Numerical Investigation on the Influence of In‐Plane Damage on the Out‐of‐Plane Behavior of Masonry Infill Walls

Abstract

is study presents a finite element model to investigate the bidirectional seismic behavior of masonry infill walls. e test data are utilized to verify the numerical model. e comparison between the analytical and the experimental results indicates that the finite element model can successfully predict the failure mode, stiffness, and strength of the masonry infill wall. Based on the model, the effects of aspect ratio (height to length), slenderness ratio (height to thickness), and masonry strength on the out-of-plane (OOP) response of infill wall with in-plane (IP) damage are explored. Considering the aspect ratio, slenderness ratio, and masonry strength of infill wall, the OOP behavior of infill wall with and without IP damage is studied. Finally the reduction of the stiffness and strength in the OOP direction, due to the IP damage, is discussed.

Prediction Equations for Out-of-Plane Capacity of Unreinforced Masonry Infill Walls Based on a Macroelement Model Parametric Analysis

“…more than 50% for an IP drift of 0.15% for a wall with a slenderness ratio of 16) which is not convincing when compared to experimental results. Wang et al (2020) concluded that the reduction of OoP strength due to IP damage is influenced by slenderness ratio, aspect ratio, and additionally by the masonry strength which was not previously considered by others. The strength reduction was lower for masonry infills with higher compressive strength but the stiffness decay was found not affected by the masonry strength.…”

“…A comparison of OOP capacities at different aspect ratios for infills of different heights, thickness, and masonry strengths is kept in Fig 11. Aspect ratio (l/h) (c) by Wang et al (2020) from their numerical study. As an example, the particular case of an infill wall (height =2600 mm) having an aspect ratio of 1.0 is shown in Figs 12-15.…”

“…Differently from the IP coupling between frame and infill and the modification of frame behaviour because of infills, the problem of IP/OoP behaviour interaction of infills, especially the change in the OoP strength of infills that experienced previous IP damage, has got high attention in both experimental investigations (Ricci et al 2018a(Ricci et al , 2018bDe Risi et al 2019b;Butenweg et al 2019, Di Domenico et al 2021) and numerical studies (Cavaleri et al 2019;Ricci et al 2019, Wang et al 2020 only in the last ten years.…”

“…In this context, a systematic study of the influence of the key parameters is possible only through numerical investigations. Partially, FE-based micro-models have been used to deepen the understanding of the OoP behaviour of URM infill walls and the aspect of the IP-OoP interaction (Agnihotri et al 2013;Cavaleri et al 2019;Liberatore et al 2020;Wang et al 2020). Agnihotri et al (2013) investigated the influence of slenderness ratio and aspect ratio on OoP capacity and also their influence on strength reduction due to the IP damage.…”

Nonstructural Seismic Loss Analysis of Traditional and Innovative Partition Systems Housed in Code-conforming RC Frame Buildings

“…Infills and partitions typically account for a significant part of the total NC costs (Restrepo and Bersofsky 2011). Infills and partitions were extensively studied in the past few decades, and their seismic performance was widely assessed through both experimental testing (Di Fiorino, Bucciero, and Landolfo 2019;Landolfo et al 2019;Magliulo et al 2014;Onat et al 2018;Pali et al 2018;Petrone, Magliulo, and Manfredi 2014;Restrepo and Bersofsky 2011;Tasligedik, Pampanin, and Palermo 2015;Verderame et al 2019) and numerical methods (Petrone et al 2018;Wang et al 2020;Zhai et al 2018). These components are sensitive to interstory drift within their plane (i.e., in-plane (I-P) damage mechanisms) and accelerations along their out-ofplane direction (i.e., out-of-plane (O-O-P) damage mechanisms) (Petrone, Magliulo, and Manfredi 2017).…”