Effect of Infill-Wall Material Types and Modeling Techniques on the Seismic Response of Reinforced Concrete Buildings

Wijaya, Hendrik; Rajeev, Pathmanathan; Gad, Emad; Amirsardari, Anita

doi:10.1061/(asce)nh.1527-6996.0000395

Cited by 21 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In such a situation, it may not be appropriate to directly compare the seismic responses of the different frames on the same plot, as each Sa,T1 represents a different IM. However, the purpose of these figures is to have a visual comparison in line with some of the published literature (Wijaya et al, 2020;Bhosale et al, 2018). It can also be seen that the first mode periods of the three selected building frames are not very different.…”

Section: Fragility Curvesmentioning

confidence: 72%

Variability of Mechanical Properties of Cellular Lightweight Concrete Infill and Its Effect on Seismic Safety

Zade

Bhosale²,

Dhir

et al. 2021

Nat. Hazards Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cellular lightweight concrete (CLC) block masonry has gained popularity in the masonry market with the growing demand in the modern construction industry due to its various advantages, including a positive impact on the environment. Subsequently, the detailed characterization of its vital engineering properties should be studied for the development of the mathematical model, analysis, evaluation, and design of structures made of CLC block masonry. The present study investigates the variability in two important strength properties of CLC block masonry and proposes the most appropriate models for their statistical distribution to support probability-based structural analysis and design. This study shows that the assumption of a normal distribution in the absence of an appropriate uncertainty model can result in an inaccurate estimate of the seismic risk of an RC frame building infilled with CLC block masonry. The paper further assesses the seismic safety of a typical RC framed building infilled with CLC block masonry in relation to traditional brick masonry, considering the proposed uncertainty model. It is observed that although CLC block masonry results in a higher seismic risk compared to traditional brick masonry, it can be used as an infill material in high seismic areas, as it results in a probability of failure within the acceptable limit.

show abstract

Section: Fragility Curvesmentioning

confidence: 72%

Variability of Mechanical Properties of Cellular Lightweight Concrete Infill and Its Effect on Seismic Safety

Zade

Bhosale²,

Dhir

et al. 2021

Nat. Hazards Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…, , , , , . These parameters were calibrated against the experimental results to capture the pinching and degradation behaviors (Wijaya et al 2020).…”

Section: Simpli Ed Opensees Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-Platform Simulation of Infilled Shear-Critical Reinforced Concrete Frames Subjected to Earthquake Excitations

Huang

Brodsky

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a multi-platform simulation method for seismic performance assessment of masonry infilled reinforced concrete (RC) frames, especially for those who tend to fail in shear during an earthquake due to inadequate reinforcing details. The method is based on a micro-macro modeling approach where a detailed finite element (FE) model of the RC frame is incorporated with a strut model of the infill wall. It takes advantage of the strut model in terms of computational efficiency and the FE model based on the Modified Compression Field Theory (MCFT) to capture the nonlinear behaviour of the RC frame with explicit modeling of the beam-column joint failure and shear failure of the frame. The proposed method is validated against previously tested frames subjected to lateral loads, and its advantages over the conventional struct models are demonstrated through both quasi-static and dynamic analyses.

show abstract

“…A static examination of how far along the inelastic zone a structure may drift before experiencing global instability is known as a "pushover analysis". Because of the fact that earthquake excitations vary significantly, researchers [19,[25][26][27][28] have employed static pushover analyses to determine the structural responses [29]. Furthermore, the ET method, a detailed seismic assessment methodology, is implemented on the basis of an artificial ramp-type standard acceleration record of at least 10 s to the considered engineering structure, until the maximum structural response value is obtained [30,31].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conventional RVS Methods for Seismic Risk Assessment for Estimating the Current Situation of Existing Buildings: A State-of-the-Art Review

Bektaş

Kegyes-Brassai

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developments in the field of earthquake engineering over the past few decades have contributed to the development of new methods for evaluating the risk levels in buildings. These research methods are rapid visual screening (RVS), seismic risk indexes, and vulnerability assessments, which have been developed to assess the levels of damage in a building or its structural components. RVS methods have been proposed for the rapid pre- and/or post-earthquake screening of existing large building stock in earthquake-prone areas on the basis of sidewalk surveys. The site seismicity, the soil type, the building type, and the corresponding building characteristic features are to be separately examined, and the vulnerability level of each building can be identified by employing the RVS methods. This study describes, evaluates, and compares the findings of previous investigations that utilized conventional RVS methods within a framework. It also suggests the methods to be used for specific goals and proposes prospective enhancement strategies. Furthermore, the article discusses the time-consuming RVS methods (such as FEMA 154, which requires from 15 to 30 min, while NRCC requires one hour), and provides an overview of the application areas of the methods (pre-earthquake: FEMA 154, NRCC, NZEE, etc.; postearthquake: GNDT, EMS, etc.). This review of the traditional RVS methods offers a comprehensive guide and reference for field practitioners (e.g., engineers, architects), and recommends enhancement techniques (e.g., machine learning, fuzzy logic) for researchers to be used in future improvements.

show abstract

Effect of Infill-Wall Material Types and Modeling Techniques on the Seismic Response of Reinforced Concrete Buildings

Cited by 21 publications

References 30 publications

Variability of Mechanical Properties of Cellular Lightweight Concrete Infill and Its Effect on Seismic Safety

Variability of Mechanical Properties of Cellular Lightweight Concrete Infill and Its Effect on Seismic Safety

Multi-Platform Simulation of Infilled Shear-Critical Reinforced Concrete Frames Subjected to Earthquake Excitations

Conventional RVS Methods for Seismic Risk Assessment for Estimating the Current Situation of Existing Buildings: A State-of-the-Art Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About