Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering

Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering

Equivalent Diagonal Strut Method for Masonry Walls in Pinned Connection and Multi-Bay Steel Frames

Document Type : Structural Earthquake Engineering

Authors
Sayed Mohamad Motovali Emami 1
Majid Mohammadi 1
Paulo B. Lourenço 2
1 International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES)
2 University of Minho
10.48303/jsee.2017.240772
Abstract
Equivalent compression strut is one of the most prevalent approaches recommended in seismic codes to simulate infill panels in the frames. The mechanical parameters of infilled frames, such as strength and stiffness, are controlled by material properties, thickness and width of equivalent strut. The strut width depends on the contact length between the infill and the frame. Previous studies have shown that the connection rigidity of the surrounding frame affects the contact length and consequently the response of infilled frame. Parametric finite element analyses have been carried out to investigate the influence of frame connection rigidity on the behavior of infill walls using ABAQUS environment. The finite elementmodels were verified based on the results of experimental data. It is shown that the stiffness and strength of infill panel in pinned connection steel frame are 0.9 and 0.8 times of those in rigid connection frame, respectively. The results of parametric finite element analyses were validated using equivalent strut method. Moreover, it is shown that the equivalent diagonal struts in multi-bay frame have the same properties of strut in one-bay frames for both rigid and pinned connections ones.
Keywords
Infill wall
Pinned connection frame
Equivalent strut model
Multi-bay infilled frame
ABAQUS
FEM
  1. Polyakov, S. (1960) On the interaction between masonry filler walls and enclosing frame when loaded in the plane of the wall. Translations in Earthquake Engineering, 36-42.
  2. Holmes, M. (1961) Steel frames with brickwork and concrete infilling. ICE Proceedings, 473-478.
  3. Smith B.S. and Carter, C. (1969) A method of analysis for infilled frames. ICE Proceedings, 31-48.
  4. Mainstone, R.J. (1971) On the stiffness and strengths of infilled frames. ICE Proc. Thomas Telford, 49(2), 230.
  5. Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000) Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Report no. FEMA 356, FEMA, Washington, DC.
  6. ASCE 41-06 (2006) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers, Virginia: Reston.
  7. Dawe J. and Seah, C. (1989) Behaviour of masonry infilled steel frames. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 16, 865-876.
  8. Flanagan R.D. and Bennett R.M. (1999) In-plane behavior of structural clay tile infilled frames. Journal of Structural Engineering, 125, 590-599.
  9. Motovali Emami, S.M. and Mohammadi, M. (2017) Effect of frame connection rigidity on the behaviour of infilled steel frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research (under review).
  10. Murthy, C. and Hendry, A. (1996) Model experiments in load bearing brickwork. Building Science, 1, 289-298.
  11. Mosalam, K.M., White, R.N., and Gergely, P. (1997) Static response of infilled frames using quasi-static experimentation. Journal of Structural Engineering, 123, 1462-4169.
  12. Al-Chaar, G., Issa, M., and Sweeney, S. (2002) Behavior of masonry-infilled non-ductile reinforced concrete frames. Journal of Structural Engineering, 128, 1055-1063.
  13. Motovali Emami, S.M. (2017) Effect of Vertical Load, Number of Bays and Connection Rigidity of the Frame on the Seismic Behavior of Infilled Steel Frames. Ph.D. Thesis, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (in Persian).
  14. Habbit Karlsson & Sorensen Inc. (2014) ABAQUS Theory Manual Version 6.14.
  15. Motovali Emami, S.M. and Mohammadi, M. (2016) Influence of vertical load on in-plane behavior of masonry infilled steel frames. Earthquakes and Structures, 11, 609-627.
  16. Lubliner, J., Oliver, J., Oiler, S., and Onate, E. (1989) A plastic-damage model for concrete. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 25, 299-329.
  17. Lee, J. and Fenves, G.L. (1998) Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete struc-tures. ASCE Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 124, 892-900.
  18. Dugdale, D.S. (1960) Yielding of steel sheets containing slits. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 8, 100-104.
  19. Needleman, A. (1987) A continuum model forvoid nucleation by inclusion debonding. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 54, 525-531.
  20. Bolhassani, M., Hamid, A.A., Lau, A.C., and Moon, F. (2015) Simplified micro modeling of partially grouted masonry assemblages. Construction and Building Materials, 83, 159-173.
  21. Standard No. 2800 (2005) Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings. Third Revision, Building and Housing Research Center, Iran (in Persian).
  22. ASCE 41-13 (2012) Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers; Virginia: Reston.
  23. Kaltakci, M., Koken, A., and Korkmaz, H. (2006) Analytical solutions using the equivalent strut tie method of infilled steel frames and experimental verification. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 33, 632-638.
  24. CSI, SAP2000 V. 14.1 (2010) Integrated Finite Element Analysis and Design of Structures Basic Analysis Reference Manual. Computers and Structures, Inc., Berkeley, California, USA.
Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering
Volume 19, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
Autumn 2017
Pages 299-311

  • Receive Date 09 July 2017
  • Accept Date 26 December 2020
  • Publish Date 01 October 2017