You are on page 1of 27

Research to Practice Webinar

co-produced by NEES and EERI

Assessment of Seismic Performance


of Masonry-Infilled Reinforced
Concrete Frames
P. Benson Shing
Ioannis Koutromanos
University of California
San Diego

Andreas Stavridis
University of Texas
Arlington

May 22, 2012

Based on research sponsored by

George E. Brown, Jr. Network for Earthquake


Engineering Simulation Program

P. Benson Shing
Jose Restrepo
Andreas Stavridis
Ioannis Koutromanos
Stanford University

Sarah Billington
Marios Kyriakides

Kaspar Willam
Sivaselvan Mettupalayam
Ben Blackard
Carlo Citto
P.B. Shing

Outline of Presentation

Overview of research program

Background/Motivation.
Summary of experimental and analytical
studies.

P. Benson Shing
UCSD
pshing@ucsd.edu

Major findings
Observations from experiments and finite
element models.
Influence of geometry, material and design
parameters on nonlinear behavior.

Simplified assessment tools

Andreas Stavridis
UT Arlington
stavridis@uta.edu

Simplified analytical model.


Proposal for ASCE 41-13.

Nonlinear finite element modeling

Modeling approach.
Constitutive models and their calibration.
Validation examples.
Case studies.

Ioannis Koutromanos
UCSD
ikoutromanos@ucsd.edu

P.B. Shing

Earthquake Damage of Masonry Infilled RC Structures

1985 Mexico City Earthquake (EERI)

2000 Kocaeli Earthquake, Turkey (EERI)

P.B. Shing

2008 Wenchuan Earthquake, China

P.B. Shing

Possible Failure Mechanisms

Knee-Braced

Corner Crushing

Diagonal Strut Crushing

Shear Sliding

P.B. Shing

Nonlinear Analysis Methods for Performance Assessment


Limit Analysis Methods

Equivalent Strut Models


ASCE 41-06

Finite Element Method

Pros

Cons

Limit Analysis
Methods

Consider different
failure mechanisms;
good estimates of
strengths.

Do not provide forcedisplacement


relations.

Strut Models

Simple to use for


pushover or
dynamic analysis.

Difficult to calibrate
and to capture correct
failure mechanisms.

Finite Element
Method

Most general and


provides detailed
behavior.

Difficult to use and


limited availability.

P.B. Shing

ASCE 41-06 Seismic Rehab. of Existing Buildings

Strut model for assessing


stiffness and required strengths
of RC column and beam
members.

Nonlinear force-deflection relations for infill walls

P.B. Shing

What is lacking in ASCE 41-06?

Guidelines for determination of monotonic


load-displacement or hysteretic behavior of
equivalent struts for nonlinear analysis.
Guidelines for nonlinear finite element analysis.
Comprehensive experimental/analytical data to
support acceptance criteria.

P.B. Shing

Goals of Research Program


Development of simplified
and nonlinear finite element
analysis methods for
performance assessment.

10

Development and evaluation of


retrofit methods for masonry
infill walls to enhance seismic
performance.

Focused on non-ductile RC frames with unreinforced


brick infill walls.
P.B. Shing

Experimental Studies

11

Evaluate retrofit schemes


Validate analytical models
Study influence of wall openings
Study multi-story, multi-bay systems

1/5-Scale Quasi-Static Tests at Stanford

2/3-Scale Shake-Table Tests at NEES@UCSD


2/3-Scale Quasi-Static Tests at NEES@Colorado
P.B. Shing

Prototype Building For Experimental Studies

12

Existing 1920s Building in California


Frame Studied
3
18
2
18
1
22
A

22

22
B

P.B. Shing

Stanford University
(Billington & Kyriakides)

13

Engineered Cementitious
Composites (ECC)

Flexural Tests

Triplet Tests

7.7
7
.
7

Prism Tests

ECC

ECC Retrofit
Compression

Tension

Bond
P.B. Shing

Stanford University

14

(Billington & Kyriakides)


1/5-scale frames

Drift (%)
P.B. Shing

University of Colorado

15

(Willam, Blackard & Citto)

