2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.09.047
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In-plane and out-of plane response of currently constructed masonry infills

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Several problems have been observed such as the in-plane/out-of-plane interaction in the seismic response of these non-structural elements (Figure 1a), the global influence in the overall seismic behaviour of the structure and the structural damages caused by local interaction between the masonry panels and the structural members (Figure 1b). The seismic behaviour of non-ductile masonry infills has been studied also experimentally and numerically into many researches that had different goals such as, the infill/structural global interaction ( [5], [6], [7]), the in-plane behaviour ( [8], [9]), the out-of-plane response ( [10], [11], [12]). The in-plane/out-of-plane interaction ( [13], [14], [15]), the economic evaluation of the expected annual losses ( [16], [17]) and the local interaction between the infill and the structural members ( [18], [19], [20]) as, for example, shown in Figure 2, were investigate as well.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several problems have been observed such as the in-plane/out-of-plane interaction in the seismic response of these non-structural elements (Figure 1a), the global influence in the overall seismic behaviour of the structure and the structural damages caused by local interaction between the masonry panels and the structural members (Figure 1b). The seismic behaviour of non-ductile masonry infills has been studied also experimentally and numerically into many researches that had different goals such as, the infill/structural global interaction ( [5], [6], [7]), the in-plane behaviour ( [8], [9]), the out-of-plane response ( [10], [11], [12]). The in-plane/out-of-plane interaction ( [13], [14], [15]), the economic evaluation of the expected annual losses ( [16], [17]) and the local interaction between the infill and the structural members ( [18], [19], [20]) as, for example, shown in Figure 2, were investigate as well.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…e failure mechanism and the load resistance of the masonry-infilled RC frame depend on a number of parameters such as geometry of the wall (height/width ratio and openings), geometrical plane and elevation distribution of the infills in a structure, quality of the materials, stiffness and ductility of the frame, type of loading, detailing, relative infill-frame stiffness and strength, and quality of the workmanship. In a seismic event, however, they carry inplane shear loads or out-of-plane flexural loads [13,14]. Past earthquakes showed that the out-of-plane failures are more disastrous than the in-plane ones [15][16][17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is known that masonry structures are vulnerable to both in-plane and out-of-plane movements under the action of lateral loads. The in-plane and out-of-plane behavior of the masonry infill has been studied experimentally [5] and numerically [6]. The out-of-plane failures turn out to be more disastrous than the in-plane ones [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most recent retrofitting techniques include the use of fiber reinforced polymers (FRP) [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26] ductile-fiber-reinforced cementitious composites (FRCM) [27,28,29] and textile reinforced mortar (TRM) [30,31]. TRM jacketing is an extremely promising solution for the strengthening of unreinforced infill walls subjected to either out-of-plane or in-plane loading [5]. In recent experimental and numerical studies provided by Koutas et al [32,33] the use of TRM for strengthening masonryinfilled frames was studied.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%