Sei sulla pagina 1di 11

Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001

www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response of a four-storey


reinforced concrete frame a deterministic assessment
Matjaz Dolsek , Peter Fajfar
University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, Jamova 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Received 11 May 2007; received in revised form 28 December 2007; accepted 7 January 2008
Available online 14 February 2008

Abstract

The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response of a four-storey reinforced concrete frame has been studied using the N2 method. The
method is based on pushover analysis and the inelastic spectrum approach. It was recently extended in order to make it applicable to infilled
reinforced concrete frames. In the paper the method is summarized and applied to the deterministic seismic assessment of a four-storey reinforced
concrete frame with masonry infills, with openings and without them. A comparison has been made with the behaviour of the bare frame. The
most common analytical modelling technique, which employs compressive diagonal struts for modelling of the masonry infill, and one-component
lumped plasticity elements for modelling the flexural behaviour of the beams and columns, was applied. The results of the analyses indicate that
the infills can completely change the distribution of damage throughout the structure. The infills can have a beneficial effect on the structural
response, provided that they are placed regularly throughout the structure, and that they do not cause shear failures of columns.
c 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Seismic assessment; Reinforced concrete frame; Masonry infill; Infilled RC frame; Simplified nonlinear analysis

1. Introduction behaviour of this system during strong earthquakes. A good


review of design provisions related to infilled frames has been
Reinforced concrete (RC) frames with masonry infill are presented by Kaushik et al. [4]. A comprehensive overview of
a popular structural system in many parts of the world [1]. the analytical modelling techniques of infilled frame structures
If the infills are properly distributed throughout the structure was prepared, for example, by Moghaddam and Dowling [5]
and properly considered in the design, then they usually have and, more recently, by Crisafulli, Carr and Park [6]. The most
a beneficial effect on the seismic response of the structure. commonly used technique to model infill panels is that of single
On the other hand, negative effects can be caused by irregular or multiple compressive equivalent diagonal struts.
positioning of the infills in plan, and especially in elevation [1, In this paper the effects of masonry infill on the
2]. A soft-storey collapse is typical for infilled structures in seismic response of a four-storey reinforced concrete frame
which the infills are missing in one, e.g. the bottom storey. are discussed. A simplified seismic performance assessment
However, a first-storey mechanism and subsequent collapse can method, recently proposed by the authors [7], has been used.
also occur in the case of RC frame buildings with a regular In one variant, the infill is without openings (the fully infilled
distribution of masonry infills if the global ductility of the bare
frame, Section 3.1), whereas in the other variant there are
frame and the local ductilities of the structural elements are low,
openings for windows and doors in infills (the partially
if the masonry infills are weak and brittle, and if the ground
infilled frame, Section 3.1). A comparison has been made
motion is strong compared to the design strength [3].
with the behaviour of the bare frame. The partially infilled
Any method for the analysis or design of infilled frames
frame and the bare frame were pseudo-dynamically tested
should properly take into account the highly nonlinear
at full-scale in the ELSA laboratory in ISPRA [8]. In the
analyses, the masonry infill panels were modelled by means
Corresponding author. of two diagonal struts, which can only carry compression. The
E-mail address: mdolsek@ikpir.fgg.uni-lj.si (M. Dolsek). flexural behaviour of the beams and columns was modelled

c 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.


0141-0296/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.01.001
1992 M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001

by one-component lumped plasticity elements, consisting of


an elastic beam and two inelastic rotational hinges (defined
by a momentrotation relationship). The mathematical model
was validated by comparing the results of nonlinear dynamic
analyses with the experimental results. The OpenSees program
was used for all the analyses [9]. The seismic assessment
discussed and applied in this paper is deterministic. In the
companion paper [10] a probabilistic assessment is presented.

