Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the mechanical behaviour of masonry infilled RC frames, with and without openings, subjected to simultaneous in-plane (IP) and out-of-plane (OoP) loading

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The behaviour of masonry infilled RC frames, with and without openings, subjected to both in-plane (IP) and out-of-plane (OoP) shear loading, indicates the most unfavourable shear (seismic) design condition. A series of calibrated computational micromodels of previously tested 1/2.5 scaled single-bay and single-story RC frames with masonry infill walls, were employed to investigate the effect of openings of various type, size and position, on structure’s shear resistance under different IP and OoP load combinations. The load combination was characterised by an angle α of the IP (or OoP) resultant force, ranging from 0° to 90°. Considered were walls with centrically or eccentrically positioned door or window opening, of an opening to wall area ratio Ao/Ai = 0.1–0.3, walls without openings, and frame without wall i.e. bare frame. A total of 252 models were considered. The obtained behaviour revealed the specific load resisting mechanisms and accompanying failure modes. The IP–OoP shear resistance interaction curves and surfaces were constructed with regard to load direction α and opening to wall area ratio Ao/Ai. Considering these criteria, the IP–OoP shear resistance estimation functions were derived in order to improve the existing shear (seismic) design methodologies of masonry infilled RC frames.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  • Abrahamczyk L, Penava D, Markušić S et al (2022a) Die Magnitude 6,4 – Erdbeben in Albanien und Kroatien – Ingenieuranalyse der Erdbebenschäden und Erfahrungswerte für die Baunormung. Mauerwerk 26:109–121. https://doi.org/10.1002/dama.202210022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamczyk L, Penava D, Markušić S et al (2022b) Die Magnitude 6,4 – Erdbeben in Albanien und Kroatien – Ingenieuranalyse der Erdbebenschäden und Erfahrungswerte für die Baunormung. Bautechnik 99:18–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/bate.202100070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abrams DP, Angel R, Uzarski J (1996) Out-of-Plane strength of unreinforced masonry infill panels. Earthq Spectra 12:825–844. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585912

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akhoundi F, Vasconcelos G, Lourenço P (2020) Experimental out-of-plane behavior of brick masonry infilled frames. Int J Archit Herit 14:221–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2018.1529207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anić F, Penava D, Abrahamczyk L, Sarhosis V (2020) A review of experimental and analytical studies on the out-of-plane behaviour of masonry infilled frames. Bull Earthq Eng 18:2191–2246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00771-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anić F, Penava D, Abrahamczyk L, Sarhosis V (2019) Computational evaluation of experimental methodologies of out-of-plane behavior of framed-walls with openings. Earthquakes Struct 16:265–277. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.16.3.265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anić F, Penava D, Guljaš I et al (2021a) Out-of-plane cyclic response of masonry infilled RC frames: an experimental study. Eng Struct 238:112258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anić F, Penava D, Sarhosis V, Abrahamczyk L (2021b) Development and calibration of a 3D micromodel for evaluation of masonry infilled RC frame structural vulnerability to earthquakes. Geosciences 11:468. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11110468

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Anić F, Penava D, Sarhosis V, Lars A (2023) Study of simultaneous inter-storey drift IP and OoP loads on RC frames with and without infill walls and openings by a variating angle. In: 2nd Croatian conference on earthquake engineering, Zagreb, Croatia

  • Anić F, Penava D, Varevac D, Sarhosis V (2018) Influence of clay block masonry properties on the out-of-plane behaviour of infilled RC frames. Teh Vjesn

  • Asteris PG (2003) Lateral stiffness of brick masonry infilled plane frames. J Struct Eng 129:1071–1079. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2003)129:8(1071)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asteris PGG, Cavaleri L, Di Trapani F, Tsaris AKK (2017) Numerical modelling of out-of-plane response of infilled frames: state of the art and future challenges for the equivalent strut macromodels. Eng Struct 132:110–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.10.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benedetti D, Benzoni GM (1984) A numerical model for seismic analysis of masonry buildings: experimental correlations. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 12:817–831. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290120608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Booth E, Key D (2006) Earthquake design practice for buildings. Thomas Telford, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cavaleri L, Zizzo M, Asteris PG (2020) Residual out-of-plane capacity of infills damaged by in-plane cyclic loads. Eng Struct 209:109957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CEN (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings (EN 1998–1:2004). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • CEN (2005) Eurocode 6: design of masonry structures—Part 1–1: general rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures (EN 1996-1-1:2005). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervenka Consulting (2015) ATENA for non-linear finite element analysis of reinforced concrete structures

  • Crisafulli FJ, Carr AJ, Park R (2000) Analytical modelling of infilled frame structures-a general review. Bull Zeal Soc Earthq Eng 33:30–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawe JL, Seah CK (1989) Out-of-plane resistance of concrete masonry infilled panels. Can J Civ Eng 16:854–864. https://doi.org/10.1139/l89-128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dias-Oliveira J, Rodrigues H, Asteris P, Varum H (2022) On the seismic behavior of masonry infilled frame structures. Buildings 12:1146. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12081146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowrick DJ (2009) Earthquake resistant design and risk reduction, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan R, Bennett R (1999) Bidirectional behavior of structural clay tile infilled frames. J Struct Eng 125:236–244. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1999)125:3(236)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan RD (1994) Behavior of structural clay tile infilled frames. Tennessee, USA

