Seismic performance of gravity-load designed concrete frames infilled with low-strength masonry

  • Siddiqui, Umair A. (Department of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University) ;
  • Sucuoglu, Haluk (Department of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University) ;
  • Yakut, Ahmet (Department of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University)
  • Received : 2013.11.05
  • Accepted : 2014.07.07
  • Published : 2015.01.25


This study compares the seismic performances of two reinforced concrete frame specimens tested by the pseudo-dynamic procedure. The pair of 3-storey, 3-bay frames specimens are constructed with typical characteristics of older construction which is lacking seismic design. One of the specimens is a bare frame while the other is infilled with low-strength autoclave aerated concrete (AAC) block masonry. The focus of this study is to investigate the influence of low strength masonry infill walls on the seismic response of older RC frames designed for gravity loads. It is found that the presence of weak infill walls considerably reduce deformations and damage in the upper stories while their influence at the critical ground story is not all that positive. Infill walls tend to localize damage at the critical story due to a peculiar frame-infill interaction, and impose larger internal force and deformation demands on the columns and beams bounding the infills. Therefore the general belief in earthquake engineering that infills develop a second line of defence against lateral forces in seismically deficient frames is nullified in case of low-strength infill walls in the presented experimental research.


gravity-load design;infilled frames;low-strength infills;AAC;pseudo-dynamic testing;performance evaluation


Supported by : Turkish Scientific and Technological Research Council (TUBITAK)


  1. Al-Chaar, G., Issa, M. and Sweeney, S. (2002), "Behaviour of masonry-infilled non-ductile reinforced concrete frames", J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE), 128(8), 1055-1063.
  2. American Society of Civil Engineers (2006), "Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings", ASCE/SEI 41, Reston, Virginia.
  3. Bertero, V. and Brokken, S. (1983), "Infills in seismic resistant building", J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE), 109(6), 1337-1361.
  4. Buonopane, S.G. and White, R.N. (1999), "Pseudo-dynamic testing of masonry infilled reinforced concrete frame", J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE), 125(6), 578-589.
  5. Crisafulli, F.J., Carr, A.J. and Park, R. (2000), "Analytical modelling of infilled frame structures-A general review", Bull. New Zealand Soc. Earthq. Eng., 33(1).
  6. Comite Europeen de Normalisation, "European standard EN 1998-3 Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance-Part1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings," Brussels, 2004.
  7. Fardis, M.N. and Panagiotakos, T.B. (1997), "Seismic design and response of bare and masonry-infilled reinforced concrete buildings, Part II: Infilled structures", J. Earthq. Eng., 1(3), 475-503.
  8. Fiore, A., Netti, A. and Monaco, P. (2012), "The influence of masonry infill on the seismic behaviour of RC frame buildings", Eng. Struct., 42, 133-145.
  9. Karsan, I.D. and Jirsa, J.O. (1969), "Behaviour of concrete under compressive loading", J. Struct. Div. (ASCE), 95, ST 12, 2543-2563.
  10. Kent, D. C., and Park R. (1971), "Flexural members with confined concrete", J. Struct. Div. (ASCE), 97, ST 7, 1969-1990.
  11. Klingner, R.E. and Bertero, V.V. (1978), "Earthquake resistance of infilled frames", J. Struct. Div. (ASCE), 104(6), 973-989.
  12. Lee, H.S. and Woo, S.W. (2002), "Effect of masonry infills on seismic performance of a 3-storey RC frame with non-seismic detailing", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. (EESD), 31(2), 353-378.
  13. Madan, A., Reinhorn, A.M., Mander, J.B. and Valles, R.E. (1997), "Modelling of masonry infill panels for structural analysis", J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE), 123(10), 1295-1302.
  14. Magenes, G. and Pampanin, S. (2004), "Seismic response of gravity-load designed frames with masonry infills", The 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada.
  15. Mahin, S.A. and Shing, P.B. (1985), "Pseudo-dynamic method for seismic testing", J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE), 111(7), 1482-1503.
  16. Mehrabi, A.B., Shing, P.B., Schuller, M.P. and Noland, J.L. (1996), "Experimental evaluation of masonry-infilled RC frames", J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE), 122(3), 228-237.
  17. Mosalam, K.M.A., White, R.N. and Ayala, G. (1998), "Response of infilled frames using pseudo-dynamic experimentation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 27(6), 589-608.<589::AID-EQE744>3.0.CO;2-K
  18. Polyakov, S.V., "On the interaction between masonry filler walls and enclosing frame when loaded in the plane of the wall," Earthquake Engineering, EERI: 1960, San Francisco, 36-42.
  19. Pujol, S. and Fich, D. (1979), "The test of a full-scale three-story RC structure with masonry infill walls", Eng. Struct., 32(10), 3112-3121.
  20. Stafford Smith, B. (1966), "Behaviour of square infilled frames", J. Struct. Div. (ASCE), 92(1), 381-403.
  21. Stafford Smith, B. and Carter, C. (1969), "A method of analysis for infilled frames", Inst. Civil Eng., 44.
  22. Stafford Smith, B. (1967), "Methods of predicting the lateral stiffness and strength of Multi-storey infilled frames", Build. Sci., 2, 247-257.
  23. Uva, G., Raffaele, D., Porco, F. and Fiore, A. (2012), "On the role of equivalent strut models in the seismic assessment of infilled RC buildings", Eng. Struct., 42, 83-94.

Cited by

  1. Effect of Infills on Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frame structures—A Full-Scale Experimental Study 2017,
  2. Seismic performance of RC buildings subjected to past earthquakes in Turkey vol.11, pp.3, 2016,