2. Summary of the N2 method


Fig. 1. The idealized forcedisplacement relationship for an infilled RC frame.
The N2 method [11], which was developed at the University
of Ljubljana and has been implemented in Eurocode 8 to the acceleration capacity Say (i.e. spectral acceleration
corresponding to the yield force, Eq. (3))
(EC8) [12], has been recently extended to infilled frames [13,7].
In this paper, the basic approach for planar building structures Sae
and its extension to infilled frames are briefly summarized. R= . (5)
Say
The N2 method combines pushover analysis of a multi-
degree-of-freedom (MDOF) model with the response spectrum Note that the reduction factors used in seismic codes (e.g. the
analysis of an equivalent single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) behaviour factor q used in Eurocode 8) take into account also
model. The lateral load distribution vector , employed in the reduction due to overstrength, and are thus not equivalent
pushover analysis, is related to the assumed displacement shape to the reduction factor R defined in Eq. (5). The relationships
vector ( n = 1, n denotes the roof level) by between the reduction factor R, the ductility , and the period T
(the RT relations) depend on the type of structural system,
= M (1) and are provided in the literature. The simplest relation is the
equal displacement rule, which is often used for ordinary
where M is the diagonal mass matrix. There are no fixed rules structures with periods in the medium- and long-period range.
for the choice of the displacement shape. Some guidelines In order to apply the N2 method to infilled RC frames, two
may be given in the regulatory documents. The base sheartop modifications need to be made to the basic (simple) version
displacement relationship obtained by pushover analysis has to of the method implemented in EC 8. Firstly, the pushover
be idealized, usually by a bilinear (elasto-plastic) idealization. curve has to be idealized as a multi-linear forcedisplacement
In this way the yield force Fy , and the yield displacement relation rather than a simple elasto-plastic one. A typical
D y , are determined. The transformation to an equivalent SDOF idealized forcedisplacement envelope corresponding to an
model is made by dividing the base shear and top displacement infilled RC frame is shown in Fig. 1. It can be divided into
of the MDOF model with a transformation factor which is four parts. The first, equivalent elastic part represents both
defined as the initial elastic behaviour and the behaviour after cracking
T M 1 m has occurred in both the frame and the infill. The second
= = (2) part, between points P1 and P2 , represents yielding. This
T M L
part is typically short, due to the low ductility of infilled
where 1 is the unity vector and m is the effective mass. The frames. In the third part, which is an important characteristic
elastic period of the idealized system is defined as of infilled structures, strength degradation of the infill governs
s the structural response until the point P3 is reached, where the
m Dy infill fails completely. After this point, only the frame resists
T = 2 . (3)
Fy the horizontal loads. Secondly, inelastic spectra have to be
determined by using specific reduction factors (i.e. the RT
The capacity curve, which can be plotted in the acceleration relation) appropriate for infilled frames, e.g. those proposed
displacement (AD) format and visually compared with demand in [13]. The structural parameters determining the reduction
spectra plotted in the same format, is determined from the factor, which are employed in addition to the parameters used
idealized forcedeformation curve of the equivalent SDOF in a usual, e.g. elasto-plastic system (i.e. the initial period
system by dividing the force by m . The relation between the and global ductility), are ductility at the beginning of strength
(spectral) acceleration and the yield force Fy of the MDOF degradation s = D2 /D1 (Fig. 1), and the reduction of
system is thus defined as strength after the failure of the infills ru = F3 /F1 (Fig. 1).
The reduction factor also depends on the corner periods of
Fy
Say = . (4) the elastic demand spectrum (TC and TD according to EC8).
m For illustration, the RT relations for a specific idealized
The reduction factor R due to energy dissipation capacity system representing an infilled frame, determined according
is defined as the ratio of the acceleration demand Sae in to [13], are presented in Fig. 2. Two plots are provided, one
terms of the elastic spectral acceleration for the period T , for a given ductility, and the other for a given reduction factor
M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001 1993

thickness of 12 cm, and 1.5 cm of plaster on both sides of


the infill. The mean strength obtained from the diagonal test
amounts to 0.575 MPa and the corresponding shear modulus
amounts to 1.171 GPa [15].
The masses amount to 46 t in the bottom storeys and 40 t in
the top storey, for both the bare and infilled frames, resulting in
a total mass of 178 t. The design base shear coefficient is 0.08.

