Advertisement

Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

, Volume 43, Issue 10, pp 5615–5633 | Cite as

The Theoretical Prediction of Collapse Mechanisms for Masonry-Infilled Steel Frames

  • Sayeh Beroual
  • Abdelhadi Tekkouk
  • Mohamed Laid Samai
Research Article - Civil Engineering
  • 28 Downloads

Abstract

The masonry infills in infilled steel frames are generally considered non-structural elements and are neglected in design by different codes. In fact, the presence of these infills should have a decisive influence on the mechanical properties such as lateral stiffness and ultimate strength. In the present work, a new macro-model has been proposed to model the masonry infill by two equivalent pin-jointed diagonal struts connecting the beams and the columns, respectively. To show the infill effect, the theory of plastic hinges has been adopted as an appropriate approach. In this parametric study, the prediction of the nature of failure mechanisms of structures subjected to a combined loading system has been presented, including their collapse loads with information about the location and order of plastic hinges. The model has been validated by theoretical and experimental predictions. In addition, interaction diagrams, \(\lambda V{-}\lambda H\), were constructed. From the result, the factors that have a direct influence are the infill thickness and the values of \(\alpha \). By comparing the collapse loads for the infilled frames to their corresponding open frames, it was found that the lateral stiffness and the vertical strength were considerably increased. It can be said that the two-strut model proposed can realistically capture the collapse mechanisms of infilled frames and can more accurately estimate the local effects due to the infill–frame interaction. Finally, important conclusions about the failure modes of the infilled frames and their corresponding collapse loads were drawn from this work.

