Out-of-plane Response of an Innovative Masonry Infill with Sliding Joints from Shaking Table Tests

References

• Akhoundi, F., G. Vasconcelos, and P. Lourenço. 2018a. In-plane behavior of infills using glass fiber shear connectors in textile reinforced mortar (TRM) technique. International Journal of Structural Glass and Advanced Materials Research 2 (1): 1–14. doi: 10.3844/sgamrsp.2018.1.14.
   Google Scholar
• Akhoundi, F., G. Vasconcelos, and P. Lourenço. 2018b. Experimental out-of-plane behavior of brick masonry infilled frames. International Journal of Architectural Heritage. doi: 10.1080/15583058.2018.1529207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binici, B., E. Canbay, A. Aldemir, I. O. Demirel, U. Uzgan, Z. Eryurtlu, K. Bulbul, and A. Yakut. 2019. Seismic behavior and improvement of autoclaved aerated concrete infill walls. Engineering Structures 193: 68–81. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.05.032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binici, B., E. Canbay, İ. O. Demirel, A. Aldemir, U. Uzgan, Z. Eryurtlu, and A. Yakut. 2018. Seismic response of autoclaved aerated concrete masonry infill walls under in-plane and out-of-plane seismic demands. CE/Papers 2 (4): 241–45. doi: 10.1002/cepa.v2.4.
   Google Scholar
• Binici, B., G. Ozcebe, and R. Ozcelik. 2007. Analysis and design of FRP composites for seismic retrofit of infill walls in reinforced concrete frames. Composites Part B: Engineering 38 (5–6): 575–83. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.08.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brincker, R., L. Zhang, and P. Andersen. 2000. Modal identification from ambient responses using frequency domain decomposition. In Proc. 18th ISMA, San Antonio, Texas.
   Google Scholar
• Butenweg, C., and M. Marinkovic. 2018. Damage reduction system for masonry infill walls under seismic loading. CE/Papers 2 (4): 267–73. doi: 10.1002/cepa.v2.4.
   Google Scholar
• Butenweg, C., M. Marinkovic, and R. Salatic. 2019. Experimental results of reinforced concrete frames with masonry infills under combined quasi-static in-plane and out-of-plane seismic loading. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 17 (6): 3397–422. doi: 10.1007/s10518-019-00602-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calvi, G. M., and D. Bolognini. 2001. Seismic response of reinforced concrete frames infilled with weakly reinforced masonry panels. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 5 (2): 153–85. doi: 10.1080/13632460109350390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canbay, E., B. Binici, I. O. Demirel, A. Aldemir, U. Uzgan, Z. Eryurtlu, and K. Bulbul. 2018. DEGAS: An innovative earthquake-proof AAC wall system. CE/Papers 2 (4): 247–52. doi: 10.1002/cepa.v2.4.
   Google Scholar
• CEN. 2004a. Eurocode 6 - Design of masonry structures, Part 1-1: Common rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures, ECS, EN 1996-1-1: 2004. Belgium: Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• CEN. 2004b. Eurocode 8 - Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, ECS, EN 1998-1: 2004. Belgium: Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• D.M. 14/01/2008. 2008. Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni (NTC08), Gazzetta Ufficiale, n. 29 14/ 02/2008- Supplemento ordinario n.30. Roma, Italy: MIT. (in Italian).
   Google Scholar
• da Porto, F., G. Guidi, M. Dalla Benetta, and N. Verlato. 2013. Combined in-plane/out-of-plane experimental behaviour of reinforced and strengthened infill masonry walls. In Proc. of the 12th Canadian Masonry Symposium, 2-5 June 2013, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Dafnis, A., H. Kolsch, and H. Reimerdes. 2002. Arching in masonry walls subjected to earthquake motions. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 128 (2): 153–59. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:2(153).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demirel, I. O., A. Yakut, B. Binici, and E. Canbay. 2015. An experimental investigation of infill behaviour in RC frames. In Proc. 10th PCEE, 6-7 November 2015, Sydney, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Di Domenico, M., P. Ricci, and G. M. Verderame. 2019. Experimental assessment of the out-of-plane strength of URM infill walls with different slenderness and boundary conditions. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 17 (7): 3959–93. doi: 10.1007/s10518-019-00604-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drysdale, R. G., A. A. Hamid, and L. R. Baker. 2008. Masonry structures: Behavior and design. Boulder, Colorado: The Masonry Society.
   Google Scholar
• EN 1052-1. 2001. Methods of test for masonry – Determination of compressive strength. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
   Google Scholar
• EN 1052-2. 2001. Methods of test for masonry – Determination of flexural strength. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
   Google Scholar
• Ewins, D. J. 2000. Modal testing: Theory, practice and application. England: Research Study Press Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• FEMA 461. 2007. Interim testing protocols for determining the seismic performance characteristics of structural and nonstructural components. Washington, DC: FEMA.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, R. D., and R. M. Bennett. 1999. Bidirectional behavior of structural clay tile infilled frames. Journal of Structural Engineering 125 (3): 236–44. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1999)125:3(236).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fragomeli, A., A. Galasco, F. Graziotti, G. Guerrini, S. Kallioras, G. Magenes, D. Malomo, M. Mandirola, C. F. Manzini, B. Marchesi, et al. 2017. “Comportamento degli edifici in muratura nella sequenza sismica dell’Italia centrale del 2016 - Parte 1: Quadro generale. Progettazione sismica 8 (2): 49–77. (in Italian).
