Skip to main content

Design Guidelines for URM Infills and Effect of Construction Sequence on Seismic Performance of Code Compliant RC Frame Buildings

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Advances in Structural Engineering

Abstract

Un-reinforced masonry (URM) infilled RC framed buildings are the most common construction practice for modern multi-storey buildings in India like many other parts of the world. Although the behavior and failure pattern of the global structure changes significantly due to infill-frame interaction, the general design practice is to treat them as non-structural elements and their stiffness, strength and interaction with frame is often ignored, as it is difficult to simulate. Indian Standard, like many other major national codes, does not provide any explicit guideline for modeling of infills. This paper takes a stock of controlling design provisions in some of the major national seismic design codes to ensure the desired seismic performance of infilled frame. Most of the national codes on seismic design of buildings still lack in adequate guidelines on modelling and design of URM infilled frames results in variable assumption in analysis and design. This paper, using nonlinear pushover analysis, also presents the effect of one of such assumptions of conventional ‘simultaneous’ analysis procedure of infilled frame on the seismic performance of URM infilled RC frame buildings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. GSI (1995) Report on Uttarkashi earthquake of 20th October 1991. Geological Society of India (GSI), Memoir 30, Bangalore, India

    Google Scholar 

  2. DEQ (1999) A report on Chamoli earthquake of March 29, 1999. Department of Earthquake Engineering, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, India

    Google Scholar 

  3. GSI (2003) Kutch (Bhuj) earthquake 26 January 2001. Geological Survey of India Lucknow, India

    Google Scholar 

  4. EERI (2002) Bhuj, India earthquake of January 26, 2001, reconnaissance report. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute

    Google Scholar 

  5. Özcebe G, Ramirez J, Wasti ST, Yakut A (2003) Bingöl earthquake of 1 May 2003 engineering report. http://www.seru.metu.edu.tr/archives.html, http://www.anatolianquake.org

  6. BIS (2002) IS 1893 (Part 1) Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  7. CEN (2004) EN 1998-1, Eurocode 8: design for structures for earthquake resistance, Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Brussels, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  8. NZS-4230 (2004) Design of reinforced concrete masonry structures. Standards Association of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  9. ASCE-41 (2007) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings (ASCE/SEI 41-06). American Society of Civil Engineers Reston, Virginia

    Google Scholar 

  10. Haldar P, Singh Y (2009) Seismic performance and vulnerability of Indian code designed RC frame buildings. ISET J Earthq Eng 46:29–45

    Google Scholar 

  11. BIS (2000) IS 456 Indian standard plain and reinforced concrete-code of practice (Fourth Revision). Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  12. FEMA-273 (1997) NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  13. FEMA-306 (1998) Evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and masonry wall buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  14. FEMA-356 (1998) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  15. Riddington JR (1984) The influence of initial gaps on infilled frame behavior. Proc Inst Civ Eng Part 2 77:295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Saneinejad A, Hobbs B (1995) Inelastic design of infilled frames. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 121:634–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Moghaddam HA, Dowling PJ (1987) The state of the art in infilled frames. ESEE research report no 87-2, Civil Engineering Department, Imperial College, London

    Google Scholar 

  18. BIS (1987a) IS: 875 (part 1) Indian standard code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and structures. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  19. BIS (1987b) IS: 875 (part 2) Indian standard code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and structures. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  20. SAP2000 (2010) CSI analysis reference manual for SAP2000. Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, California

    Google Scholar 

  21. ASCE/SEI-41 (2007) Supplement-1, update to ASCE/SEI 41 concrete provisions. American Society of Civil Engineers Reston, Virginia

    Google Scholar 

  22. Haldar P, Singh Y, Paul DK (2013) Identification of seismic failure modes of URM infilled RC frame buildings. Eng Fail Anal 33:97–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Haldar P, Singh Y (2012) Modelling of URM infills and their effect on seismic behaviour of RC frame buildings. Open Constr Build Technol J 6(Suppl 1-M1):35–41 (Bentham Science Publishers)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Smith BS (1962) Lateral stiffness of infilled frames. ASCE J Struct Div 88:183–199

    Google Scholar 

  25. Madan A, Reinhorn AM, Mander JB, Valles RE (1997) Modeling of masonry infill panels for structural analysis. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 123:1295–1302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Asteris PG (2003) Lateral stiffness of brick masonry infilled plane frames. J Struct Eng ASCE 129:1071–1079

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Putul Haldar .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer India

About this paper

Cite this paper

Haldar, P., Singh, Y., Paul, D.K. (2015). Design Guidelines for URM Infills and Effect of Construction Sequence on Seismic Performance of Code Compliant RC Frame Buildings. In: Matsagar, V. (eds) Advances in Structural Engineering. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2193-7_83

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2193-7_83

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New Delhi

  • Print ISBN: 978-81-322-2192-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-81-322-2193-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics