مطالعه آزمایشگاهی روش‌های متداول مهار دیوارهای میانقاب بنایی به قاب‌های فولادی در ایران

نوع مقاله : Articles

نویسندگان

گروه عمران، واحد کرمانشاه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرمانشاه، ایران

چکیده

مشخصات میانقاب‌ها و نوع اتصال آنها به قاب، می‌تواند اثرات قابل‌توجهی بر رفتار لرزه‌ای سازه داشته باشد. در این مقاله به‌منظور بررسی روش‌های متداول مهار دیوارهای میانقاب بنایی در ایران، نتایج آزمایش چهار نمونه قاب فولادی یک طبقه و یک دهانه با مقیاس  ، با تمرکز بر جزئیات مختلف اتصال دیوار به قاب ارائه می‌گردد. سه نمونه دارای دیوار میانقاب بنایی ساخته شده با استفاده از مصالح متداول در ایران هستند و یک قاب بدون میانقاب است. تمام نمونه‌ها با اعمال بار جانبی تنها در تراز تیر فوقانی مورد آزمایش قرار گرفتند. جزئیات مختلفی از تماس و اتصال میانقاب و قاب شامل تماس دیوار و قاب بدون مهار، اتصال و مهار میانقاب با استفاده از نبشی‌های جداکننده قائم و میلگردهای مدفون در دیوار بررسی و رفتار آنها در هریک از این موارد بررسی گردید. نتایج نشان می‌دهد جزئیات ذکر شده جهت اتصال و مهار دیوار میانقاب به قاب، ضمن امکان اجرای سریع و آسان، به نحو مطلوبی سبب تأخیر در ترک‌خوردگی پانل میانقاب، تغییر حالات شکست دیوار، کاهش میزان آسیب‌دیدگی و حفظ ایستایی دیوار در جابه‌جایی جانبی قاب می‌گردد. همچنین تأثیر قابل‌توجهی بر الگوی تشکیل ترک‌ها، مدهای شکست، سختی، مقاومت، شکل‌پذیری، تغییر شکل خارج از صفحه و میزان اتلاف انرژی دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Experimental Investigation of Conventional Methods of Anchoring Masonry Infills to Steel Frames in Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahdi Kahrizi
  • Mehrzad Tahamouli Roudsari
Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Kermanshah Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran
چکیده [English]

Depending upon whether or not they are connected to the frame, infill walls display different performances and have varying effects on the structure and the force distribution between building frames. In most of buildings with steel or reinforced concrete frames, to partition the internal space and also to separate the inside of the building from outside, walls with masonry materials are used as infills. Masonry infill walls are composed of small, distinct elements which collectively act as a single unit. Videlicet, the masonry infill wall consists of discrete materials and since discrete materials generally exhibit a brittle behavior, they crack or fail during earthquakes which in most cases results in the loss of lives and capital. Thereupon, predicting solutions for bracing infill walls and preventing them from being destroyed in such a way that the structure can maintain its desirable performance seems necessary. The specifications of infills and the way they are connected to frames can exert considerable influences on the seismic behavior of the structure. In this study, to investigate the conventional methods of anchoring masonry infills to steel frames in Iran, the experimental results of four single-story, single-bay steel frames with the scale of 1:3 are presented, with a special focus on the different details of the connection between the infill wall and the surrounding frame. Three frames with masonry infills and one frame without an infill were constructed using conventional materials in Iran. All of the samples were tested by applying a lateral load on the upper beam. Different details regarding the connection of the infill to the frame including how the infill is connected to an un-anchored frame, connecting the infill to the frame using vertical separating angles, and the use of embedded rebars in the infill. The results showed that using the mentioned details to anchor the infill to the frame is not only quick and convenient, it also suitably delays the cracking of the infill panel, changes the failure modes of the wall, decreases the level of damage and maintains stability in the wall. The employment of these details also exerts a significant influence on the cracking patterns, failure modes, stiffness, strength, ductility, out-of-plane deformations, and energy dissipation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Steel Frame
  • Masonry Infill Wall
  • Wall-Frame Connection
  • Lateral Load
  • Experimental study
  1. - Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1998) Evaluation of Earthquake Damaged Concrete and Masonry Wall Buildings. Report no. FEMA 306. Washington (DC).
  2. - Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000) Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Report No. FEMA 356. Washington (DC).
  3. - Moghaddam, H.A., and Dowling, P.J. (1987) The State of the Art in Infilled Frames. London: Imperial College of Science and Technology, Civil Engineering Department.
  4. - Abrams, D.P. (1994) Proceedings from the NCEER Workshop on Seismic Response of Masonry Infills. NCEER.
  5. - Calvi, G.M., and Santini, S. (1996) Experimental and Numerical Investigations on the Seismic Response of RC Infilled Frames and Recommendations for Code Provisions.
  6. - Crisafulli, F.J., Carr, A.J. and Park, R. (2000) Analytical Modelling of Infilled Frame Structures - A General Review. Bulletin-New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 33(1), 30-47.
  7. - Aliaari, M., and Memari, A.M. (2005) Analysis of masonry infilled steel frames with seismic isolator subframes. Engineering Structures, 27(4), 487-500.
  8. - Mohammadi, M., and Akrami, V. (2010) An engineered infilled frame: Behavior and calibration. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 66(6), 842-849.
  9. - Tasnimi, A.A., and Mohebkhah, A. (2011) Investigation on the behavior of brick-infilled steel frames with openings, experimental and analytical approaches. Engineering Structures, 33(3), 968-980.
  10. - Varela-Rivera, J.L., et al. (2011). Out-of-plane behaviour of confined masonry walls. Engineering Structures, 33(5), 1734-1741.
  11. - Liu, Y., and Manesh, P. (2013) Concrete masonry infilled steel frames subjected to combined in-plane lateral and axial loading–An experimental study. Engineering Structures, 52, 331-339.
  12. - Jazany, R.A., Hajirasouliha, I. and Farshchi, H. (2013) Influence of masonry infill on the seismic performance of concentrically braced frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 88, 150-163.
  13. - Markulak, D., Radić, I. and Sigmund, V. (2013) Cyclic testing of single bay steel frames with various types of masonry infill. Engineering Structures, 51, 267-277.
  14. - Chen, X., and Liu, Y. (2015) Numerical study of in-plane behaviour and strength of concrete masonry infills with openings. Engineering Structures, 82, 226-235.
  15. - ASTM C 67 – 02c (2002) Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Brick and Structural Clay Tile. American Society for Testing and Materials.
  16. - ASTM C 109/C 109M – 07 (2007) Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2-in. or [50-mm] Cube Specimens). American Society for Testing and Materials.
  17. - ASTM C 1314 – 03a (2003). Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Masonry Prisms. American Society for Testing and Materials.
  18. - Combescure, D., and Pegon, P. (2000) Application of the local-to-global approach to the study of infilled frame structures under seismic loading. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 196(1), 17-40.
  19. - Riddington, J.R. (1984) The influence of initial gaps on infilled frame behaviour. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 77(3), 295-310.
  20. - Achyutha, H. (1982) Effect of contact between infill and frame on the behaviour of infilled multistorey frames. Proc. 6th Int. Brick Masonry Con., Rome.