   Google Scholar
• Furtado, A., H. Rodrigues, A. Arede, and H. Varum. 2016. Experimental evaluation of out-of-plane capacity of masonry infill walls. Engineering Structures 111: 48–63. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.12.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furtado, A., H. Rodrigues, A. Arede, and H. Varum. 2018a. Effect of the panel width support and column axial load on the infill masonry walls out-of-plane behaviour. Journal of Earthquake Engineering. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2018.1453400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furtado, A., H. Rodrigues, A. Arede, and H. Varum. 2018b. Out-of-plane behavior of masonry infilled RC frames based on the experimental tests available: A systematic review. Construction and Building Materials 168: 831–48. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.02.129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guidi, G., F. da Porto, M. Dalla Benetta, N. Verlato, and C. Modena. 2013. Comportamento sperimentale nel piano e fuori piano di tamponamenti in muratura armata e rinforzata. In Proc. of the XV ANIDIS, Padua, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Hak, S., P. Morandi, and G. Magenes. 2014. Out-of-plane experimental response of strong masonry infills. In Proc. 2nd European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Istanbul, 25–29 August 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Hak, S., P. Morandi, G. Magenes, and T.J. Sullivan. 2012. Damage control for clay masonry infills in the design of RC frame structures. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 16 (1): 1–35. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2012.670575.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamed, E., and O. Rabinovitch. 2008. Nonlinear dynamic behavior of unreinforced masonry walls subjected to out-of-plane loads. Journal of Structural Engineering 134 (11): 1743–53. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2008)134:11(1743).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• INSYSME INnovative SYSstems for earthquake resistant masonry enclosures in RC building, European project, grant FP7-SME-2913-2-GA606229, 2013-2016.
   Google Scholar
• Komaraneni, S., D. C. Rai, and V. Singhal. 2011. Seismic behavior of framed masonry panels with prior damage when subjected to out-of-plane loading. Earthquake Spectra 27 (4): 1077–103. doi: 10.1193/1.3651624.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koutas, L., A. Pitytzogia, T. C. Triantafillou, and S. N. Bousias. 2013. Strengthening of infilled reinforced concrete frames with TRM: Study on the development and testing of textile-based anchors. Journal of Composites for Construction 18(3): A4013015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koutas, L., and D. Bournas. 2019. Out-of-plane strengthening of masonry-infilled RC frames with textile-reinforced mortar jackets. Journal of Composites for Construction 23 (1): 04018079. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000911.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langenbach, R. 2007. From “opus craticium” to the “chicago frame”: Earthquake-resistant traditional construction. International Journal of Architectural Heritage: Conservation, Analysis and Restoration 1 (1): 29–59. doi: 10.1080/15583050601125998.
   Google Scholar
• Leite, J., A. A. Correia, P. B. Lourenço, E. Vintzileou, V. Palieraki, P. Candeias, A. Campos Costa, and E. Coelho. 2015. Assessment of innovative solutions for non-load bearing masonry enclosures. In Experimental research in earthquake engineering, 247–67. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, K., Y. Z. Totoev, and H. J. Liu. 2010. In-plane cyclic test on framed dry-stack masonry panel. Advanced Materials Research 163-167: 3899–903.
   Google Scholar
• Manfredi, V., and A. Masi. 2014. Combining in-plane and out-of-plane behaviour of masonry infills in the seismic analysis of RC buildings. Earthquakes and Structures 6 (5): 515–37. doi: 10.12989/eas.2014.6.5.515.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manzini, C. F., and P. Morandi. 2012. Rapporto preliminare sulle prestazioni ed i danneggiamenti agli edifici in muratura portante moderni a seguito degli eventi sismici emiliani del 2012 (in Italian), EUCENTRE, http://www.eqclearinghouse.org/2012-05-20-italy/.
   Google Scholar
• Manzini, C. F., P. Morandi, R. R. Milanesi, and G. Magenes. 2018. Shaking-table test on a two-storey RC framed structured with innovative infills with sliding joints. In Proc. 16th ECEE, 18-21 June 2018, Thessaloniki, Greece.
   Google Scholar
• Markulak, D., I. Radic, and V. Sigmund. 2013. Cyclic testing of single bay steel frames with various types of masonry infill. Engineering Structures 51: 267–77. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.01.026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markulak, D., T. Doksanovic, I. Radic, and I. Milicevic. 2018. Structurally and environmentally favorable masonry units for infilled frames. Engineering Structures 175: 753–64. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.08.073.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDowell, E. L., and K. E. McKee. 1956. Arching action theory of masonry walls. Journal of the Structural Division 82 (2): 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Milanesi, R. R., P. Morandi, F. Dacarro, L. Albanesi, and G. Magenes. 2017. In-plane cyclic and out-of-plane dynamic testing procedures for infilled RC frames. In Proc 7th AESE, 6-8 September 2017, Pavia, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Mohammadi, M., V. Akrami, and R. Mohammadi-Ghazi. 2011. Methods to improve infilled frame ductility. Journal of Structural Engineering 137 (6): 646–53. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morandi, P., R. R. Milanesi, and G. Magenes. 2018a. Innovative solution for seismic-resistant masonry infills with sliding joints: In-plane experimental performance. Engineering Structures 176: 719–33. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.09.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morandi, P., S. Hak, and G. Magenes. 2013. Simplified Out-of-plane resistance verification for slender clay masonry infills in RC frames. In Proc. of XV ANIDIS, 30 June–4 July 2013, Padova, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Morandi, P., S. Hak, and G. Magenes. 2018b. Performance-based interpretation of in-plane cyclic tests on RC frames with strong masonry infills. Engineering Structures 156: 503–21. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.11.058.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onat, O., A. A. Correia, P. B. Lourenço, and A. Koçak. 2018. Assessment of the combined in-plane and out-of-plane behavior of brick infill walls within reinforced concrete frames under seismic loading. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 47 (14): 2821–39. doi: 10.1002/eqe.v47.14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palieraki, V., C. Zeris, E. Vintzileou, and C.-E. Adami. 2018. In-plane and out-of-plane response of currently constructed masonry infills. Engineering Structures 177: 103–16. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.09.047.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pasca, M., L. Liberatore, and R. Masiani. 2017. Reliability of analytical models for the prediction of out-of-plane capacity of masonry infills. Structural Engineering and Mechanics 64 (6): 765–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preti, M., N. Bettini, and G. Plizzari. 2012. Infill walls with sliding joints to limit infill-frame seismic interaction: Large-scale experimental test. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 16 (1): 125–41. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2011.579815.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preti, M., N. Bettini, L. Migliorati, V. Bolis, A. Stavridis, and G. A. Plizzari. 2016b. Analysis of the in-plane response of earthen masonry infill panels partitioned by sliding joints. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 45 (8): 1209–32. doi: 10.1002/eqe.v45.8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preti, M., V. Bolis, and A. Stavridis. 2016a. Design of masonry infill walls with sliding joints for earthquake structural damage control. In Proc. 16th IBMAC, 1317–24, 26-30 June 2016, Padova, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Preti, M., V. Bolis, and A. Stavridis. 2017. Seismic infill-frame interaction of masonry walls partitioned with horizontal sliding joints: Analysis and simplified modelling. Journal of Earthquake Engineering. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2017.1387195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Retamales, R., G. Mosqueda, A. Filiatrault, and A. Reinhorn. 2011. Testing protocol for experimental seismic qualification of distributed nonstructural systems. Earthquake Spectra 27 (3): 835–56. doi: 10.1193/1.3609868.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricci, P., F. De Luca, and G. M. Verderame. 2011. 6th April 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, Italy: Reinforced concrete building performance. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 9 (1): 285–305. doi: 10.1007/s10518-010-9204-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricci, P., M. Di Domenico, and G. M. Verderame. 2018a. Experimental investigation of the influence of slenderness ratio and of the in-plane/out-of-plane interaction on the out-of-plane strength of URM infill walls. Construction and Building Materials 191: 507–22. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.10.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricci, P., M. Di Domenico, and G. M. Verderame. 2018b. Experimental assessment of the in-plane/out-of-plane interaction in unreinforced masonry infill walls. Engineering Structures 173: 960–78. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.07.033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sigmund, V., and D. Penava. 2014. Influence of openings, with and without confinement, on cyclic response of infilled R-C frames – An experimental study. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 18 (1): 113–46. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2013.817362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tu, Y.-H., T.-H. Chuang, P.-M. Liu, and Y.-S. Yang. 2010. Out-of-plane shaking table tests on unreinforced masonry panels in RC frames. Engineering Structures 32 (12): 3925–35. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.08.030.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valluzzi, M. R., F. da Porto, E. Garbin, and M. Panizza. 2014. Out-of-plane behaviour of infill masonry panels strengthened with composite materials. Materials and Structures 47 (12): 2131–45. doi: 10.1617/s11527-014-0384-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verlato, N., G. Guidi, F. da Porto, and C. Modena. 2016. Innovative systems for masonry infill walls based on the use of deformable joints: Combined in-plane/out-of-plane tests. In Proc. of 16th IBMAC, 26-30 June 2016, Padova, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Vintzileou, E., C. E. Adami, and V. Palieraki. 2016. In-plane and out-of-plane response of a masonry infill divided into smaller wallettes. In Proc. of 16th IBMAC, 26-30 June 2016, Padova, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Yuksel, E., H. Ozkaynak, O. Buyukozturk, C. Yalcin, A.A. Dindar, M. Surmeli, and D. Tastan. 2010. Performance of alternative CFRP retrofitting schemes used in infilled RC frames. Construction and Building Materials 24 (4): 596–609. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.09.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar