ANALYSIS OF LATERAL STIFFNESS FOR INFILLED FRAME WITH OPENING

A.S. KASNALE1 & SANJAY JAMKAR2 Professor in Civil Engineering Department, M.S. Bidve Engineering College, Latur, India Professor in Civil Engineering Department, Government College of Engineering, Aurangabad, India E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract- Analytical study of infilled frame with opening is done using finite element method. Lateral stiffness of the frame without infill, with infill and with having opening has been investigated. The effect of opening area against lateral stiffness of infilled frame has been worked out. The variation of aspect ratio, opening size with strut width reduction factor is derived. The effect of number of storey on lateral stiffness of structure is also included in the study. Keywords- Infill;Lateral Stiffness;Seismic Load; Opeing Area

I. INTRODUCTION The term infilled frame is used to denote a composite structure formed by the combination of a moment resisting plane frame and infill walls. An infill wall tends to interact with the frame when the structure is subjected to lateral loads, and also exhibits energy-dissipation characteristics under seismic loading. The infilled wall then comes into play to carry a part of the load by providing strut action to the frame. The stress configuration in the frame also gets changed due to the strut action in the structural system. Masonry walls contribute to the stiffness of the infill under the action of lateral load. In seismic areas, ignoring the frame-wall interaction is not always on the safe side, since, under lateral loads, the infills significantly increase the stiffness resulting in possible change in the seismic demand due to the significant reduction in the natural period of the composite structural system. Also the composite action of the frame-wall system changes magnitude and distribution of straining actions in the frame members, i.e. critical sections in the infilled frame differ from those in the bare frame, which may lead to unconservative or poorly detailed designs. Objectives of present study is to develop simplified equivalent strut method of analysis to model the lateral stiffness of reinforced concrete frame with unreinforced brick masonry with central opening of different opening area. Using the finite element method, reinforced concrete infilled frame with one bay-one storey, one bay-two storey, one bay-three storey, two bay-one storey, two bay-two storey, and two bay-three storey with a central opening of different area in infill are analysed and width of the strut required for equivalent diagonal strut method is proposed.

II. ANALYTICAL MODEL FOR INFILL The analytical model can be offered by micro-models (detailed) or macro-models (approximate). Micro Models These models are based on the finite element representation of the infill, the frame and the interaction between frame and infill. The main focus has been the appropriate representation of the contact elements. In one of the early studies conducted, the main aim was to correctly represent the infill stiffness. The linear elastic rectangular finite elements with two degrees of freedom at each of the four corner (four-node) nodes were used to model the infill panels [Mallick and Severn, 1967]. The beams and columns were modeled by frame elements, neglecting axial deformations. The main advantage of the frame element was that it was geometrically simple and had only four degrees of freedom. The interface elements were provided between adjacent nodes with common displacements normal to the interface. Separation was assumed to occur when tensile stresses developed in the normal direction and in this way the contact length was determined. Slip between the frame and infill was also taken into account. The axial deformation of the frame member came into consideration in the prediction of the lengths of contact, load shared between the frame and infill, and lateral stiffness of the composite structure. Effects of regular and irregular patterns of infills were investigated by considering various frames including a bare frame. Frame with continuously arranged masonry infills performed better undergoing lower drifts than the bare frames and those with irregular arrangement of infills [Dhanasekar and Page, 1986].

International Journal of Advanced Technology in Civil Engineering, ISSN: 2231 5721, Volume-1, Issue-3,4, 2012 23