P.B. Shing

UCSD Shake-Table Tests

16

(Shing, Stavridis, Koutromanos)

P.B. Shing

Nonlinear Finite Element Modeling

V/W

17

-1.5

-1.0

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5-0.5 0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
-1.0
-1.5
Experiment
Analysis
-2.0
-2.5
drift ratio (%)

P.B. Shing

Retrofit with Engineered Cementitious Overlay

18

ECC Overlay

P.B. Shing

Application of Engineered Cementitious Overlay

19

P.B. Shing

Damage in Unretrofitted 2nd Story

20

P.B. Shing

GFRP Overlay Strengthening of Second Story

21

Installed by Fyfe Co.

P.B. Shing

Epoxy Injection and GFRP Overlay in 2nd Story

22

P.B. Shing

Installed GFRP Overlays

23

P.B. Shing

Repaired Specimen

24

P.B. Shing

Test Data and Reports in NEES Repository

25

http://nees.org/warehouse/project/422
1.

2.

3.

4.

Stavridis, Andreas (2009). Analytical and Experimental Study of


Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frames Infilled with
Masonry Walls, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, San Diego,
La Jolla, CA.
Kyriakides, Marios (2011). Seismic Retrofit of Unreinforced Masonry
Infills in Non-Ductile Reinforced Concrete Frames using Engineered
Cementitious Composites, Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University,
Stanford, CA.
Koutromanos, Ioannis (2011). Numerical Analysis of Masonry-Infilled
Reinforced Concrete Frames Subjected to Seismic Loads and
Experimental Evaluation of Retrofit Techniques, Ph.D. Dissertation,
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA.
Citto, Carlo (2008). Two-Dimensional Interface Model Applied to
Masonry Structures, MS Thesis, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO.

P.B. Shing

Journal Publications

26

1.

Stavridis, A. and Shing, P.B. (2010). Finite-Element Modeling of Nonlinear


Behavior of Masonry-Infilled RC Frames, Journal of Structural Engineering,
Vol. 136, No. 3, 285296.

2.

Blackard, B., Willam, K., and Mettupalayam, S. (2009). Experimental


Observations of Masonry Infilled RC Frames with Openings, ACI SP 265-9,
American Concrete Institute, 199-222.

3.

Koutromanos, I. and Shing, P.B. (2012). A Cohesive Crack Model to Simulate


Cyclic Response of Concrete and Masonry Structures, ACI Structural Journal,
Vol. 109, No. 3, 349-358.

4.

Koutromanos, I., Stavridis, A., Shing, P.B., and Willam, K. (2011). Numerical
Modeling of Masonry-Infilled RC Frames Subjected to Seismic Loads, Computers
and Structures, Vol. 89, 10261037.

5.

Stavridis, A., Koutromanos, I., and Shing, P.B. (2012). Shake-Table Tests of a
Three-Story Reinforced Concrete Frame with Masonry Infill Walls, Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 41, Issue 6, 10891108.

6.

Kyriakides, M.A., Hendriks, M.A.N., Billington, S.L. (2012). Simulation of


Unreinforced Masonry Beams Retrofitted with Engineered Cementitious
Composites in Flexure, Journal of Composites for Construction (in press).

7.

Citto, C., Wo, S.I., Willam, K., and Schuler, M.P. (2011). "In-Place Evaluation of
Masonry Shear Behavior using Digital Image Analysis," ACI Materials Journal,
Vol. 108, No. 4, 413-422.

P.B. Shing

Outline of Presentation

27

Overview of research program

Background/Motivation.
Summary of experimental and analytical
studies.

P. Benson Shing
UCSD
pshing@ucsd.edu

Major findings
Observations from experiments and finite
element models.
Influence of geometry, material and design
parameters on nonlinear behavior.

Simplified assessment tools

Andreas Stavridis
UT Arlington
stavridis@uta.edu

Simplified analytical model.


Proposal for ASCE 41-13.

Nonlinear finite element modeling

Modeling approach.
Constitutive models and their calibration.
Validation examples.
Case studies.

Ioannis Koutromanos
UCSD
ikoutromanos@ucsd.edu

P.B. Shing