DOI: 10.5937/jaes0-35912
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY 4.0
Volume 20 article 981 pages: 745-753
In order to get accuration analytical model for describing the lateral strength of brick masonry with openings, a newly simple method was introduced. Comparison of reinforced concrete frame structures with openings and the experimental results of brick masonry with openings (holes) of 25% and 40% was used in this analytical model. In the high-risk seismic areas many reinforced concrete buildings with infill frame with openings. Where the presence of openings will reduce the strength of the wall. In addition, the influence of the area and location openings in the walls are strongly needed to obtain a more realistic method for designing reinforced concrete structures.The brick mansory was assumed as the non-structural component. However, based on the observations after the earthquake, the presence of brick masonry has a significant contribution to the seismic capacity of reinforced concrete structures. The diagonal strut method was used, where the elastic and plastic behavior of the fill-portal by considering the limited ductility of the infill frame material. The comparison of the new analytical model and the experimental brick masonry with opening 25% and brick masonry with opening 40% shows a good agreement. Finally, it can be said that the new analytical model can be used.
This research was financially supported by the Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education,Indonesia(123/SP2H/AMD/LT/DRPM/2020). The authors also sincerely acknowledge to head and staffs of Structure and Construction Material Laboratory, Civil Engineering Department, Syiah Kuala University, for supporting during prepared the specimens, provided the structural testing facilities and conducted the structural tests.
1. Furtado A, Rodrigues H, Arêde A, Varum H,.2020,. Experimental tests on strengthening strategies for masonry infill walls:A literature review, Construction and Building Materials 263 (2020) 120520,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120520
2. Penava D, Sarhosis V, Kožar I, Guljaš I, 2018, Contribution of RC columns and masonry wall to the shear resistance of masonry infilled RC frames containing different in size window and door openings, Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 105–130 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.007
3. Maidiawati, Sanada, Y., 2016, R/C Frame–infill interaction model and its application to Indonesian buildings, Journal of Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. Doi:10.1002/eqe.2787
4. Okail H, Abdelrahman, Abdelkhalik, Metwaly M., 2016 Experimental and analytical investigation of the lateral load response of confined masonry walls, HBRC Journal 12, 33-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.09.004
5. J. Zovkic, V. Sigmund, and I. Guljas, Earthquake Engng. Struc. Dyn. 1131-1149. (2013)
6. Maidiawati, Sanada, Y., 2013, Modeling of brick masonry infill and application to analyses of indonesian R/C frame buildings, The Thirteenth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction (EASEC-13), Sapporo, Japan. http://hdl.handle.net/2115/54474
7. Maidiawati, Tanjung J., and Medriosa H., Conference Proceedings, in AIP Conf.Proc.1892 of IGNITE-AICCE'17, 2017, pp. 020013-1-020013-8
8. Yekrangnia M, Asteris P, 2020, Multi-strut macro-model for masonry inilled frames with openings,Journal of Building Engineering 32 (2020) 101683, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101683
9. Maidiawati, Tanjung J, Hayati Y, Agus, Medriosa H,. Experimental Investigation Of Seismic Performance Of Reinforced Brick Masonry Infilled Reinforced Concrete Frames With A Central Opening, International Journal of GEOMATE, May 2019, Vol.16, Issue 57, pp.35 - 41Geotec., Const. Mat. & Env., DOI: https://doi.org/10.21660/2019.57.4592ISSN: 2186-2982 (Print), 2186-2990 (Online), Japan.
10. Choi, H., Yoshiaki, Nakano., and Sanada, Y., 2005,Seismic Performance and Crack Pattern of Concrete Block Infilled Frames. Bulletin of ERS, No. 38.Suzuki T, Choi H, Sanada Y, Nakano Y, Matsukawa K, and Paul D 2017 Bull Earthquake Eng, doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0139-1
11. Goutam, Mondal., and Sudhir, K., Jain, M., 2008, Lateral Stiffness of Masonry Infilled Reinforced Concrete (RC) Frames with Central Opening, Earthquake Spectr Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI)a, Vol. 24, No. 3, 701–723. DOI: 10.1193/1.2942.376.
12. The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association [JBDPA], 2005, English Version 1st, Standard for Seismic Evaluation of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings. Building Research Institute,Japan.
13. Paulay T, Priestley MJN 1992 Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings, John Wiley & Sons: New York.
14. Maidiawati, Sanada, Y., 2008, Investigation and Analysis of Buildings Damaged during the September 2007 Sumatra Indonesia Earthquakes, Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 7 (2), 371-378.
15. Maidiawati, Sanada, Y., Konishi, D., and Tanjung, J.,2011, Seismic Performance of Nonstructural Brick Walls Used in Indonesian R/C Buildings, Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 10 (1), 203-210.
16. Maidiawati, Oo, T., Sanada, Y., 2012, A Simple Approach for Determining Contact Length between Frame and Infill of Brick Masonry Infilled R/C Frames, 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisboa, Portugal.
17. Surendran, S., and Kausihk, H.B., 2012, Masonry Infill RC frame with openings: Review of in-plane lateral load behaviour and modeling approaches, The Opening Construction and Building Technology Journal, Vol. 6, (Suppl 1-M9), 126–154.
18. Karimi AS, Karimi MS, Kheyroddin A, Shahkarami AA, 2016, Experimental and Numerical Study on Seismic Behavior of An Infilled Masonry Wall Compared to An Arched Masonry Wall, Structures 8 (2016) 144–153, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2016.09.012
19. F. Piroglu, and K. Ozakgul,2013,. Site investigation of masonry buildings damaged during the 23 October and 9 November 2011 Van Earthquakes in Turkey, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst.Sci.,13, 689–708, 2013www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/13/689/2013/doi:10.5194/nhess-13-689-2013.