Abstract
A macro-modelling approach is proposed for representing the masonry infill walls in a non-linear analysis of infilled frame structures. The infill wall is modelled by equivalent struts. The paper presents a combination of an experimental testing method and analytical method to determine the constitutive law of the equivalent struts model. Thus, the model is based on the physical behaviour of the infill wall, rather than on empirical values that came from experimental or numerical tests of infilled frames. Upon requirement, the model can be developed to horizontal or vertical distortion of the infill wall. The strut model was incorporated in a detailed, micro non-linear two-dimensional finite element analysis and validated against reinforced concrete frames infilled by hollow concrete blocks and autoclaved aerated concrete blocks subjected to loss of supporting column scenario. The validation procedure showed that the model captures not only the stiffness and the resistance of a reinforced concrete infilled frame but also the failure mode and the pattern of cracking of the frame.
Graphic abstract
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akkaya Y, Guner S, Vecchio FJ (2019) Constitutive model for inelastic buckling behavior of reinforcing bars. ACI Struct J 116:195–204. https://doi.org/10.14359/51711143
American Society of Civil Engineers (2017a) Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. Standard ASCE/SEI 41–17. American Society of Civil Engineers
Anderson D, Brzev S (2009a) Sesmic design guide for masonry buildings
ASCE/SEI 41-06 (2007a) ASCE/SEI 41-06 Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings
Bentz EC (2003a) Augustus: finite element post-processor for VecTor2 and TRIX. Univ Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Bentz EC (2005) Explaining the riddle of tension stiffening models for shear panel experiments. J Struct Eng 131:1422–1425. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2005)131:9(1422)
Brodsky A, Rabinovitch O, Yankelevsky DZ (2017b) Experimental evaluation of the interaction between an infill wall and the surrounding frame. Strain 53:e12250. https://doi.org/10.1111/str.12250
Brodsky A, Rabinovitch O, Yankelevsky DZ (2018a) Effect of masonry joints on the behavior of infilled frames. Const Build Mater 189:144–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.08.209
Brodsky A, Rabinovitch O, Yankelevsky DZ (2018b) Determination of the interaction between a masonry wall and a confining frame. Eng Struct 167:214–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.04.001
Brodsky A, Yankelevsky DZ (2017c) Resistance of reinforced concrete frames with masonry infill walls to in-plane gravity loading due to loss of a supporting column. Eng Struct 140:134–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.061
Brodsky A, Yankelevsky DZ, Rabinovitch O (2021) Shearing of infill masonry walls under lateral and vertical loading. J Build Eng 38:102147
Calvi GM, Bolognini D (2001a) Seismic response of reinforced concrete frames infilled with weakly reinforced masonry panels. J Earthq Eng 5:153–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460109350390
Cavaleri L, Papia M (2003) A new dynamic identification technique: application to the evaluation of the equivalent strut for infilled frames. Eng Struct 25:889–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(03)00023-3
Chrysostomou CZ (1991) Effects of degrading infill walls on the nonlinear seismic response of two-dimensional steel frames. Cornell University
Chrysostomou CZ, Gergely P, Abel JF (2002) A six-strut model for nonlinear dynamic analysis of steel infilled frames. Int J Struct Stab Dyn 02:335–353. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219455402000567
Crisafulli FJ (1997a) Seismic behaviour of reinforced concrete structures with masonry infills. University of Canterbury, Christchurch
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
Di Trapani F, Bertagnoli G, Ferrotto MF, Gino D (2018c) Empirical equations for the direct definition of stress-strain laws for fiber-section-based macromodeling of infilled frames. J Eng Mech 144:04018101. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001532
Dolšek M, Fajfar P (2008) The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response of a four-storey reinforced concrete frame - a deterministic assessment. Eng Struct 30:1991–2001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.01.001
El-Dakhakhni WW, Elgaaly M, Hamid AA (2003c) Three-strut model for concrete masonry-infilled steel frames. J Struct Eng 129:177–185. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2003)129:2(177)
Eligehausen R, Popov EP, Bertero VV (1982a) Local bond stress-slip relationships of deformed bars under generalized excitations. University of California, Berkeley, USA
Emami SMM, Mohammadi M (2016a) Influence of vertical load on in-plane behavior of masonry infilled steel frames. Earthq Struct 11:609–627. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.4.609
