Irregularity of the Distribution of Masonry Infill Panels and Its Effect on the Seismic Collapse of Reinforced Concrete Buildings
Source abstract
Abstract
On 16 April 2016, an earthquake of Mw 7.8 shook the coast of Ecuador, causing the destruction of buildings and a significant number of casualties. Following a visit by the authors to the city of Portoviejo during the debris removal and recovery stage, it was noted that several reinforced concrete buildings located on corners had collapsed in the central part of the city. These buildings were characterized by the presence of masonry at the edges of the buildings but not between the two mostly open-plan facades on the corner for practical reasons. This article reviews the effect of masonry infill panels on the seismic response of reinforced concrete structures. For this, a model that contains the geometric and mechanical characteristics typical of collapsed buildings was generated and subjected to nonlinear analysis, with both static and dynamic increments. The results show the clear influence of the masonry infill panels on the structural response through the torsional behavior that is reflected in the evolution of the floor rotations. Finally, dynamic incremental analysis is used to obtain the collapse fragility curve of the building, and a new damage measure based on floor rotations is proposed.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Masonry and Concrete Structural Analysis · Seismic Performance and Analysis · Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Civil Engineering School, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Valparaíso 2340000, Chile
Department of Earth and Construction Sciences, Universidad de las Fuerzas Armadas, Sangolquí 171103, Ecuador
Regional Center for Technological Developments for Construction, Seismology and Seismic Engineering (CEREDETEC), Universidad Tecnológica Nacional, Mendoza 5500, Argentina
Engineering Faculty, Universidad Laica Eloy Alfaro de Manabí, Manta 130203, Ecuador
Funding
PAN AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF GEOGRAPHY AND HISTORY
References (48)
Show source-provided references
1. Finite element modelling of confined masonry wall under in-plane cyclic load10.1088/1757-899X/936/1/012020 ↗
2. Seismic vulnerability: Theory and application to Algerian buildings10.1007/s10950-013-9377-0 ↗
3. Site investigation of masonry buildings damaged during the 23 October and 9 November 2011 Van Earthquakes in Turkey10.5194/nhess-13-689-2013 ↗
4. Development of fragility curves for confined masonry buildings in Lima, Peru10.1193/090517EQS174M ↗
5. Behavior of confined masonry walls with openings under in-plane and out-of-plane loads10.1193/061416EQS097M ↗
6. Performance of masonry enclosure walls: Lessons learned from recent earthquakes10.1007/s11803-012-0095-3 ↗
7. Seismic vulnerability assessment of masonry buildings in Banja Luka and Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina) using the macroseismic model10.1007/s10518-020-00846-8 ↗
8. Seismic vulnerability assessment and reduction at a territorial scale on masonry and adobe housing by rapid vulnerability indicators The case of Tlajomulco Mexico10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101425 ↗
9. Typical Collapse Modes of Confined Masonry Buildings under Strong Earthquake Loads. Open Constr. Build
10. Idris, Y., Cummins, P., Rusydy, I., Muskin, U., Syamsidik, M.Y.H., and Meilianda, E. (2019). Post-Earthquake Damage Assessment after the 6.5 Mw Earthquake on December, 7th 2016 in Pidie Jaya, Indonesia. J. Earthq. Eng., 1–17.10.1080/13632469.2019.1689868 ↗
11. Investigation and analysis of buildings damaged during the september 2007 Sumatra, Indonesia earthquakes10.3130/jaabe.7.371 ↗
12. Seismic damage to structures in the M s6.5 Ludian earthquake10.1007/s11803-016-0314-4 ↗
13. Fardis, M.N. (2006, January 3–8). Seismic design issues for masonry- infilled rc frames. Proceedings of the First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneve, Switzerland. Paper 313.
