Novel anchorage solution for in-plane decoupling of concrete infill sandwich panels: An experimental study
Source abstract
Abstract
Concrete sandwich panels (CSPs) are widely favored as non-structural infill elements due to their inherent thermal efficiency, acoustic insulation, and ease of erection. However, their rigid connection to structural frames can induce undesirable in-plane force transfer, potentially compromising seismic performance. This study introduces and evaluates a novel, cost-effective flat-duct sleeved rebar anchor system, designed with the dual functionality of providing reliable out-of-plane restraint while minimizing in-plane stiffness transfer. An experimental program was conducted on ten CSP wall specimens (arranged in five pairs) subjected to displacement-controlled cyclic loading. Three pairs for out-of-plane bending and two for in-plane shear. Three top-support configurations were examined: (i) a conventional sliding bearing support, (ii) fixed rebar anchors, and (iii) the proposed flat-duct sleeved rebar anchors. Key response parameters, including peak capacity, elastic stiffness, energy dissipation, ductility, and relative support-wall displacement, were compared. Out-of-plane tests demonstrated that all support systems provided sufficient resistance, with Type 1 (sliding) exhibiting the highest performance. Crucially, both rebar anchor systems (fixed and flat-duct sleeved) maintained connection integrity despite slightly lower out-of-plane stiffness, resulting in some relative displacement between the wall and the frame. In-plane shear tests proved critical in distinguishing the systems. The fixed rebar anchorage (Type (2) transferred significant frame displacement to the infill panel, inducing shear forces that, while small compared to the wall’s in-plane resistance, caused localized concrete cover damage at the connection. Crucially, the proposed Type 3, with its rebar-duct gap, achieved substantial decoupling. Simultaneously, out-of-plane tests demonstrated that the Type 3 system maintained full connection integrity and provided sufficient resistance, comparable to fixed anchors. This work validates the flat-duct sleeved rebar system as a robust, cost-effective, and practical solution for simultaneous out-of-plane restraint and in-plane decoupling, directly addressing the limitations of existing complex details and enhancing the seismic safety of CSP systems.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Masonry and Concrete Structural Analysis · Seismic Performance and Analysis · Wood Treatment and Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Yazd University
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. Hoenderkamp J, Hofmeyer H, Snijder H. Experimental investigation of the shear resistance of steel frames with precast concrete infill panels. Adv Steel Constr 2010; 6(3): 817–830.
2. 10.2174/187483680120601006310.2174/1874836801206010063 ↗
3. Hou H, Qiu C, Wang J, et al. An experimental study on sandwich composite panel infilled steel frames. Int J Adv Steel Constr 2012; 8(3): 226–241.
4. 10.1177/109963621668254610.1177/1099636216682546 ↗
5. 10.12989/scs.2010.10.1.00110.12989/scs.2010.10.1.001 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.14115910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.141159 ↗
7. 10.15554/pcij56.2-0610.15554/pcij56.2-06 ↗
8. PCI. Design and typical details of connections for precast and prestressed concrete. MNL-123. 1988.
9. Seeber K, Andrews R, Baty J, et al. State-of-the-art of precast/prestressed sandwich wall panels. PCI J 1997; 42(2): 33.
10. 10.14311/110110.14311/1101 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jobe.2024.11053110.1016/j.jobe.2024.110531 ↗
12. 10.2174/187483680120601018210.2174/1874836801206010182 ↗
13. Xie W Xia J Zheng Y et al. Study on effects of mudsill and infilled wallboard on response of steel frame under curvature surface deformation. In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science Wuhan China 9–11 November 2019: IOP Publishing.10.1088/1755-1315/295/4/042047 ↗
14. Tang Z Zha X Wang B et al. Finite element study on shear performances of in-filled bolt joint of assembled GRC wall with light steel skeleton frame. In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science Wuhan China 9–11 November 2019: IOP Publishing.10.1088/1755-1315/242/6/062084 ↗
15. Jiang Q, Wang H, Feng Y, et al. Enhancing the seismic performance of precast RC frames with cladding panels through setting U shaped dampers and rocking walls. Shock Vib 2020; 2020(1): 1–16.
16. 10.18400/tekderg.55903610.18400/tekderg.559036 ↗
17. 10.3390/buildings1212207010.3390/buildings12122070 ↗
18. 10.1007/s13296-018-0068-010.1007/s13296-018-0068-0 ↗
19. Anand A, Singhal V. Shear strength and failure behavior of precast concrete sandwich panels under elevated temperatures: experimental and numerical investigation. J Sandw Struct Mater. 2025; 10996362251339572.
20. Plan and Budget Organization of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Instruction manual for the design, construction, and implementation of lightweight 3D prefabricated panel systems. Plan and Budget Organization, 2006. Publication no. 385.
21. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.08.08110.1016/j.compositesb.2018.08.081 ↗
22. 10.1177/136943322199976910.1177/1369433221999769 ↗
23. 10.1007/s12205-018-0809-910.1007/s12205-018-0809-9 ↗
24. Chen X, Chen L, Ju S, et al. Study on the influence of thermal insulation material on the flexural performance of precast sandwich panel connected by steel wire mesh. J Sandw Struct Mater. 2025; 10996362251368964.
25. 10.1007/s42452-020-03754-310.1007/s42452-020-03754-3 ↗
26. ASTM A82-02. Standard specification for steel wire, plain, for concrete reinforcement. ASTM International, 2002.
27. ASTM A185-02. Standard specification for steel welded wire fabric, plain, for concrete reinforcement. ASTM International, 2002.
28. ASTM E2126-02. Standard guide for cyclic (reversed) load testing of components of structures. ASTM International, 2002.
29. ASCE/SEI 41-17. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers, 2017.