3.2. Structural modelling

The N2 method is not limited to any specific mathematical


model. In the test examples, the most common mathematical
models were used. For the elements of the RC frame, one-
component lumped plasticity elements were used, consisting of
an elastic beam and two inelastic rotational hinges (defined by
a momentrotation relationship). The infills were modelled by
means of diagonal strut elements.
The momentrotation envelopes of the inelastic rotational
hinges are shown in Fig. 4. The yield and the maximum moment
were calculated by taking into account the axial forces due to
the vertical loading on the frame. The same vertical loading
was assumed for both the bare frame and the infilled frames. It
amounted to 9.1 and 8.0 kN/m2 for the bottom three stories,
and for the top storey, respectively. The potential reduction
Fig. 2. The RT relations for an infilled RC frame and for an elasto-plastic in strength (moment) due to insufficient anchorage length of
system without strength degradation.
the reinforcing bars was not considered when determining the
(strength). For comparison, the relations for an elasto-plastic momentrotation envelopes.
system without strength degradation are also shown. The characteristic rotations, which describe the
momentrotation envelope of a plastic hinge, were determined
3. Example structures and mathematical modelling according to the procedure described by [16]. The zero moment
point was assumed to be at the mid-span of the columns and
3.1. Description of the bare frame and infilled frames beams. The ultimate rotation u in the columns at the near col-
lapse (NC) limit state, which corresponds to a 20% reduction
The example structures are three variants of a four-storey in the maximum moment, was estimated by means of the Con-
plane RC frame. The bare frame was analysed, as well as the ditional Average Estimator (CAE) method [17]. For the beams,
fully and partially infilled frames. the EC8-3 [18] formulae were used, the parameter el being
The structures had been designed to reproduce the design assumed equal to 1.0. Due to the absence of seismic detail-
practice in European and Mediterranean countries about forty ing, the ultimate rotations were multiplied by a factor of 0.85.
to fifty years ago [8]. However, they may also be typical of Low values were adopted for the confinement effectiveness fac-
buildings built more recently, but without the application of tor, = 0.1, and for the ratio of the transverse reinforcement,
capacity design principles (especially the strong columnweak sx = 0.02. The calculated ultimate rotations varied from 31
beam concept), and without up-to-date detailing. milliradians to 34 milliradians for all the columns with the
The elevation, plan and typical reinforcement in the columns exception of column C, whose ultimate rotation varied from
are presented in Fig. 3. Three types of openings were 42 milliradians in the first storey to 57 milliradians in the top
constructed in the partially infilled frame: a door opening of storey. The calculated ultimate rotations in the beams vary from
2.0/1.75 m, and two types of window openings (2.0/1.0 m, 27 milliradians to 43 milliradians.
1.2/1.0 m). The infill panels were modelled by means of two diagonal
All the beams are 0.25 m wide and 0.50 m deep. The slabs struts which can carry loads only in compression. The diagonals
are 0.15 m thick. The reinforcement for the columns in the first were placed between the beamcolumn joints. The main
and second storeys is presented in Fig. 3. The reinforcement is problem, which is subject to large uncertainties, is how to
reduced in the top two stories in columns B and C. An effective determine the characteristics of these diagonals, i.e. their
slab width of 75 and 125 cm was considered [14] for the short forcedisplacement envelopes and their hysteretic behaviour.
and long beams, respectively. Additional problems arise because of the openings in the infills
The mean strength of the concrete amounts to 16 MPa and (Fig. 3).
the mean yield strength of the steel amounts to 343.4 MPa. Many different proposals have been made for the
The masonry infills consist of ceramic hollow bricks with a determination of the stiffness and strength of infill. In this
1994 M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001

Fig. 3. View, plan, and typical reinforcement of the columns of the example structures.

study the initial stiffness K i was calculated using the simple by the factor o . This approach does not distinguish between
procedure described in ECOEST-PREC 8 Report [19] window and door openings. In our model the strength of the
infill with the opening for the door was arbitrarily reduced
G w L in tw
Ki = , (6) by 50% in order to obtain a better correlation between
Hin the calculated and measured first-storey drift time histories,
where G w is the shear modulus of the wall, determined from especially in the near collapse range. The 50% reduction in the
the diagonal compression test, L in and Hin are the length and case of the door opening is larger than suggested by the results
height of the infill, respectively, and tw is the thickness of the of a recently published experimental study [23]. However, the
wall. configuration of the openings, and especially the frameinfill
For the determination of the strength of the infill a simplified connections, were different in this study.

form of the expression proposed by Zarni c and Gostic [20] was The forcedisplacement envelope of an infill is shown in
used Fig. 4. It was assumed that the ratio between the cracking force
L in tw f t p
 q  and the maximum force was 0.6, and that the maximum force
Fmax = 0.818 1 + CI + 1 ,
2
was reached at a storey drift of 0.2% for the short infill, 0.15%
CI
for the long infill with a window, and 0.1% for the infill with a
L in door. These values are lower than the drifts at maximum force
C I = 1.925 , (7)
Hin for comparable specimens tested by Colangelo [24]. However,
where f t p is the cracking strength of the infill, obtained from the they are in good agreement with the observed behaviour in
diagonal compression test. A very similar result was obtained the pseudo-dynamic test of the partially infilled frame, where
with the simple alternative expression for the determination of a first-storey drift of about 0.15% was observed at maximum
infill strength [19] force [8].
The strength degradation of the infill was modelled as shown
Fmax = 1.3 f t p L in tw . (8) in Fig. 4. A ratio of 5 between the displacement at collapse
The initial stiffness and strength of the infill according and that at maximum force was arbitrarily assumed. The
to Eqs. (6)(8) apply to the horizontal direction. For the forcedeformation envelopes of the diagonal struts, measured
forcedisplacement envelope of the diagonal strut these values in the horizontal direction, and determined according to the
have to be transformed to the direction of the diagonal. described procedure using the material characteristics and
The influence of an opening, i.e. a door or a window, was geometry of the infills as described in Section 3.1, are presented
taken into consideration by using the factor o , which was in Fig. 5.
introduced by Dawe and Seah [21], and has also been used in Due to the lack of data and uncertainties in the modelling, it
NZSEE [22] was necessary to arbitrarily assume several parameters for the
mathematical model (as described above). However, as shown
1.5L o in the next section, the model was able to simulate closely the
o = 1 > 0, (9)
L in experimental behaviour of the example structures, suggesting
where L o is the horizontal length of the opening. The strength that quite realistic values had been chosen at least for the most
and the initial stiffness of infill with an opening are reduced important parameters defining the mathematical model.
M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001 1995