14. Analysis of buildings that collapsed of Portoviejo during the earthquake of 16 april 2016
15. Experimental study on the seismic behavior of masonry walls under offshore environment10.1016/j.istruc.2020.08.064 ↗
16. Lateral in-plane seismic response of confined masonry walls: From numerical to backbone models10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111098 ↗
17. Verification of seismic resistance of confined masonry buildings10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199710)26:10<1073::AID-EQE695>3.0.CO;2-Z ↗
18. Numerical modeling of masonry-infilled RC frames subjected to seismic loads10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.01.006 ↗
19. Numerical model for nonlinear analysis of masonry walls
20. A numerical model for masonry-like structures10.2140/jomms.2010.5.583 ↗
21. Numerical modelling of non-confined and confined masonry walls10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.07.013 ↗
22. Seismic vulnerability assessment of confined masonry structures by macro-modeling approach10.1016/j.istruc.2020.06.007 ↗
23. Evaluation of local and global ductility relationships for seismic assessment of regular masonry-infilled reinforced concrete frames using a coefficient-based method10.12989/eas.2013.5.1.001 ↗
24. Seismic performance evaluation of full-scale confined masonry building using light weight cellular panels10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101473 ↗
25. Experimental study on seismic failure modes of confined masonry structures with different enhancements10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.747.594 ↗
26. Experimental investigation of axial load and detailing effects on the inelastic response of reinforced concrete masonry structural walls with boundary elements10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002842 ↗
27. Crisafulli, F.J. (1997). Seismic Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Structures with Masonry Infills. [Ph.D. Thesis, University of Canterbury].
28. Implementation and verification of a masonry panel model for nonlinear dynamic analysis of infilled RC frames10.1007/s10518-011-9262-6 ↗
29. Magenes, G., and Pampanin, S. (2004, January 1–6). Seismic response of gravity-load design frames with masonry infills. Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
30. Bell, D.K., and Davidson, B.J. (2001, January 23–25). Evaluation of Earthquake Risk Buildings with Masonry Infill Panels. Proceedings of the 2001 Technical Conference, Future Directions: A Vision for Earthquake Engineering in New Zealand, New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Taupo, Taupo, New Zealand.
31. Menegotto, M., and Pinto, P.E. (1973). Method of analysis for cyclically loaded R.C. plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behaviour of elements under combined normal force and bending. Symposium on the Resistance and Ultimate Deformability of Structures Acted on by Well Defined Repeated Loads, International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering.
32. Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804) ↗
33. (2018, May 01). Seismosoft, SeismoStruct 2018—A Computer Program for Static and Dynamic Nonlinear Analysis of Framed Structures. Available online: http://www.seismosoft.com.
34. Sahlin, S. (1971). Structural Masonry, Prentice-Hall Inc.
35. Paulay, T., and Priestley, M.J.N. (1992). Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings, John Wiley & Sons Inc.10.1002/9780470172841 ↗
36. Hendry, A.W. (1990). Structural Masonry, Macmillan Education Ltd.
37. Seismic retrofit of existing buildings led by non-linear dynamic analyses10.2495/SAFE-V9-N3-201-212 ↗
38. Seismic performance of waffled-slab floor buildings10.1680/stbu.2009.162.3.169 ↗
39. Improved procedure for determining the ductility of buildings under seismic loads
40. Vielma, J.C., and Mulder, M. (2018). Seismic performance factors of buildings with irregularity in plan. Monograph CIMNE IS 76, Earthquake Engineering Monographs, CIMNE.
41. Incremental dynamic analysis10.1002/eqe.141 ↗
42. RENAC (2016). Accelerograms of the Earthquake of April 16 2016, National Accelerometer Network of the Geophysical Institute of the National Polytechnic School.
43. Effect of earthquake ground motion duration on the seismic response of a low-rise RC building10.1155/2020/8891282 ↗
44. Seismic safety of low ductility structures used in Spain10.1007/s10518-009-9127-4 ↗
45. Vielma, J.C., Porcu, M.C., and López, N. (2020). Intensity measure based on a smooth inelastic peak period for a more effective incremental dynamic analysis. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10238632 ↗
46. Calibration of the response reduction factors used in Ecuador for steel SMRF
47. FEMA P-695 (2009). Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors, FEMA.
48. NEC-15 (2015). Ecuadorian Construction Standard, SE-DS, Seismic Loads. Earthquake Resistant Design, MIDUVI. (In Spanish).