Reinforced concrete (RC) frame
structures with masonry infill are a popular form of
construction in many earthquake-prone regions all
over the world. Throughout the Balkans, but
especially in Serbia, there is a substantial number
of school buildings with this structural system,
which are located in high seismic hazard areas.
Although infill walls are considered non-structural
elements and are usually neglected in the design
process, field observations after past earthquakes
have shown that they interact with the structural
system and experience severe damage or total
collapse when subjected to seismic loads.
This paper presents the results of comparative
numerical analyses on three models, i.e. bare
frame model (model 1) and bare frame models with
traditional and decoupled masonry infill (models 2
and 3). First, a modal response spectrum analysis
was performed on the elastic model, followed by
non-linear "Pushover" and "Time history"
analyses. The most common damage
configurations caused by the irregular distribution
of infill walls, such as the “short” column effect
and the "soft-storey” mechanism, were avoided
using the INODIS system that decouples masonry
infills from the surrounding frame. The main aim of
this paper is to investigate the effect of decoupling
masonry infill using the INODIS system and then
compare with the results of the bare frame and
traditionally infilled frame models. The results of
nonlinear analyses show that the model's
behaviour with isolated infill walls is similar to the
bare frame model. In contrast, the behaviour of the
model with traditional infill is significantly different
and requires a complex numerical model. The
practically negligible difference in the behaviour of
models 1 and 3 led us to conclude that there is a
large potential for using the bare frame model in
the design of RC frame buildings with masonry
infill with the proper use of the INODIS system.
Index Terms: Earthquake, Pushover, Time
history, Traditional masonry infill, Decoupled
masonry infill
Earthquake, Pushover, Time
history, Traditional masonry infill, Decoupled
masonry infill
1. Blagojević, P., Brzev, S., Cvetković, R., “Simplified
Seismic Assessment of Unreinforced Masonry
Residential Buildings in the Balkans: The Case of
Serbia,“ Buildings, vol. 11, n.9, pp. 392. 2021.
2. Marinković, M., “Innovative system for seismic resistant
masonry infills in reinforced concrete frame structures,“
Doctoral dissertation, University of Belgrade, Faculty of
Civil engineering, 2018.
3. Brzev, S., Mitra, K., “Earthquake-resistant confined
masonry construction,“ National information centre of
earthquake engineering, Kanpur, India, 2018.
4. Varum, H., Furtado, A., Rodrigues, H., Dias-Oliveira, J.,
Vila-Pouca, N., Arêde, A., “Seismic performance of the
infill masonry walls and ambient vibration tests after the
Ghorka 2015, Nepal earthquake,” Bulletin of Earthquake
Engineering, vol.15, n.3, pp. 1185-1212. 2017.
5. Tasligedik, A. S., Pampanin, S., “Rocking Cantilever
Clay Brick Infill Wall Panels: A Novel Low Damage Infill
Wall System,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering,
vol.21, n.7, pp.1023-1049. 2016.
6. Dolšek, M., Fajfar, P., “Soft storey effects in uniformly
infilled reinforced concrete frames,” Journal of
Earthquake Engineering, vol. 5, n.1, pp 1–12. 2001.
7. Korkmaz, K. A., Demir, F., Sivri, M., “Earthquake
assessment of r/c structures with masonry infill walls,”
International Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 2,
n.2, pp. 155–164. 2007.
8. Magenes, G., Pampanin, S., “Seismic response of
gravity-load design frames with masonry infills,”
Proceeedings of the 13th 13th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada,
August 1-6. 2004.
9. Sezen H., Whittaker A.S., Elwood K.J., Mosalam K.M,
“Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the
August 17, 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey earthquake, and
seismic design and construction practise in Turkey,”
Engineering Structures, vol.25, n.1, pp. 103–114. 2003.
10. Braga, F., Manfredi, V., Masi, A., Salvatori, A., Vona, M.,
“Performance of non-structural elements in RC buildings
during the L‘Aquila, 2009 earthquake,” Bulletin of
Earthquake Engineering, vol.9, n.1, pp. 307-324. 2011.
...