Advertisement

MID1.0: Masonry Infilled RC Frame Experimental Database

  • F. De Luca
  • E. Morciano
  • D. Perrone
  • M. A. Aiello
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 10)

Abstract

Experimental campaigns are a key tool for the evaluation of the behaviour of Masonry Infilled Reinforced Concrete (RC) frames. The case of masonry infills in RC frames is also a regional feature making the homogenous classification for a database a real challenge. This first attempt of a Masonry Infill Database (MID) includes a preliminary selection of experimental tests carried out on models of masonry-infilled RC frames under quasi-static or pseudo-dynamic loading. Each test is characterized in order to include, in a homogenous framework, all the relevant aspects of different experimental campaigns for easy access to the data for future applications. A Damage Classification is introduced, valid for both solid infill panels and for infill with openings. Finally, all monotonic backbones are fitted with a force-displacement piecewise linear approximation for future applications in Performance Based Earthquake Engineering.

Keywords

Reinforced Concrete Masonry infills Experimental Test Database 

References

  1. Al-Chaar G, Issa M, Sweeney S (2002) Behavior of masonry-infilled nonductile reinforced concrete frames. J Struct Eng 128(8):1055–1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Nimry HS (2014) Quasi-static testing of RC infilled frames and confined stone-concrete bearing walls. J Earthq Eng 18(1):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asteris PG, Kakaletsis DJ, Chrysostomou CZ, Smyrou EE (2011) Failure modes of in-filled frames. Electr J Struct Eng 11(1):11–20Google Scholar
  4. Baran M, Sevil T (2010) Analytical and experimental studies on infilled RC frames. Int J Phys Sci 5(13):1981–1998Google Scholar
  5. Basha SH, Kaushik HB (2012) Evaluation of shear demand on columns of masonry infileld reinforced concrete frames. In: Proceedings of the 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 24–28 September 2012Google Scholar
  6. Basha SH, Kaushik HB (2016) Behavior and failure mechanisms of masonry-infilled RC frames (in low-rise buildings) subject to lateral loading. Eng Struct 111:233–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berry M, Parrish M, Eberhard M (2004) PEER structural performance database user’s manual (version 1.0). University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  8. Biondi S, Colangelo F, Nuti C (2000) La risposta sismica dei telai con tamponature murarie. CNR Gruppo Nazionale per la Difesa dai Terremoti (in Italian)Google Scholar
  9. Biskinis DE, Roupakias GK, Fardis, MN (2004) Degradation of shear strength of reinforced concrete members with inelastic cyclic displacements. ACI Struct J, 101(6):773–783 Google Scholar
  10. Biskinis D, Fardis MN (2010a) Deformations at flexural yielding of members with continuous or lap-spliced bars. Struct Concr 11(3):127–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Biskinis D, Fardis MN (2010b) Flexure-controlled ultimate deformations of members with continuous or lap-spliced bars. Struct Concr 11(2):93–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Calvi GM, Bolognini D (2001) Seismic response of reinforced concrete frames infilled with weakly reinforced masonry panels. J Earthq Eng 5(02):153–185Google Scholar
  13. Calvi GM, Bolognini D, Penna A (2004) Seismic performance of masonry-infilled RC frames: benefits of slight reinforcements. Invited lecture to sesto congresso nacional de sismologia e engenharia sismica, pp 254–276Google Scholar
  14. Cardone D, Perrone G (2015) Developing fragility curves and loss functions for masonry infill walls. Earthq Struct 9(1):257–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cavaleri L, Di Trapani F (2014) Cyclic response of masonry infilled RC frames: experimental results and simplified modeling. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 65:224–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chrysostomou CZ, Asteris PG (2012) On the in-plane properties and capacities of infilled frames. Eng Struct 41:385–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Crisafulli FJ (1997) Seismic behaviour of reinforced concrete structures with masonry infills, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, 404 pGoogle Scholar
  18. Crisafulli FJ, Carr AJ, Park R (2005) Experimental response of framed masonry structures designed with new reinforcing details. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 38(1):19–32Google Scholar
  19. Colangelo F (1996) Pseudo-dynamic seismic response of infilled RC frames designed for gravity loading. In: Proceedings of the 11th world conference on earthquake engineering, Acapulco, Mexico, 23–28 June 1996Google Scholar
