4.2 Article

Seismic response of RC frame structures strengthened by reinforced masonry infill panels

Journal

EARTHQUAKES AND STRUCTURES
Volume 8, Issue 6, Pages 1435-1452

Publisher

TECHNO-PRESS
DOI: 10.12989/eas.2015.8.6.1435

Keywords

seismic strengthening; reinforced masonry infill panels; nonlinear static analysis; nonlinear incremental dynamic analysis; low- and mid-rise reinforced concrete frames

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The performance of masonry infilled frames during the past earthquakes shows that the infill panels play a major role as earthquake-resistant elements. Experimental observations regarding the influence of infill panels on increasing stiffness and strength of reinforced concrete structures reveal that such panels can be used in order to strengthen reinforced concrete frames. The present study examines the influence of infill panels on seismic behavior of RC frame structures. For this purpose, several low- and mid-rise RC frames (two-, four-, seven-, and ten story) were numerically investigated. Reinforced masonry infill panels were then placed within the frames and the models were subjected to several nonlinear incremental static and dynamic analyses. In order to determine the acceptance criteria and modeling parameters for frames as well as reinforced masonry panels, the Iranian Guideline for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Masonry Buildings (Issue No. 376), the Iranian Guideline for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Structures (Issue No. 360) and FEMA Guidelines (FEMA 273 and 356) were used. The results of analyses showed that the use of reinforced masonry infill panels in RC frame structures can have beneficial effects on structural performance. It was confirmed that the use of masonry infill panels results in an increment in strength and stiffness of the framed buildings, followed by a reduction in displacement demand for the structural systems.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available