Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment of infill wall topology contribution in the overall response of frame structures under seismic excitation

  • Nanos, N. (School of Civil Engineering & Surveying, University of Portsmouth) ;
  • Elenas, A. (Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Structural Mechanics and Earthquake Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace)
  • Received : 2012.08.07
  • Accepted : 2014.11.22
  • Published : 2015.01.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper identifies the effects of infill wall existence and arrangement in the seismic response of steel frame structures. The methodology followed was based on the utilisation of overall seismic response indicators that distil the complexity of structural response in a single value hence enabling their straightforward comparative and statistical post process. The overall structure damage index after Park/Ang ($OSDI_{PA}$) and the maximum inter-story drift ratio (MISDR) have been selected as widely utilized structural seismic response parameters in contemporary state of art. In this respect a set of 225 Greek antiseismic code (EAK) spectrum compatible artificial accelerograms have been created and a series of non-linear dynamic analyses have been executed. Data were obtained through nonlinear dynamic analyses carried on an indicative steel frame structure with 5 different infill wall topologies. Results indicated the significant overall contribution of infill walls with a reduction that ranged 35-47% of the maximum and 74-81% of the average recorded $OSDI_{PA}$ values followed by an overall reduction of 64-67% and 58-61% for the respective maximum and average recorded MISDR values demonstrating the relative benefits of infill walls presence overall as well as localised with similar reductions observed in 1st level damage indicators.

Keywords

References

  1. Albanesi, S., Albanesi, T. and Carboni, F. (2004), "The influence of infill walls in RC frame seismic response", High Performance Structures and Materials II, Eds. Brebbia, C.A. and De Wilde W.P., WIT Press, 621-630.
  2. ATC 33 (1997), "NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings", Federal Emergency Management Agency Report FEMA 273, Washington, DC.
  3. Bruneau, M. and Bhagwagar, T. (2002), "Seismic retrofit of flexible steel frames using thin infill panels", Eng. Struct., 24(4), 443-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00111-0
  4. CEN (1993), "EN 1993: Eurocode 3 - Design of steel structures", European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.
  5. CEN (2004), "EN 1998: Eurocode 8 - Earthquake resistance design of structures", European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.
  6. D'Ayala, D., Worth, J. and Riddle, O. (2009), "Realistic shear capacity assessment of infill frames: comparison of two numerical procedures", Eng. Struct., 31(8), 1745-1761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.02.044
  7. Di Sarno, L. and Elnashai, A.S. (2009), "Bracing systems for seismic retrofitting of steel frames", J. Constr. Steel Res., 65(2), 452-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.02.013
  8. Gelfi, P. (2006), "SIMQKE-GR - Software for generating artificial accelerograms compatible with the response spectrum", University of Brescia, Italy
  9. Gunturi, S.K.V. and Shah, H.C. (1992), "Building specific damage estimation", Proceedings of the 10th WCEE '92, Madrid, Spain, 6001-6006.
  10. Madan, A., Reinhorn, A.M., Mander, J.B. and Valles, R.E. (1997), "Modeling of masonry infill panels for structural analysis", J. Struct. Eng., 123(10), 1295-1302. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1997)123:10(1295)
  11. Mohebkhah, A., Tasnimi, A. and Moghadam, H.A. (2008), "Nonlinear analysis of masonry-infilled steel frames with openings using discrete element method", J. Constr. Steel Res., 64(12), 1463-1472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.01.016
  12. Mondal, G. and Jain, S.K. (2008), "Lateral stiffness of masonry infilled reinforced concrete (RC) frames with central opening", Earthq. Spectra, 24(3), 701-723. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2942376
  13. OASP (2003), Greek antiseismic code, Greek Ministry of Environment and public works, Athens, Greece (In Greek).
  14. Park, Y.J. and Ang, A.H.S. (1985), "Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete", J. Struct. Eng. ASCE, 111(4), 722-739. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:4(722)
  15. Paulay, T. and Priestley, M.J.N. (1992), Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings, John Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken, NJ.
  16. Reinhorn, A.M., Roh, H., Sivaslvan, M., Kunnath, S.K., Valles, R.E., Madan, A., Li, C., Lobo, R. and Park, Y.J. (2009), IDARC 2D Version 7.0: A program for the inelastic damage analysis of structures, Technical Report MCEER-09-0006, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY.
  17. Sun, G., He, R., Qiang, G. and Fang, Y. (2011), "Cyclic behavior of partially-restrained steel frame with RC infill walls", J. Constr. Steel Res., 67(12), 1821-1834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2011.06.002
  18. Tasnimi, A.A. and Mohebkhah, A. (2011), "Investigation on the behavior of brick-infilled steel frames with openings, experimental and analytical approaches", Eng. Struct., 33(3), 968-980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.12.018
  19. Zarnic, R. and Gostic, S. (1997), "Masonry infilled frames as an effective structural subassemblage", Proceedings of the International Workshop on Seismic Design Methodologies for the next generation of codes '97, Bled, Slovenia, A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 335-346

Cited by

  1. Insights from existing earthquake loss assessment research in Croatia vol.13, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2017.13.4.365