2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.07.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modelling of masonry infilled RC frames subjected to cyclic loads: State of the art review and modelling with OpenSees

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 139 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the former, the average mechanical properties assigned to the infills are representative of those adopted in Italy, and some regions in southern Europe, in frames designed according to old seismic codes (Liberatore and Mollaioli 2015). On the other hand, the (average) mechanical properties of the infills used for the special-code frames are based on the study of Noh Mohammad et al (2017), which implemented the same properties in investigating the infill response of a highly reinforced and ductile experimental frames. It can be noticed here that the thickness of the infills in the SI frame is less than that in the PI frame.…”
Section: Layout Geometry and Materials Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the former, the average mechanical properties assigned to the infills are representative of those adopted in Italy, and some regions in southern Europe, in frames designed according to old seismic codes (Liberatore and Mollaioli 2015). On the other hand, the (average) mechanical properties of the infills used for the special-code frames are based on the study of Noh Mohammad et al (2017), which implemented the same properties in investigating the infill response of a highly reinforced and ductile experimental frames. It can be noticed here that the thickness of the infills in the SI frame is less than that in the PI frame.…”
Section: Layout Geometry and Materials Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The equivalent area of each strut is established based on the maximum lateral force of the infill, 38 transformed to the direction of the diagonal, and on the masonry compressive stress f m . The parameters obtained, ie, the maximum stress and strain, are used to define the masonry material with zero tensile strength simulated by the Concrete01 constitutive model 33,40 ( Figure 3B). 39 The lateral displacement of each infill is transformed into the diagonal displacement for the subsequent definition of the strain of the strut.…”
Section: Modelling Of the Infillsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…39 The lateral displacement of each infill is transformed into the diagonal displacement for the subsequent definition of the strain of the strut. The parameters obtained, ie, the maximum stress and strain, are used to define the masonry material with zero tensile strength simulated by the Concrete01 constitutive model 33,40 ( Figure 3B). The stress f m is equal to 3.10 MPa, and all infills have a thickness of 0.15 m. Additionally, a residual stress equal to 10% of the maximum stress is considered for numerical stability, which is reached at an interstorey drift five times the interstorey drift at maximum strength.…”
Section: Modelling Of the Infillsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Masonry infills have been modelled by idealized equivalent struts. The pinching factors for reloading strain and reloading stress and the degradation power of unloading stiffness have been defined according to [18]. The tensile response of the strut was assumed as 5% of the compressive response as the struts are meant to act in compression only.…”
Section: Non-linear Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%