The dynamic analyses were performed in a sequence, first


for a ground motion with a lower intensity and then for a higher
intensity ground motion. Zero damping was assumed, as in the
tests. Comparisons between the calculated and experimental
time histories are shown, for selected quantities (drifts in
critical storeys), in Fig. 7. Very good correlation between the
calculated and test results can be observed. The maximum-
storey drift in the bare frame occurred in the third storey due
to the strength reduction in column C in the top two stories
(Fig. 3). This drift amounted to 0.80% and 2.41% for the BF
475 and BF 975 tests, respectively. The corresponding drifts
obtained by analysis amount to 0.76% and 2.20%.
The deformation observed in the test of the partially infilled
frame was much smaller than that in the test of the bare frame
(Fig. 7). The maximum drift for the 975 year return period
Fig. 4. The momentrotation relationship for the plastic hinges in the columns earthquake was obtained in the first storey. It is more than
and beams, and the forcedisplacement relationship for the diagonal struts 4 times less than that measured in the third storey of the
representing the masonry infill. bare frame. Even in the case of the 2000 year return period
earthquake, the maximum-storey drift in the infilled frame is
still smaller than that in the bare frame in the case of the 975
year return period earthquake.
The storey shear versus storey drift relationships were also
determined, and compared with the test results for the bare
and partially infilled frames. Good correlation was observed
between the calculated and test results for all the tests. The
results for the two tests are shown in Fig. 8.

4. Simplified seismic assessment of example structures

4.1. General

In seismic assessment (or performance evaluation) seismic


Fig. 5. The forcedisplacement relationships of the diagonal struts (in demand is compared with capacity for different limit states
compression), measured in the horizontal direction. (performance levels). Capacities are usually provided in codes,
but mostly at the element rather than at the global level.
3.3. Validation of the mathematical model Discussion of seismic capacity is outside the scope of this
paper, so only the capacity used in the specific case of the
The mathematical model was validated by comparing the example structures will be explained. The requirements of
results of nonlinear dynamic analysis with the experimental EC8-3 [18] have been followed, where the limit states of
results obtained in pseudo-dynamic tests [8]. Different tests damage limitation (DL), of significant damage (SD), and of
were performed on the bare frame and partially infilled frame, near collapse (NC) are defined. For columns and beams in
which were then retrofitted and retested. The input excitations bending, the capacities for the three limit states are defined
were considered to be representative of a moderate to high by the yield rotation, by 75% of the ultimate rotation u , and
European seismic hazard scenario. The first tests of the bare by the ultimate rotation u , respectively. At the level of the
frame (BF 475) and of the partially infilled frame (PI structure, there is a lack of definition about the limit states
475), were thus performed for a peak ground acceleration of in codes. In this study, it was conservatively assumed that, in
0.22g, which corresponds to a 475 year return period of the the case of SD and NC limit states, the most critical column
earthquake. After the first test, additional tests were performed controls the state of the structure. Consequently, the limit states
on the bare frame (BF 975) and on the partially infilled frame of SD and NC are attained when the rotation at one hinge of
(PI 975) for the earthquake corresponding to a 975 year return any column exceeds 75% or 100% of the ultimate rotation,
period (0.29g). The strongest earthquake, with a return period respectively. For the bare frame it was assumed that the DL
of 2000 years (0.38g) was adopted for the last test on the limit state is attained at the yield displacement of the idealized
partially infilled frame (PI 2000). The elastic spectrum and pushover curve. In the case of infilled frames, the DL limit state
the accelerogram for the 475 year return period earthquake are is attained at the deformation when the last infill in a storey
presented in Fig. 6. The accelerograms for the 975 and 2000 starts to degrade. In the case of the infilled frames used in the
year return period were obtained by scaling the accelerogram example, this state approximately corresponds to the maximum
presented in Fig. 6. strength of the structure.
1996 M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001

Fig. 6. The elastic spectrum and ground acceleration for the 475 year return period earthquake.

Fig. 7. Calculated and experimental time-histories for the third-storey drift of the bare frame, and for the first-storey drift of the partially infilled frame.

Fig. 8. Calculated and experimental storey shear versus storey drift relationships for the bare frame (third storey), and for the partially infilled frame (first storey).

