasi-static cyclic Verderame et al 20162 RC Quasi-static cyclic Waly 20102 RC Quasi-static cyclic Yorulmaz and Sozen (1968) 7 RC Monotonic Yuksel and Teymur (2011) 2 RC Quasi-static cyclic Zarnic and Tomazevic (1985) 3 RC Quasi-static cyclic Zhai et al (2016) 3 RC Quasi-static cyclic Zovkic et al (2013) 3 RC Quasi-static cyclic RC: reinforced concrete.…”

Section: Structural Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A database of test results from steel and reinforced concrete infilled frame experiments

Huang

Burton

2020

Earthquake Spectra

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extensive experimental investigations into the behavior of reinforcement concrete and steel frames with infill have been conducted worldwide. However, there are very few systematically created and publicly available databases on infilled frame experiments. This article assembles a database of 264 experiments on single-story infilled frames, which includes specimens with different types of frames and panels. It has been utilized by the authors (in separate studies) to develop (1) empirical equations for modeling the infill panels as equivalent struts and (2) machine learning models for failure mode classification. The intent is for the database to be augmented and further used in various other applications in studying the seismic behavior of masonry-infilled frames.

show abstract

Experimental tests and global modeling of masonry infilled frames

Cited by 39 publications

References 3 publications

Experimental Testing and Numerical Modeling of Robust Unreinforced and Reinforced Clay Masonry Infill Walls, With and Without Openings

Experimental Testing and Numerical Modeling of Robust Unreinforced and Reinforced Clay Masonry Infill Walls, With and Without Openings

Recent Findings and Open Issues concerning the Seismic Behaviour of Masonry Infill Walls in RC Buildings

A database of test results from steel and reinforced concrete infilled frame experiments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About