Analysis Of Lateral Stiffness For Infilled Frame With Opening

A method of modeling of infilled frames, called Method of contacts points, was presented for the analysis of masonry infilled subjected to static loads [Asteris, 1996]. This method combined the following three features, namely a finite element model, a failure surface for masonry and a criterion for the separation of masonry panel from the surrounding frame. III. MACRO MODELS Among the progress of research work, it was understood that when an infilled frame is subjected to lateral loads, the transfer of load takes place through a truss action in the infill and this led to the development of diagonal strut model. The strut action takes place when infill along the unloaded diagonal gets separated from the beams and columns due to flexural deformation of adjoining frame members and a strut action is formed along the compressed infill diagonal Polyakov. The early version of this equivalent strut model [Holmes, 1961] includes a pin jointed strut with its width taken as one-third the infill diagonal. This approach with only the stiffness property of the strut to be input, found its immediate acceptance in the modeling of infilled frames [Smith, 1962]. The separation between the frame and infill was found to take place only over a limited length on each side of the infill corner depending on relative stiffness of the frame and infill [Smith, 1966]. Another model for representing the brick infill panel by equivalent diagonal strut was proposed [Mainstone, 1974], wherein the area of the strut was calculated by considering the section properties of the adjoining column members. In a recent study, however, three levels of details for the computational models were explored, namely micro-modeling, meso-modeling and macromodeling. The meso-models were intermediate models with damage mechanisms modeled using smeared cracks and homogenous properties of masonry. The study concluded the advantage of micro-models in capturing the finer details of the behavior and the capability of meso-models to calibrate the macro-models [Mosalam, 1997]. . IV. PARAMETRIC STUDY OF INFILLED FRAME WITH OPENING A. Modeling forIinfilled Frame Present work in based on analytical study using Finite Element Method. Finite element analyses performed using the software SAP2000 Advanced 10.0.5. The frame elements with two translational degrees of freedom and one rotational degree of freedom at each node were used to model the frame element. The

infills were idealized by square plane stress elements with two translational degrees of freedom at each node. The number of finite elements, used in the analyses, depends on size of both panels and openings. The infill and frame interface were modeled by using link elements incapable of taking any tension. B. Parametric Study In the present parametric study, six set of infilled frames are analyzed and their lateral stiffness determined. For this finite element study, the geometric and material properties used are presented in Table 1. The unit weight and Poissons ratio of concrete were taken as 25 kN/m3 and 0.2 respectively. Unit weight and Poissons ratio of infill were taken as 20 kN/m3 and 0.15 respectively. In this study all frames have 2000 mm X 2000 mm (center to centre dimensions) of 110 mm thick masonry infill wall. The detail dimensions of these frames are shown in figure 1. The opening is varied by changing both width and height of opening. Width of opening 400 mm, 800 mm, 1200mm, and 1600 mm are taken. For each of these widths of opening 400 mm, 800 mm, 1200mm, and 1600 mm height opening are considered. In addition, one bare frame and one fully infilled frame are analyzed. The lateral stiffness determined by finite element analysis of frames are shown in Table 2 which presents the results for all parametric study with square openings Also, lateral stiffness of all the six infilled frames namely one bay-one storey, one bay-two storey, one bay-three storey, two bay-one storey, two bay-two storey, and two bay-three storey is obtained by equivalent diagonal strut analysis. In this equivalent diagonal strut method the infill modeled as a single equivalent diagonal strut with varying width of diagonal strut and beam and column modeled as frame elements. Thickness of strut is kept same as that of the infill. The strut is connected to the diagonal nodes at beam-column joint such that it can take only axial compressive force. The strut-width reduction factor is given by:
Strut-width of infilled frame with opening (Wdo) Strut-width of fully infilled frame (Wds) Opening area ratio is defined as the ratio of area of opening to area of full infill wall and is given by: Strut-width reduction factor =

Opening area ratio =

Area of opening (Aopening) Area of full infill (Ainfill)

Strut-width reduction factors for various opening area ratios as shown in Table 2. Figure 2 shows the same thing for all parametric study cases.

International Journal of Advanced Technology in Civil Engineering, ISSN: 2231 5721, Volume-1, Issue-3,4, 2012 24

Analysis Of Lateral Stiffness For Infilled Frame With Opening

V. CONCLUSIONS 1. The presence of square openings can be modeled using the single equivalent diagonal strut model. The objective of this modeling is to calculate the stiffness of infill. The stiffness of strut is expressible in terms of area of cross section (A), Modulus of Elasticity (E) and the length (L). It can be seen that, the only free parameter for including the effect of openings is the area and thereby the width of strut, hence a reduction factor to the strut width corresponding to a solid infill is evaluated in present work. A reduction factor given by R = f (area ratio: the ratio of area of opening to the area of panel) is evaluated for various cases. The effect of opening on strut-width reduction factor of infilled frame should be neglected if the area of opening less than 5 % of the area of the infill panel. 24 % of opening reduces the strut-width up to 60 % of fully-infilled frame and in between 24 % to 40 % of opening reduces the strut width up to 80 % of fully-infilled frame. In general, more than 50 % of opening renders the stiffness of composite frame much close to that of the bare-frame. The investigation in to effect of number of storeys shows that lateral stiffness is reduced by 30 % to 40 % for building with two upper stories. The investigation on effect of bays shows that lateral stiffness is increased 25 % to 40 % with increase in number of bays by one.