Taking into account the test results, it was assumed that spectrum applies to all return periods. Taking into account EC8-
bending controls the structural behaviour of the columns and 3, the demand was represented by ground motions with return
beams, and that shear failures do not occur. This assumption periods of 225, 475, and 2475 years, for the DL, SD, and
cannot, however, be generalized. In fact, shear failure of NC limit states, respectively. In Fig. 9 the elastic acceleration
columns often occurs in RC frames that have not been designed spectra for both locations, for a 2475 year return period, are
according to modern codes. In general, this failure mode needs presented. The peak ground accelerations for all return periods
to be checked.
used in this assessment are summarized in Table 1. Note that
Seismic assessment was performed for two different
in Fig. 9 the periods of the idealized systems representing the
locations of the structures. In the first case the structures were
bare frame (T = 0.83 s), partially infilled frame (T = 0.22 s)
located in a moderate seismic hazard region (MH) in Slovenia.
and the fully infilled frame (T = 0.17 s) are indicated. It can
The second location was a high seismic hazard region (HH)
in southern Italy [25]. An elastic spectrum according to the be seen that the spectral acceleration, which corresponds to the
standard EC 8 [12] for ground type A was chosen. For the bare frame, is only about half of the spectral acceleration, which
sake of simplicity, it was assumed that the same shape of the corresponds to the infilled frames.
M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001 1997

Fig. 9. Elastic acceleration spectra for two locations, for a 2475 year return
period. The natural periods of idealized systems representing the fully infilled
frame (FI), the partially infilled frame (PI), and the bare frame (BF) are
indicated.

Table 1
The peak ground accelerations, ag,YRP , for different return periods, for the
moderate (MH) and high hazard (HH) locations

ag,225 (g) ag,475 (g) ag,2475 (g)


MH 0.13 0.18 0.32
HH 0.30 0.40 0.67

4.2. Capacity

The capacities of the test structures were determined by


pushover analysis. The lateral loads for the pushover analyses
were determined based on the first mode shapes, for which
the effective mass is equal to about 80% of the total mass
for all three structures. The distribution of the lateral forces is
practically the same for the bare and the infilled frames.
The pushover curves are presented in Fig. 10. It can be
seen that the presence of masonry infill substantially increases
the stiffness and strength of the frame. The maximum base
shear versus weight ratio of the partially (0.43) and fully
infilled frame (0.73) is much larger than that for the bare
frame (0.13). In the case of the partially and fully infilled
frame, the maximum force is reached at a relatively small top
displacement, which is equal to 1.5 cm and 1.6 cm, respectively.
With a further increase in displacement the masonry infill starts
Fig. 10. The computed and idealized pushover curves for the bare frame and
to degrade. A substantial reduction in strength occurs after the for both infilled frames at two locations, with indicated capacities for three limit
infill has completely collapsed in the first storey (Fig. 10). This states and demand for moderate (MH) and high hazard (HH).
reduction amounts to 57% and 77% of the maximum strength
for the partially and fully infilled frames, respectively. bare frame at the NC and SD limit states is very different from
The top displacements and storey drifts corresponding to that in the infilled frames. For all three structures, a storey
the defined limit states were obtained by post-processing of mechanism occurs. However, in the bare frame, it is formed
the results of the pushover analyses. The top displacements in the third storey (Fig. 11) due to a change in the cross-section
corresponding to the different limit states are shown in Fig. 10. of the strong column C in this storey (Fig. 4). In the case of
The top displacement and the global drift ratio (i.e. the ratio infilled frames, a storey mechanism occurs in the first storey
between the top displacement and the height) at the NC due to brittle collapse of infills in this storey. The storey drifts at
limit state are much smaller for the infilled frames than the the NC limit state of the infilled frames amount to about 3.05%,
corresponding values for the bare frame, due to an extreme 0.20%, 0.10%, and 0.05% for the stories from the bottom to
concentration of damage in the first storey of the infilled frames, the top, respectively (Fig. 11). At this stage all infills have
The values amount to 8.1 cm and 0.76% for the infilled frames, completely collapsed in the first storey, some of them began
compared to 12.1 cm and 1.14% for the bare frame. The storey to degrade in the second storey, while in the top two stories
drifts (Fig. 11) indicate that the distribution of damage in the the infills remain in the elastic range or exceed the cracking
1998 M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001

Table 2
Characteristics of the idealized systems: the yield point (Fy and D y ), the NC
point (FN C and D N C ), the effective mass m , the transformation factor ,
the period of the equivalent SDOF system T , and the maximum base shear to
weight ratio Fy /W , for bare, partially infilled, and fully infilled frame

Parameter Bare frame Partially infilled frame Fully infilled frame


Fy (kN) 220 745 1277
D y (cm) 3.4 0.81 0.87
FN C (kN) 196 257 257
D N C (cm) 12.1 8.1 8.1
m (t) 112.5 111.2 109.6
T (s) 0.83 0.22 0.17
1.29 1.32 1.34
Fy /W 0.126 0.427 0.731
Say (g) 0.155 0.513 0.890