  20. Colangelo F (2003) Experimental evaluation of member-by-member models and damage indices for infilled frames. J Earthq Eng 7(01):25–50Google Scholar
  21. Colangelo F (2004) Pseudo-dynamic seismic response of infilled RC frames designed for gravity loading. In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 1–6 August 2004Google Scholar
  22. Colangelo F (2005) Pseudo-dynamic seismic response of reinforced concrete frames infilled with non-structural brick masonry. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34(10):1219–1241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. De Luca F, Vamvatsikos D, Iervolino I (2013) Near-optimal piecewise linear fits of static pushover capacity curves for equivalent SDOF analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42(4):523–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. De Luca F, Verderame GM, Manfredi G (2015) Analytical versus observational fragilities: the case of Pettino (L’Aquila) damage data database. Bull Earthq Eng 13(4):1161–1181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fardis MN, Bousias SN, Franchioni G, Panagiotakos TB (1999) Seismic response and design of RC structures with plan-eccentric masonry infills. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28(2):173–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. FEMA 306 (1998) Evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and masonry wall buildings (FEMA 306). Applied Technology Council, Redwood CityGoogle Scholar
  27. Grüntal G (1998) European macroseismic scale EMS-98. European Seismological Commission, Sub-commission on Engineering Seismology, Working Group Macroseismic Scales, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  28. Haris I, Hortobágyi Z (2015) Comparison of experimental and analytical results on masonry infilled RC frames for cyclic lateral load. Period Polytech Civil Eng 59(2):193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kakaletsis DJ, Karayannis CG (2008) Influence of masonry strength and openings on infilled R/C frames under cycling loading. J Earthq Eng 12(2):197–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kakaletsis DJ, Karayannis CG (2009) Experimental investigation of infilled reinforced concrete frames with openings. ACI Struct J 106(2):132Google Scholar
  31. Kyriakides MA (2001) Seismic retrofit of unreinforced masonry infills in non-ductile reinforec concrete frames using engineered cementitious composites. Dissertation, Department of Civil and Enviromental Engineering, Stanford University, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  32. Mehrabi AB, Shing PB, Schuller MP, Noland JL (1994) Performance of masonry-infilled R/C frames under in-plane lateral loads. Rep. CU/SR-94, p 6Google Scholar
  33. Mehrabi AB, Benson Shing P, Schuller MP, Noland JL (1996) Experimental evaluation of masory-infilled RC frames. J Struct Eng 122(3):228–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Negro P, Colombo A (1997) Irregularities induced by nonstructural masonry panels in framed buildings. Eng Struct 19(7):576–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Panagiotakos TB, Fardis MN (2001) Deformations of reinforced concrete members at yielding and ultimate. Struct J 98(2):135–148Google Scholar
  36. Pires F, Carvalho EC (1992) The behaviour of infilled reinforced concrete frames under horizontal cyclic loading. In: Proceedings of the 10th world conference on earthquake engineering, Madrid, Spain, 9–24 July 1992Google Scholar
  37. Sassun K, Sullivan TJ, Morandi P, Cardone D (2016) Characterising the in-plane seismic performance of infill masonry. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 49(1):100–117Google Scholar
  38. Skafida S, Koutas L, Bousias SN (2014) Analytical modeling of masonry infilled RC frames and verification with experimental data. J Struct 2014:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Verderame GM, De Luca F, Ricci P, Manfredi G (2011) Preliminary analysis of a soft-storey mechanism after the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40:925–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zovkić J, Sigmund V, Guljaš I (2012) Testing of R/C frames with masonry infill of various strength. In: Proceedings of the 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 24–28 September 2012Google Scholar
  41. Zovkic J, Sigmund V, Guljas I (2013) Cyclic testing of a single bay reinforced concrete frames with various types of masonry infill. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42(8):1131–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. De Luca
    • 1
  • E. Morciano
    • 1
    • 2
  • D. Perrone
    • 2
    • 3
  • M. A. Aiello
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of BristolBristolUK
  2. 2.Department of Engineering for InnovationUniversity of SalentoLecceItaly
  3. 3.Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS di PaviaPaviaItaly

Personalised recommendations