Keywords

Masonry infill Infilled steel frame Equivalent diagonal strut Plastic hinge Collapse mechanism Interaction diagram 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Asteris, P.G.; Antoniou, S.T.; Sophianopoulos, D.S.; Chrysostomou, C.Z.: Mathematical macro-modeling of infilled frames: state of the art. J. Struct. Eng. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. (ASCE) 137(12), 1508–1517 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asteris, P.G.; Cotsovos, D.M.; Chrysostomo, C.Z.; Mohebkhah, A.; Al-Chaar, G.K.: Mathematical micro-modeling of infilled frames: state of the art. Eng. Struct. 56, 1905–1921 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhagyalaxmi, S.; Anusha, P.G.; Harshitha, R.K.; Renukadevi, M.V.: Effect of modulus of masonry stiffness of infilled frames with openings. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 03(6), 218–224 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chysostomou, C.Z.; Gergely, P.; Abel, J.F.: A six-strut model for nonlinear dynamic analysis of steel infilled frames. Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn. 2(3), 335–353 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    El-Dakhakhni, W.W.; Mohamed, E.; Hamid, A.A.: Three-strut model for concrete masonry-infilled steel frames. J. Struct. Eng. 129(2), 177–185 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hashemi, A.; Mosalam, K.M.: Seismic evaluation of reinforced concrete buildings including effects of infill masonry walls. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), University of California, Berkeley (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaushik, H.B.; Rai, D.C.; Jain, S.K.: A rational approach to analytical modeling of masonry infills in reinforced concrete frame buildings. In: Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liauw, T.C.; Kwan, K.H.: Nonlinear behaviour of non-integral infilled frames. Comput. Struct. 18(3), 551–560 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mosalam, K.M.; Günay, M.S.: Chapter 23: Seismic and design of masonry-infilled frames. In: S.K. Kunnath (ed) Structural and Geotechnical Engineering. Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) Publishers, Oxford (2012).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pereira, V.G.; Barros, R.C.; César, M.T.: A parametric study of a R/C frame based on ‘Pushover’ analysis. In: Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Integrity, Reliability and Failure, Porto, Portugal (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Samoilà, D.M.: Analytical modeling of masonry infills. Civ. Eng. Archit. 55(2), 127–136 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Asteris, P.G.; Kakaletsis, D.J.; Chrysostomou, C.Z.; Smyrou, E.E.: Failure modes of in-filled frames. Electron. J. Struct. Eng. 11(1), 11–20 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chrysostomou, C.Z.; Asteris, P.G.: On the in plane properties and capacities of infilled frames. Eng. Struct. 41, 385–402 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liauw, T.C.; Kwan, K.H.: Plastic theory of non-integral infilled frames. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 75(2), 379–396 (1983)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mallick, D.V.; Severn, R.T.: The behaviour of infilled frames under static loading. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 38, 639–656 (1967)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    May, I.M.: Determination of collapse loads for unreinforced panels with and without openings. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 71(2), 215–233 (1981)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wood, R.H.: Plasticity, composite action and collapse design of unreinforced shear wall panels in frames. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 65(2), 379–411 (1978)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Amato, G.; Cavaleri, L.; Fossetti, M.; Papia, M.: Infilled frames: influence of vertical load on the equivalent diagonal strut model. In: Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Buonopane, S.G.; White, R.N.: Pseudo-dynamic testing of masonry-infilled reinforced concrete frame. J. Struct. Eng. 125(6), 578–589 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mallick, S.K.; Barua, H.K.: Behaviour of single storey reinforced concrete frame infilled with brickwork under lateral loads. In: Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Delhi (1977)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Samai, M.L.: Behaviour of reinforced concrete frames with lightweight block work infill panels. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Sheffield, London (1984)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shing, P.B.; Mehrabi, A.: Behaviour and analysis of masonry-infilled frames. Progr. Struct. Eng. Mater. 4, 320–331 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stafford-Smith, B.: Behaviour of square infilled frames. J. Struct. Div. ASCE 92(ST1), 381–403 (1966)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stafford-Smith, B.; Carter, C.: A method of analysis for infilled frames. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 44, 31–49 (1969)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Polyakov, S.V.: On the interaction between masonry filler walls and enclosing frame when loaded in the plane of the wall. Translations in Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California, pp. 36–42 (1960)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chrysostomou, C.Z.: Effect of degrading infill walls on the nonlinear seismic response of two dimensional steel frames. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Cornell, Ithaca, NY (1991)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hamburger, R.O.: Methodology for seismic capacity evaluation of steel frame buildings with infill unreinforced masonry. In Proceedings of 1993 National Earthquake Conference, Central U.S. Earthquake Consortium, Memphis, Tennessee, May (2), pp. 173–197 (1993)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Holmes, M.: Steel frames with brickwork and concrete infilling. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 19(2), 473–478 (1961)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Holmes, M.: Combined loading on infilled frames. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 25(1), 31–38 (1963)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stafford-Smith, B.: Lateral stiffness of infilled frames. J. Struct. Div. ASCE 88(ST6), 183–199 (1962)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stafford-Smith, B.: Model test results of vertical and horizontal loading of infilled frames. ACI Struct. J. 65(8), 618–624 (1968)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thiruvengadam, V.: On the natural frequencies of infilled frames. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 13(3), 401–419 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mainstone, R.J.: On the stiffnesses and strengths of infilled frames. In: Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers, Supplement IV (Paper 73605), pp. 57–90 (1971)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kadysiewski, S.; Mosalam, K.M.: Modeling of unreinforced masonry infill walls considering in-plane and out-of-plane interaction. University of California, Berkeley, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center PEER (2009)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mosalam, K.M.; Ayala, G.; White, R.N.; Roth, C.: Seismic reliability of LRC frames with and without masonry infill wall. J. Earthq. Eng. 1(4), 693–720 (1997)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Reflak, J.; Fajfar, P.: Elastic analysis of infilled frames using substructures. In: Proceeding of 6th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Toronto, Canada (1991)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Boukeloua, S.; Tekkouk, A.; Samai, M.L.: Prediction of collapse mechanisms by the construction interaction diagrams for plane steel structures. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 43, 1687–1696 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Grigorian, M.; Kaveh, A.: A practical weight optimization for moment frames under combined loading. Int. J. Optim. Civ. Eng. 3(2), 289–312 (2013)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lord Baker, J.H.: Plastic Design of Frames, 1 Fundamental. Cambridge University Press, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Moy, S.S.J.: Plastic Methods for Steel and Concrete Structures, 2nd edn. Macmilian, Basingstoke (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Liu, Y.-S.; Guo-Qiang, L.: A nonlinear analysis method of steel frames using element with internal plastic hinge. Adv. Steel Constr. 4(4), 341–352 (2008)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Burton, H.: Literature review of reinforced concrete infill frame. Ph.D. Thesis, Chapter in progress, University of Stanford, California (2012)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Framed Infill Network: Modeling technique: development and implementation. Publishing GeoHazards International and EERI. http://framedinfill.org/resources/technical-literature/. Accessed 11 July 2017 (2017)
  44. 44.
    Abolghasem, S.; Hobbs, B.: Inelastic design of infilled frames. J. Struct. Eng. 121(4), 634–650 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sarhosis, V.; Tsavdaridis, K.D.; Giannopoulos, I.: Discrete element modelling of masonry infilled steel frames with multiple window openings subjected to lateral load variations. Open Construct. Build. Technol. J. 8, 93–103 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pantò, B.; Caliò, I.; Lourenço, P.B.: Seismic safety evaluation of reinforced concrete masonry infilled frames using macro modelling approach. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 15(9), 3871–3895 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Di Trapani, F.; Shing, P.B.; Cavaleri, L.: Macro-element model for in-plane and out-of-plane responses of masonry infills in frame structures. ASCE J. Struct. Eng. 144(2), 04017198 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Asteris, P.G.; Repapis, C.C.; Tsaris, A.K.; Trapani, F.D.I.; Cavaleri, L.: Parameters affecting the fundamental period of infilled RC frame structures. Earthq. Struct. 9(5), 999–1028 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Crowley, H., Pinho, R.: Simplified equations for estimating the period of vibration of existing buildings. In: Proceedings of the First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland (2006)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Cavaleri, L.; Di Trapani, F.: Prediction of the additional shear action on frame members due to infills. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 13(5), 1425–1454 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Cavaleri, L.; Trapani, F.D.; Asteris, P.G.; Sarhosis, V.: Influence of column shear failure on pushover based assessment of masonry infilled reinforced concrete framed structures: a case study. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 100, 98–112 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Celarec, D.; Dolšek, M.: Practice-oriented probabilistic seismic performance assessment of infilled frames with consideration of shear failure of columns. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 42, 1339–1360 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cavaleri, L.; Di Trapani, F.: Cyclic response of masonry infilled RC frames: experimental results and simplified modeling. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 65, 224–242 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kakaletsis, D.J.; Karayannis, C.G.: Experimental investigation of infilled reinforced concrete frames with openings. ACI Struct. J. 102(2), 132–141 (2009)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mainstone, R.J.; Weeks, G.A.: The influence of a bounding frame on the racking stiffnesses and strengths of brick walls. In: Proceeding of 2nd International Brick Masonry Conference, pp. 165–171 (1971)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    FEMA 273.: NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Report No. FEMA 273, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC (1997)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    FEMA 274.: NEHRP Commentary on the Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Report No. FEMA 274, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C (1997)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    SAP2000: Linear and nonlinear static and dynamic analysis and design of three-dimensional structures. Structural Analysis Program SAP2000, V15.0.0, Berkeley, California (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sayeh Beroual
    • 1
  • Abdelhadi Tekkouk
    • 1
  • Mohamed Laid Samai
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Sciences of TechnologyMentouri Brothers UniversityConstantineAlgeria

Personalised recommendations