Fig. 11. The storey drifts for the bare, partially infilled, and fully infilled frame capacity curve of the equivalent idealized SDOF system, the
at the DL, SD, and NC limit states. demand spectra, and their interrelations, can be visualized in the
point. Similar plastic mechanisms had been observed also in accelerationdisplacement (AD) format. In Fig. 12 the capacity
the pseudo-dynamic tests of the bare and partially infilled curves for all three structures, and the elastic demand spectra for
frame [8]. the 2475 year return period for the two locations, are plotted.
For the infilled frames, the DL limit state is controlled The procedure is as follows. First, the elastic displacement of
by the behaviour of the infills. Taking into account the the idealized SDOF system, i.e. the displacement of a structure
defined forcedisplacement envelopes for the diagonal struts with the same period as the idealized system but with unlimited
representing the masonry infill (Fig. 4), all the infills in the strength, is determined. It is defined by the intersection of the
first storey are at the degradation stage at a 0.20% storey drift radial line representing the elastic period of the structure and
for both infilled frames, whereas they have all collapsed at a the elastic spectrum. This intersection also defines the spectral
1.0% storey drift. At this stage, a storey plastic mechanism acceleration of a structure with unlimited elastic behaviour.
has been already formed in the first storey. A much larger drift The reduction factor due to ductility, R, is defined as the
corresponds to the DL limit state in the case of the bare frame ratio between this acceleration and the acceleration at the yield
(0.43%). At this drift some columns and beams have already point of the idealized system Eq. (5). Knowing the period
deformed beyond the yield point. T and the reduction factor R, the ductility demand can
For further analyses idealized pushover curves are needed. be determined from the RT relation, which is specific
They are shown in Fig. 10. The elastic stiffnesses were for the investigated structural system (EC8 or [11] for the
determined based on the equal energy concept for the part bare frame, and [7] for the infilled frames). The complete
of the curve before the capping point. The pushover curves inelastic spectrum can be determined, if needed. The inelastic
of the infilled frames were idealized with a four-linear spectra corresponding to the elastic demand spectra and the
forcedisplacement relationship, as shown in Fig. 10 and ductility demands of the three structures are plotted in Fig. 12.
explained in Section 2. The parameter s amounts to 1.82 Knowing the ductility demand the displacement demand can
and 1.80, and the parameter ru amounts to 0.39 and 0.23 for be easily determined. Demand (performance) points defining
the partially and fully infilled frame, respectively. For the bare the displacement demand of the idealized SDOF system are
frame, a bilinear idealization was made. The values defining indicated in Fig. 12. In the case of the bare frame, which is
the idealized relationships are summarized in Table 2, together idealized by means of an ideal elasto-plastic capacity diagram,
with some other characteristics of the idealized systems: the NC the demand (performance) point is defined as the intersection of
point (D N C , FN C ), the effective mass m , the transformation the capacity diagram and the inelastic demand spectrum for the
factor , the period of the equivalent SDOF system T , and the relevant ductility. For the infilled frames, which are idealized by
maximum base shear versus weight ratio Fy /W . a four-linear capacity diagram, an extension of the horizontal
yield plateau of the capacity diagram should be used, instead
4.3. Demand of the capacity diagram itself, for the determination of the
demand point. The seismic demands in terms of displacements,
Demand was determined for each structure for ground transformed to actual MDOF systems, are indicated in Fig. 10
motions with return periods of 225, 475, and 2475 years, for the three return periods, and for all three example structures.
corresponding to the DL, SD and NC limit states, according The problem can be also reversed. Given the capacity in
to EC8-3. The peak ground accelerations at the two considered terms of drift, it is possible to determine the ground motion
locations (moderate and high seismic hazard) are summarized intensity which would produce a seismic demand equal to
in Table 1. For the bare frame, the original N2 method, a capacity. In such a case, one starts from the displacement
as implemented in EC8, was used. For the infilled frames, demand which is equal to a specified capacity. First the
the extended N2 method [7] was applied. In both cases, the ductility demand and the corresponding reduction factor are
M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001 1999

Table 3
Elastic spectral acceleration Sae,L S and peak ground acceleration ag,L S for the
DL, SD, and NC limit states
LS Bare Partially infilled Fully infilled frame
frame frame
DL 0.16 0.67 1.07
Sae,L S SD 0.47 1.19 1.38
NC 0.54 1.37 1.48
DL 0.13 0.27 0.43
ag,L S SD 0.39 0.48 0.55
NC 0.45 0.55 0.59