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler JJ (1994) Analysis of dynamic testing performed on structural clay tile infilled frames. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Freddi F, Novelli V, Gentile R et al (2021) Observations from the 26th November 2019 Albania earthquake: the earthquake engineering field investigation team (EEFIT) mission. Bull Earthq Eng 19:2013–2044. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01062-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hak S, Morandi P, Magenes G (2014) Out-of-plane experimental response of strong masonry infills. In: 2nd European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology, Istanbul, Turska

  • Henderson R, Jones W, Burdette E, Porter M (1993) The effect of prior out-of-plane damage on the in-plane behavior of unreinforced masonry infilled frames. In: Fourth DOE natural phenomena hazards mitigation conference, p 18

  • Henderson RC, Porter ML, Jones WD, Burdette EG (2006) Influence of prior out-of-plane damage on the in-plane behavior of masonry infilled frames. TMS J 24:71–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones E, Oliphant T, Peterson P, Others (2015) SciPy: open source scientific tools for Python, 2001. http://www.scipy.org/

  • Markušić S, Stanko D, Korbar T et al (2020) The Zagreb (Croatia) M5.5 earthquake on 22 March 2020. Geosciences 10:252. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10070252

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Markušić S, Stanko D, Penava D et al (2021) Destructive M6.2 Petrinja earthquake (Croatia) in 2020—preliminary multidisciplinary research. Remote Sens 13:1095. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13061095

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Mays GC, Hetherington JG, Rose TA (1999) Response to blast loading of concrete wall panels with openings. J Struct Eng 125:1448–1450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morandi P, Hak S, Magenes G (2013) Simplified out-of-plane resistance verification for slender clay masonry infills in RC frames. XV Convegno ANIDIS - "L’INGEGNERIA SISMICA Ital

  • Neufert E, Neufert P (2012) Architects’ data, 4th edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Penava D, Sarhosis V, Kožar I, Guljaš I (2018) Contribution of RC columns and masonry wall to the shear resistance of masonry infilled RC frames containing different in size window and door openings. Eng Struct 172:105–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossetto T, D’Ayala D, Gori F et al (2014) The value of multiple earthquake missions: the EEFIT L’Aquila Earthquake experience. Bull Earthq Eng 12:277–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9588-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sepasdar R (2017) Experimental investigation on the out-of-plane behaviour of concrete masonry infilled RC frames. Dalhausie University, Halifax

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro D, Uzarski J, Webster M, et al (1994) Estimating out-of-plane strength of cracked masonry infills. San Francisco, USA

  • Sigmund V, Penava D (2014) Influence of openings, with and without confinement, on cyclic response of infilled r-c frames—an experimental study. J Earthq Eng 18:113–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2013.817362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomaževič M (1999) Earthquake-resistant design of masonry buildings. Imperial College Press, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tu YH, Chuang TH, Liu PM, Sen YY (2010) Out-of-plane shaking table tests on unreinforced masonry panels in RC frames. Eng Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.08.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verlato N, Guidi G, da Porto F, Modena C (2016) Innovative systems for masonry infill walls based on the use of deformable joints: combined in-plane/out-of-plane tests. In: 16th international brick and block masonry, Padova, Italy, pp 1359–1366

  • Wang C (2017) Experimental investigation on the out-of-plane behaviour of concrete masonry infilled frames. Dalhousie University, Halifax

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research presented in this article forms part of the research project, FRAmed-MAsonry composites for modelling and standardisation [HRZZ-IP-2013-11-3013], supported by the Croatian Science Foundation; this support is gratefully acknowledged.

Funding

This work was supported by Croatian Science Foundation research project entitled FRAmed-MAsonry composites for modelling and standardization or (acronym: FRAMA) under grant number HRZZ-IP-2013-11-3013.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia

    Filip Anić & Davorin Penava

  2. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Weimar, Germany

    Lars Abrahamczyk

  3. School of Civil Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds, England, UK

    Vasilis Sarhosis

Authors
  1. Filip Anić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Davorin Penava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lars Abrahamczyk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vasilis Sarhosis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Filip Anić and Davorin Penava. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Filip Anić and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Davorin Penava.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have not disclosed any competing interests.

Competing interests

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Figs. 14, 15, 16 and 17.

Fig. 14
figure 14

Selection process for each opening type

Full size image
Fig. 15
figure 15

Crack patterns at load-bearing capacity

Full size image
Fig. 16
figure 16

Maximal principal (left) stress of FI model's infill wall and minimal (right) on the whole model

Full size image
Fig. 17
figure 17

Regression results for depending variable α

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anić, F., Penava, D., Abrahamczyk, L. et al. On the mechanical behaviour of masonry infilled RC frames, with and without openings, subjected to simultaneous in-plane (IP) and out-of-plane (OoP) loading. Bull Earthquake Eng 22, 1775–1799 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-023-01832-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-023-01832-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation