A comparative investigation on experimental lateral behaviour of bare RC frame, non-strengthened and ferrocement strengthened masonry infilled RC frame

D. Sen, Fatema Tuz Zahura, Anik Das, H. Alwashali, Md. Shafiul Islam, Masaki Maeda, Matsutaro Seki, Muhammad Abdur Rahman Bhuiyan
{"title":"A comparative investigation on experimental lateral behaviour of bare RC frame, non-strengthened and ferrocement strengthened masonry infilled RC frame","authors":"D. Sen, Fatema Tuz Zahura, Anik Das, H. Alwashali, Md. Shafiul Islam, Masaki Maeda, Matsutaro Seki, Muhammad Abdur Rahman Bhuiyan","doi":"10.5459/bnzsee.1656","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although concrete framed structures are widely used with masonry infills, the contribution of masonry infills in structural design is limited to their dead loads only. Therefore, the full-fledged stiffness characteristics of masonry infill are not often considered. However, recent earthquakes showed the impact of masonry infill on the lateral behavior of surrounding RC frames. Moreover, sometimes existing masonry infills are strengthened using Ferrocement (FC), Textile Reinforced Mortar (TRM), Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP), etc., which might also have a similar impact on surrounding RC frames. The impact includes enhanced shear demand, damage, etc. However, the effect of the enhanced shear demand on RC columns is a relatively less investigated issue. In this context, an experimental program was designed to compare the effect of non-strengthened and FC strengthened masonry infill on the behavior of the surrounding RC frame in terms of lateral strength, hinge formation, shear demand enhancement, and damage to columns. The test specimens, including a bare RC frame, a masonry infilled RC frame, and a FC strengthened masonry infilled RC frame, were subjected to a quasi-static cyclic lateral loads. The experimental result showed that the masonry infill and FC strengthened masonry infill increased lateral strength, on average, by 81% and 244%, respectively, when compared to that of the bare RC frame. Meanwhile, FC strengthening of masonry infill improved the lateral strength, on average, by 90% when compared with the masonry infilled RC frame’s lateral strength. In this study, low-strength masonry infill caused the formation of a short column on the tension column of the RC frame. The application of ferrocement to low-strength masonry altered the position of the plastic hinge formed on the tension column of the RC frame when compared to that of the masonry infilled RC frame. Therefore, ferrocement strengthening of masonry eliminated the short column phenomenon in this particular study. Nevertheless, the shear demand (in terms of strain on the column tie) enhancement of the tension column was not substantial due to the ferrocement strengthening of the masonry infill when compared to that of the masonry infilled RC frame. Moreover, the damage concentration on RC columns (i.e., residual crack width) after insertion of masonry infill and ferrocement strengthened masonry infill changed to a smaller extent when compared to the bare RC frame damages, where the residual crack widths were within 1.0 ~ 2.0 mm.","PeriodicalId":503230,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.1656","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although concrete framed structures are widely used with masonry infills, the contribution of masonry infills in structural design is limited to their dead loads only. Therefore, the full-fledged stiffness characteristics of masonry infill are not often considered. However, recent earthquakes showed the impact of masonry infill on the lateral behavior of surrounding RC frames. Moreover, sometimes existing masonry infills are strengthened using Ferrocement (FC), Textile Reinforced Mortar (TRM), Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP), etc., which might also have a similar impact on surrounding RC frames. The impact includes enhanced shear demand, damage, etc. However, the effect of the enhanced shear demand on RC columns is a relatively less investigated issue. In this context, an experimental program was designed to compare the effect of non-strengthened and FC strengthened masonry infill on the behavior of the surrounding RC frame in terms of lateral strength, hinge formation, shear demand enhancement, and damage to columns. The test specimens, including a bare RC frame, a masonry infilled RC frame, and a FC strengthened masonry infilled RC frame, were subjected to a quasi-static cyclic lateral loads. The experimental result showed that the masonry infill and FC strengthened masonry infill increased lateral strength, on average, by 81% and 244%, respectively, when compared to that of the bare RC frame. Meanwhile, FC strengthening of masonry infill improved the lateral strength, on average, by 90% when compared with the masonry infilled RC frame’s lateral strength. In this study, low-strength masonry infill caused the formation of a short column on the tension column of the RC frame. The application of ferrocement to low-strength masonry altered the position of the plastic hinge formed on the tension column of the RC frame when compared to that of the masonry infilled RC frame. Therefore, ferrocement strengthening of masonry eliminated the short column phenomenon in this particular study. Nevertheless, the shear demand (in terms of strain on the column tie) enhancement of the tension column was not substantial due to the ferrocement strengthening of the masonry infill when compared to that of the masonry infilled RC frame. Moreover, the damage concentration on RC columns (i.e., residual crack width) after insertion of masonry infill and ferrocement strengthened masonry infill changed to a smaller extent when compared to the bare RC frame damages, where the residual crack widths were within 1.0 ~ 2.0 mm.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
裸露 RC 框架、无加固和铁水泥加固砌体填充 RC 框架侧向行为实验对比研究
虽然混凝土框架结构广泛使用砌体填充物,但砌体填充物在结构设计中的作用仅限于自重。因此,砌体填充物的全面刚度特性并不常被考虑。然而,最近的地震表明了砌体填充物对周围 RC 框架横向行为的影响。此外,有时会使用铁水泥(FC)、织物增强砂浆(TRM)、碳纤维增强聚合物(CFRP)等对现有的砌体填充进行加固,这也可能会对周围的 RC 框架产生类似的影响。这些影响包括剪力需求增强、损坏等。然而,增强的剪力需求对 RC 柱的影响是一个研究相对较少的问题。在这种情况下,我们设计了一个实验项目,以比较非加固和 FC 加固砌体填充物在横向强度、铰链形成、剪力需求增强和柱损坏方面对周围 RC 框架行为的影响。试验试件包括裸露 RC 框架、砌体填充 RC 框架和 FC 加固砌体填充 RC 框架,均承受准静态循环侧向荷载。实验结果表明,与裸露的 RC 框架相比,砌体填充和 FC 加固砌体填充的侧向强度平均分别提高了 81% 和 244%。同时,与砌体填充 RC 框架的侧向强度相比,FC 加固砌体填充的侧向强度平均提高了 90%。在这项研究中,低强度的砌体填充物导致在 RC 框架的拉力柱上形成短柱。与砌体填充 RC 框架相比,在低强度砌体中应用铁水泥改变了 RC 框架拉伸柱上形成的塑性铰链的位置。因此,在这项研究中,砌体的铁水泥加固消除了短柱现象。然而,与砌体填充 RC 框架相比,砌体填充的铁水泥加固并没有大幅提高拉伸柱的剪力需求(以柱拉杆应变表示)。此外,在砌体填充和铁水泥加固砌体填充后,RC 柱的损坏集中度(即残余裂缝宽度)与裸露 RC 框架损坏相比变化较小,残余裂缝宽度在 1.0 ~ 2.0 mm 范围内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Liquefaction hazard of Wellington reclamations based on conventional analysis A comparative investigation on experimental lateral behaviour of bare RC frame, non-strengthened and ferrocement strengthened masonry infilled RC frame Monotonic testing of brace assemblies for piping systems and considerations for capacity design
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1