reduction factor R = 2.68 with the spectral acceleration at the


yielding of the equivalent SDOF system Say = (Fy / )/m =
(745 kN/1.32)/(112 t) = 5.0 m/s2 = 0.51g. Similarly,
Sae,N C = 1.48g is obtained for the fully infilled frame. At
the location with the moderate hazard, the idealized structure
representing the fully infilled frame remains in the elastic region
(Fig. 12).
In the case of the bare frame, the basic N2 method [11]
has been used. As the period of the idealized system (0.83
s) is larger than the corner period TC = 0.4 s in the elastic
acceleration spectrum, the equal displacement rule applies. The
displacement at the NC limit state amounts to D N C = 12.1 cm
(Table 2), and the spectral displacement of the equivalent SDOF
system is obtained as Sd,N C = D N C / = 12.1/1.29 =
9.4 cm. Using the equal displacement rule, the elastic spectral
acceleration corresponding to the NC limit state is calculated as
Sae,N C = 4 2 Sd,N C /T 2 = 0.54g.
The same procedure was also applied to other selected
limit states. The results are presented in Table 3. The spectral
accelerations Sae,L S determined for the infilled frames greatly
exceed those for the bare frame. However, the spectral
accelerations for the bare frame and the infilled frames are
not directly comparable, since the periods of the compared
structural systems are very different. The corresponding peak
ground accelerations ag,L S , are therefore also presented. They
were determined by dividing the Sae,L S values by the ratio
Sae (T )/ag obtained from the spectral shape (Fig. 8). This ratio
amounts to 2.5 and 1.2 for the infilled frames and the bare
frame, respectively. The peak ground accelerations at the NC
limit state, ag,N C , amount to 0.45, 0.55 and 0.59g for the
Fig. 12. Demand spectra and capacity curves for idealized SDOF systems in bare, partially infilled and fully infilled frames, respectively,
AD format. The demand is presented for the NC limit state and for a ground
motion corresponding to a 2475 year return period for both locations.
indicating that the infilled frames can survive stronger ground
motions than the bare frame. The difference between the infilled
frames and the bare frame is much larger at the DL limit state.
determined. Knowing the reduction factor and the elastic period Of the two infilled frames, the fully infilled frame can, as
of the idealized structure, the spectral acceleration and the expected, better accommodate stronger ground motions at all
corresponding ground motion intensity can be determined, in limit states, especially at the DL limit state. It should be noted,
terms of the peak ground acceleration, for a structure with however, that the results at the DL limit state strongly depend on
unlimited elastic behaviour. For example, in the case of the NC somewhat arbitrary assumptions concerning the characteristics
limit state of the partially infilled frame, the ductility demand of the diagonal struts representing the infill.
amounts to (see Table 2) N C = D N C /D y = 8.1/0.81 = 10.0.
The reduction factor R is calculated using the formulae for 4.4. Assessment
the specific inelastic spectra for the infilled frames [7], and
amounts to 2.68. The elastic spectral acceleration Sae,N C = Seismic assessment can be performed by comparing demand
1.37g corresponding to the NC limit state is then obtained and capacity. A comparison in terms of top displacements is
from the definition of the reduction factor by multiplying the presented in Fig. 10. For all three structures, the deformation
2000 M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001

capacity at the NC limit state is large enough to accommodate the mathematical model. Simple modelling with equivalent
the demand for the 2475 years ground motion at the moderate diagonal struts, which carry loads only in compression, is able
hazard location. However, in the case of the 2475 years to simulate the global seismic response of the infilled frames,
ground motion at the high hazard location, demand exceeds and is suitable for practical applications.
capacity for all three structures, indicating their failure. When The test examples indicate that the infills can completely
comparing the demand for the 225 years ground motion change the distribution of damage throughout the structure, and
with the deformation capacity at the DL limit state, different that a first-storey mechanism may occur even if the infills are
observations were made. The behaviour of the fully infilled regularly distributed throughout the structure. Nevertheless, the
frame is the most favourable. For this structure, the demand influence of infills on the seismic response of the investigated
at both locations is smaller than the DL capacity not only for structures is beneficial, both at the damage limitation and near
the 225 years ground motion, but also for all other investigated collapse limit states. This conclusion could apply to many
ground motions, with the exception of the 2475 ground motion infilled frame structures, provided that the distribution of the
at the high hazard location. On the other hand, a comparison infills does not cause an irregularity in elevation or plan.
of demand and capacity for the partially infilled and bare frame Furthermore, shear failures due to local shear effects in columns
indicates that the demand for the 225 years ground motion is should be prevented.
larger than the capacity at the high hazard location, whereas
at the moderate hazard location the assessment criterium is Acknowledgements
fulfilled. In the latter case, the demand is much smaller
than the capacity for the partially infilled frame, whereas The results presented in this paper are based on the
demand and capacity are approximately equal for the bare work supported by the Slovenian Research Agency and by
frame. The capacity at the SD limit state, based on the EC8- the European Commission within the 6th Framework project
3 rule, is adequate in all cases (if a very minor difference LESSLOSS (505448-GOCE).
in the case of the partially infilled frame at the high hazard
References
location is neglected). These results and similar observations
made in studies of several other test structures indicate that a [1] Fardis MN. Seismic design issues for masonry-infilled RC frames. In:
combination of the EC8-3 definition of the SD limit state at the Proceedings of the first European conference on earthquake engineering
element level and the corresponding return period for demand and seismology. 2006. Paper 313.
is too optimistic, and practically eliminates the SD limit state as [2] Negro P, Colombo A. Irregularities induced by nonstructural masonry
panels in framed buildings. Engineering Structures 1997;19:57685.
a potentially significant limit state.
[3] Dolsek M, Fajfar P. Soft storey effects in uniformly infilled reinforced
The results suggest that infill may significantly reduce concrete frames. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2001;5:112.
damage, but only up to a certain intensity of ground motion. [4] Kaushik HB, Rai DC, Jain SK. Code approaches to seismic design of
If the contribution of the infill to the strength of the structure masonry-infilled reinforced concrete frames: A state of the art review.
is very large, and a very significant drop of strength occurs Earthquake Spectra 2006;22:96183.
[5] Moghaddam HA, Dowling PJ. The state of the art in infilled frames. ECEE
after the failure of the infill, as in the case of the investigated research report no. 87-2. London: Civil Engineering Department, Imperial
fully infilled frame, a small increase in the ground motion College of Science and Technology; 1987.
intensity above a threshold level can cause extensive damage to [6] Crisafulli FJ, Carr AJ, Park R. Analytical modelling of infilled frames
the structure. This phenomenon can be observed in the case of structures a general review. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for
the fully infilled frame at the high hazard location. The ground Earthquake Engineering 2000;33:3047.
[7] Dolsek M, Fajfar P. Simplified non-linear seismic analysis of infilled
motion with the 475 year return period causes only some reinforced concrete frames. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
cracking of the infills, whereas the structure fails if subjected Dynamics 2005;34:4966.
to a 2475 year return period ground motion. [8] Carvalho EC, Coelho E, editors. Seismic assessment, strengthening
Assessment of the structures can also be made by comparing and repair of structures. ECOEST2-ICONS report no. 2, European
the peak ground accelerations in Table 1, i.e. the values related Commission Training and Mobility of Researchers Programme; 2001.
[9] PEER. Open system for earthquake engineering simulation (OpenSees).
to the return periods corresponding to different limit states, with Version 1.6.2. Berkeley: Pacific Earthquake Eng. Research Center, Univ.
the peak ground accelerations in Table 3, i.e. the values which of California; 2005. http://opensees.berkeley.edu/.
the structures can accommodate when attaining different limit [10] Dolsek M, Fajfar P. The effect of masonry infills on the seismic response
states. As expected, the same conclusions can be drawn as in of a four storey reinforced concrete frame a probabilistic approach.
Engineering Structures; 2007 [submitted for publication].
the case of the comparisons in terms of displacements.
[11] Fajfar P. A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic
design. Earthquake Spectra 2000;16:57392.
5. Conclusions [12] CEN. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1:
General rules, seismic action and rules for buildings. Brussels; 2004.
The results of the study demonstrate that masonry infill [13] Dolsek M, Fajfar P. Inelastic spectra for infilled reinforced concrete
highly increases the stiffness and strength of a structure as frames. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2004;33:
1395416.
long as the seismic demand does not exceed the deformation [14] CEN. Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1: General rules
capacity of the infills. After that, both the global stiffness and rules for buildings. EN1992-1-1. Brussels; 2004.
and the global strength strongly deteriorate. In order to [15] Coelho E. Full-scale test on RC frame within topic 2 of ICONS. In: The
obtain realistic results, the infills should be included in materials characteristics. LNEC, May 1999.
M. Dolsek, P. Fajfar / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 19912001 2001

[16] Fajfar P, Dolsek M, Marusic D, Stratan A. Pre- and post-test mathematical [21] Dawe JL, Seah CK. Lateral load resistance of masonry panels in flexible
modelling of a plan-asymmetric reinforced concrete frame building. steel frames. In: Proceedings of the eighth international brick and block
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006;35:135979. masonry conference. Trinity College; 1988.
[17] Perus I, Poljansek K, Fajfar P. Flexural deformation capacity of [22] NZSEE. Assessment and improvement of the structural performance of
rectangular RC columns determined by the CAE method. Earthquake buildings in earthquakes. Study Group Draft. New Zealand Society for
Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006;35:145370. Earthquake Engineering; 2005.
[18] CEN. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 3: [23] Anil O, Altin S. An experimental study on reinforced concrete partially
Assessment and retrofitting of buildings. Brussels; 2005. infilled frames. Engineering Structures 2007;29:44960.
[19] Fardis MN, editor. Experimental and numerical investigations on the [24] Colangelo F. Pseudo-dynamic seismic response of reinforced concrete
seismic response of RC infilled frames and recommendations for code frames infilled with non-structural brick masonry. Earthquake engineering
provisions. ECOEST/PREC 8, Rep. No. 6. LNEC. Lisbon; 1996. and structural dynamics 2005;34:121941.

[20] Zarnic R, Gostic S. Masonry infilled frames as an effective structural sub- [25] LESSLOSS. Deliverable 78 Applications of probabilistic seismic
assemblage. In: Fajfar, Krawinkler, editors. Seismic design methodologies assessment methods to selected case studies. LESSLOSS Sub-Project 9
for the next generation of codes. Rotterdam: Balkema; 1997. p. 33546. Probabilistic risk assessment: methods and applications; 2006.

Potrebbero piacerti anche