| dc.description.abstract | Reinforced concrete frames, infilled with brick/concrete block masonry, are the most common type of structures found in multi-storeyed constructions, especially in developing countries. Usually, the infill walls are considered as non-structural elements even though they alter the lateral stiffness and strength of the frame significantly. Approximately 80% of the structural cost from earthquakes is attributable to damage of infill walls and to consequent damages of doors, windows and other installations. Despite the broad application and economical significance, the infill walls are not included in the analysis because of the design complexity and lack of suitable theory. But in seismic areas, ignoring the infill-frame interaction is not safe because the change in the stiffness and the consequent change in seismic demand of the composite structural system is not negligible. The relevant experimental findings shows a considerable reduction in the response of infilled frames under reverse cyclic loading. This behaviour is caused by the rapid degradation of stiffness, strength, and low energy dissipation capacity resulting from the brittle and sudden damage of the unreinforced masonry infill walls. Though various national/international codes of practice have incorporated some of the research outcomes as design guidelines, there is a need and scope for further refinement.
In the initial part of this work, a numerical modelling and linear elastic analysis of masonry infilled RC frames has been done. A multi-storey multi-bay frame infilled with masonry panels, is considered for the study. Both macro modelling and micro modelling strategies are adopted. Seismic loading is considered and an equivalent static analysis as suggested in IS 1893, 2002 is done. The results show that the stiffness of the composite structure is increased due to the obvious confinement effects of infill panels on the bounding frame. A parametric study is conducted to investigate the influence of size and location of openings, presence/absence of infill panels in a particular storey and elevation irregularity in terms of floor height. The results show that the interaction of infill panel changes the seismic response of the composite structure significantly. Presence of openings further changes the seismic behaviour. Increase in openings increases the natural period and introduce newer failure mechanisms. Absence of infill in a particular storey (an elevation irregularity) makes it drift more compared to adjacent storeys. Since the structural irregularities influence the seismic behaviour of a building considerably, we should be cautious while construction and renovation of such buildings in order to take the advantage of increased strength and stiffness obtained by the presence of infill walls.
A nonlinear dynamic analysis of masonry infilled RC frames is presented next. Material non linearity is considered for the finite element modelling of both masonry and concrete. Concrete damage plasticity model is employed to capture the degradation in stiffness under reverse cyclic loading. A parametric study by varying the same parameters as considered in the linear analysis is conducted. It is seen that the fundamental period calculation of infilled frames by conventional empirical formulae needs to be revisited for a better understanding of the real seismic behaviour of the infilled frames. Enhancement in the lateral stiffness due to the presence of infill panel attracts larger force and causes damage to the composite system during seismic loading. Elevation irregularities included absence of infill panels in a particular storey. Soft storey shows a tendency for the adjacent columns to fail in shear, due to the large drift compared to other storeys. The interstorey drift ratios of soft storeys are found to be larger than the limiting values. However this model could not capture the separation at the interfaces and related failure mechanisms.
To improve the nonlinear model, a contact surface at the interface is considered for a qualitative analysis. A one bay one storey infilled frame is selected. The material characteristics were kept the same as those used in the nonlinear model. Contact surface at the interface was given hard contact property with pressure-overclosure relations and suitable values of friction at the interface. This model could simulate the compressive diagonal strut formation and the switching of this compressive strut to the opposite diagonal under reverse cyclic loading. It showed an indication of corner crushing and diagonal cracking failure modes. The frame with central opening showed stress accumulation near the corners of opening.
Next, the micro modelling strategy for masonry suggested by Lourenco is studied. This interface element can be used at the masonry panel-concrete frame interface as well as at the expanded masonry block to block interface. Cap plasticity model (modified Drucker – Prager model for geological materials) can be used to describe the behaviour of masonry (in terms of interface cracking, slipping, shearing) under earthquake loading. The blocks can be defined as elastic material with a potential crack at the centre. However, further experimental investigation is needed to calibrate this model.
It is required to make use of the beneficial effects and improve upon the ill-effects of the presence of infills. To conclude, infill panels are inevitable for functional aspects such as division of space and envelope for the building. Using the lateral stiffness, strength contribution and energy dissipation capacity, use of infill panels is proposed to be a wiser solution for reducing the seismic vulnerability of multi-storey buildings. | en_US |