6.

Combined effect of increase in number of stories and bays suggest that the stiffness is less than the one bay-one storey case. Thus, though there is increase in strength, it is not justifiable to use the strut width for single panel case.

REFERENCES
[1] Asteris, P.G., (1996), A Method for the Modelling of Infilled Frames (Method of Contact Points), 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No.953. Asteris, P.G., (2003), Lateral Stiffness of Brick Masonry Infilled Plane Frames, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.129, No.8, August 1, 2003. Drysdale, R.G., Hamid, A.A., and Baker, R.L., (1993), Masonry Structures: Behavior and Design, Prentice Hall Inc., New Jersey. Dayaratnam, P., (1987), Brick and Reinforced Brick Structures, Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Durrani, A.J. and Haider, S., (1996), Seismic Response of R/C Frames with Unreinforced Masonry, 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. 165. Fardis Michael N, (2000), Design Provisions for Masonry Infilled Frames. 12th World Conference Earthquake Engineering 2000, Paper No. 2553. Liauw, T.C. and Kwan, K.H., (1984), New Development in Research of Infilled Frames, 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, July 21-28, 1984. Mallick, D.V., and Severn R.T., (1967), The Behavior of Infilled Frame under Static Loading, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Part-2, Vol. 38, 1967, pp 639656.

[2]

[3]

2.

[4]

3.

[5]

[6]

4.

[7]

[8]

5.

Sections

Cross-section (mmXmm)

Table 1: Properties of Infilled frame Centre-line Length Compressive Longitudinal (H) (mm) Strength (Mpa) Reinforcement

Shear Reinforcement

(No.)

Fy (Mpa)

Spacing (mm)

Fys (Mpa)

Beam

230X150

2000

40.01

4-16d

495

8d-100c/c

495

Column

230X150

2000

40.01

4-16d

495

8d-100c/c

495

Infill

1770X110

1770

6.24

International Journal of Advanced Technology in Civil Engineering, ISSN: 2231 5721, Volume-1, Issue-3,4, 2012 25

Analysis Of Lateral Stiffness For Infilled Frame With Opening

Table 2: Properties of Different Parametric Cases for Square Opening

Parametric Case

Length of Opening (L) 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

Height of Opening (h)

Opening Area Ratio,

Aopening Ainfill
0 0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 0 0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 0 0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 0 0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 0 0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 0 0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1

Lateral Stiffness with Opening, (kN/m) 36332.45 34621.32 26195.94 16556.25 10890.59 7565.16 27062.9 26442.7 18214.4 10904.2 6338.8 3577 19365.48 18442.73 12214.35 7004.24 3838.8 2692 53772.03 52124.54 39258.32 23946.28 15800 9655.34 35145.6 34626.1 25542.4 14204.2 9215.23 5236.12 25315.25 24113.25 16156.32 8626.38 5632.65 3192

Strut-Width Reduction Factor,

Wdo Wds

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

1 0.94732 0.62782 0.31897 0.11023 0 1 0.965864 0.55041 0.238158 0.063509 0 1 0.988889 0.467889 0.167 0.040222 0 1 0.98889 0.63704 0.26667 0.06111 0 1 0.9726 0.586 0.2453 0.0674 0 1 0.9821 0.628 0.29365 0.086 0

One Bay One story

One Bay Two story

One Bay Three story

Two Bay One story

Two Bay Two story

Two Bay Three story

International Journal of Advanced Technology in Civil Engineering, ISSN: 2231 5721, Volume-1, Issue-3,4, 2012 26

Analysis Of Lateral Stiffness For Infilled Frame With Opening

Figure 1: Dimensions (m) for parametric study of infilled frame with central opening International Journal of Advanced Technology in Civil Engineering, ISSN: 2231 5721, Volume-1, Issue-3,4, 2012 27

Analysis Of Lateral Stiffness For Infilled Frame With Opening

All Frames Strut-Width Reduction Factor, Wdo/Wds

y = -1.208x + 1 R = 0.830 y = - 2.404x + 1 R = 0.986

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Opeining Area Ratio, Aopening/Ainfill

Figure 2: Effect of square opening size on strut-width reduction factor of infilled for all frame

International Journal of Advanced Technology in Civil Engineering, ISSN: 2231 5721, Volume-1, Issue-3,4, 2012 28