Seismic Analysis and Response of Bare and Masonry-Infilled Reinforced Coursework

Seismic Analysis and Response of Bare and Masonry-Infilled Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures - Coursework Example Since the infill walls play some roles during earthquakes, their design need consideration to withhold lateral forces. From a research conducted out, most concrete structures succumb to seismic loads due to: Failures of beam-column joints as a result of poor reinforcement at the joints and/or poor workmanship in installation of reinforcement beams; Basic failure that results from flexural weakness and or low shear strength; Failure of the infill wall that results from enough shear strength or a flexural strength that is out-of-plane (Griffith, Mike 2008, p.2). The relationship between un-reinforced masonry in-fills and reinforced concrete has led to unique influences in comparison to bare frames or seismic response. The behaviour of the in-fills to seismic loads remains controversial for existing buildings (Magenes, Guido and Pampanin Stefano, 2004). The issues to be addressed are modelling of structural elements and masonry in-fills panels. The analysed model need validation in term s of Beam-Column Subassemblies, single storey frames with infills, Dimension Frame with infills for multi-storey structures. Limitations related to infill panels and joints area also considered (Magenes, Guido and Pampanin Stefano, 2004). ... Therefore, structures in these areas need to be designed to withstand seismic loads. The success achieved will assist in reducing risks of collapsed structures in case of earthquake disasters. The aim of this project is to analyse the importance of masonry infill in relation to seismic loads. A comparison between structures with infill and bare structures are considered to help determine the best structures for earthquake prone areas. Part Two: References Article One:Diptesh Das and C.V.R. Murty, Brick masonry infills in seismic design of RC buildings: Part 1- Cost implications. 2004. The Indian Concrete Journal. According to Diptesh das and C.V.R. Murty(2004), the infills of reinforced concrete structures has contributed some strength to a structure in relation to seismic loads when compared to bare structures. Keen interest should therefore be put during seismic design stages of the infill walls. The focus is on design methods that make use of the importance of infills, improve the ir functions and minimize their negative impacts. The purposes of infill walls are; I. They minimize drifting in inter-storey structures, II. Improve the strength of the structure and III. Makes the structures stiff. Despite these advantages, infills reduce the structure’s ductility. Other factors that determine the strength of infill masonry is the quality of material used, the workmanship and the type of frame-infill interface. The design codes for infill are very few. The common codes are; a. Eurocode 8 b. Nepal building code 201 and c. Indian seismic code. The Eurocode 8 (EC 8) refers to RC frames and infill of brick masonry as a dual system. This infill is classified thrice depending on ductility, mainly low, medium and