Flanagan RD, Bennett RM (1999) In-Plane Behavior of Structural Clay Tile Infilled Frames. J Struct Eng 125:590–599. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1999)125:6(590)
Furtado A, Rodrigues H, Arêde A, Varum H (2015) Experimental Characterization of the In-plane and Out-of-Plane Behaviour of Infill Masonry Walls. Procedia Engineering. Elsevier Ltd, Amsterdam, pp 862–869
Furtado A, Rodrigues H, Arêde A, Varum H (2016b) Simplified macro-model for infill masonry walls considering the out-of-plane behaviour. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 45:507–524. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2663
Guner S, Vecchio FJ (2010a) Pushover analysis of shear-critical frames: formulation. ACI Struct J 107:63–71
Hashemi A, Mosalam KM (2007b) Seismic Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Buildings Including Effects of Masonry Infill Walls
He XG, Kwan AKH (2001b) Modeling dowel action of reinforcement bars for finite element analysis of concrete structures. Comput Struct 79:595–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(00)00158-9
Kupfer H, Hilsdorf HK, Rusch H (1969a) Behavior of concrete under biaxial stresses. J Proc 66:656–666
Kadysiewski S, Mosalam KM (2009b) Modeling of unreinforced masonry infill walls considering in-plane and out-of-plane interaction. 11th Can Mason Symp 144
Klingner RE, Bertero VV (1978) Earthquake resistance of infilled frames. J Struct Div 104:973–989
Madan A, Reinhorn AM, Mander JB, Valles RE (1997b) Modeling of masonry infill panels for structural analysis. J Struct Eng 123:1295–1302
Markulak D, Dokšanović T, Radić I, Zovkić J (2020) Behaviour of steel frames infilled with environmentally and structurally favourable masonry units. Eng Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109909
Montoya E, Vecchio FJ, Sheikh SA (2006) Compression field modeling of confined concrete: Constitutive models. J Mater Civ Eng 18:510–517. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2006)18:4(510)
Panagiotakos TB, Fardis MN (1996) Seismic response of infilled RC frame structures. Proc. 11th World Conf. Earthq. Eng. 1–8
Park R, Priestley MJN, Gill WD (1982b) Ductility of square-confined concrete columns. J Struct Div 108:929–950
Ricci P, Di Domenico M, Verderame GM (2018d) Empirical-based out-of-plane URM infill wall model accounting for the interaction with in-plane demand. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 47:802–827. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2992
Richart FE, Brandtzaeg A, Brown RL (1928) A study of the failure of concrete under combined compressive stresses. Bull No 185 Eng Exp Stn 26:7–92
Rodrigues H, Varum H, Costa A (2010b) Simplified macro-model for infill masonry panels. J Earthq Eng 14:390–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460903086044
Saneinejad A, Hobbs B (1995) Inelastic design of infilled frames. J Struct Eng 121:634–650. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1995)121:4(634)
Stafford Smith B, Carter C (1969b) A method of analysis for infilled frames. Proc Inst Civ Eng 44:31–48. https://doi.org/10.1680/iicep.1970.6801
Stafford Smith B (1967) Methods for predicting the lateral stiffness and strength of multi-storey infilled frames. Build Sci 2:247–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-3628(67)90027-8
Thiruvengadam V (1985) On the natural frequencies of infilled frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 13:401–419. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290130310
Vecchio FJ (1992) Finite Element Modeling of Concrete Expansion and Confinement. J Struct Eng 118:2390–2406. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1992)118:9(2390)
Vecchio FJ, Collins MP (1982c) Response of Reinforced Concrete to In-Plane Shear and Normal Stresses. Univ Toronto Dep Civ Eng 211–225
Vecchio FJ, Collins MP (1986) The Modified Compression-Field Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear. ACI J 83:219–231. https://doi.org/10.14359/10416
Walraven JC (1981) Fundamental analysis of aggregate interlock. J Struct Div 107:2245–2270
Wong PS, Vecchio FJ, Trommels H (2013) VecTor2 and Formworks user’s manual. Univ, Toronto
Acknowledgements
Financial support for this study has been provided by the Lyon Sachs Research Fund, University of Toronto.
Funding
Financial support for this study has been provided by the Lyon Sachs Research Fund, University of Toronto. The author declare that he has no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Derived data supporting the findings of this study are available upon request.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brodsky, A. A micro–macro modelling methodology for the analysis of infilled frames. Bull Earthquake Eng 19, 2161–2184 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01045-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01045-9