Comparison of different methods for preventing the infill's detrimental effects in the infilled steel frames

  IJETT-book-cover  International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT)          
© 2016 by IJETT Journal
Volume-32 Number-7
Year of Publication : 2016
Authors : Saher Elkhoreeby, Mohamed A. Saker, Tarek M. khalifa, Mohammed Eladly
DOI :  10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V32P262


Saher Elkhoreeby, Mohamed A. Saker, Tarek M. khalifa, Mohammed Eladly"Comparison of different methods for preventing the infill's detrimental effects in the infilled steel frames", International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), V32(7),315-327 February 2016. ISSN:2231-5381. published by seventh sense research group

The presence of infill panels in buildings with concrete or steel frames can lead to conflicting effects on the structural response, depending on the mechanical properties, the geometrical distribution of infills and the interaction with structural elements. Traditionally, the infill walls are integrated with the structural frame. This could possibly lead to significant degradation of stiffness and strength under Strong earthquakes. This paper presents three methods previously proposed and validated by other researchers. Each of these methods has its own system and technique. However, all of them have the same main concept (allowing infill wall–frame interaction under wind loading and minor-to-moderate earthquakes for reduced building drift but disengaging them under damaging events). Each method is adequately explained with summary of its main results. Finally, a comparison of them (including several comparison factors: improved characteristics, preferred infill material, difficulty level of manufacturing and installation, cost, extent of damage under damaging events, etc.) is presented.


[1] Drysdale RG, Hamid AA, Baker LR. Masonry structures— behavior and design. 2nd ed. The Masonry Society; 1999.
[2] Paulay T, Priestley MJN. Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. Wiley; 1992.
[3] Tomazevic M. Earthquake-resistant design of masonry buildings. London: Imperial College Press; 1999.
[4] Dowrick DJ. Earthquake resistant design for engineers and architects. 2nd ed. Wiley; 1987.
[5] Memari AM, Aliaari M. Seismic infill wall isolator subframe (SIWIS) system for use in buildings. In: Proceeding, ATC-17-2 seismic on response modification technologies for performance-based design. 2002.
[6] Richardson J. The behavior of masonry infilled steel frames. MS thesis. University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB Canada; 1986.
[7] Dawe JL, Seah CK. Behavior of masonry infilled steel frames. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1989;16:865–76.
[8] Seah CK. A universal approach for the analysis and design of masonry infilled frame structures. Ph.D. thesis. University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB Canada; 1998.
[9] El-Dakhakhni WW, Elgaaly M, Hamid AA. Three-strut model for concrete masonry-infilled steel frames. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 2003;129:177–85.
[10] ANSYS user‘s manual—version 6.1. Canonsburg (PA): ANSYS Inc.;2002.
[11] M. Aliaari, A.M. Memari. Analysis of masonry infilled steel frames with seismic isolator subframes. Engineering Structures, 2005;27: 487–500.
[12] Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). FEMA 461, interim testing protocols for determining the seismic performance characteristics of structural and nonstructural components. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency; 2007.
[13] European Committee for Standardization (CEN). EN 1996- 1-1, Eurocode 6: design of masonry structures – Part 1-1: general rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures. Brussels, Belgium: CEN; 2005.
[14] Mohammadi MGh. Methods to improve mechanical properties of infilled frames. Ph.D. thesis. Tehran (Islamic Republic of Iran): Civil department, Sharif University; 2007.
[15] FEMA 306. Evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and masonry wall buildings. Applied technology council, ATC-43 Project, 1998.
[16] Iranian Code of practice for seismic resistant design of buildings. 3rd ed. Standard No. 2800-05. Building and Housing Research Center, BHRC-PN S 253. 2007.
[17] M. Mohammadi, V. Akrami. An engineered infilled frame: Behavior and calibration. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2010;66: 842–849.
[18] D. Markulak, Ivan Radic´, Vladimir Sigmund. Cyclic testing of single bay steel frames with various types of masonry infill. Engineering Structures, 2013;51: 267–277.
[19] Mohammadi MGh. Stiffness and damping of single and multi-layer infilled steel frames. Journal of ICE Structures and Buildings 2007;160:105–18 [Paper No. 14599].
[20] Moghadam HA, Dowling PJ. The state of the art in infilled frames, ESEE Research Report No. 87-2, 1987.

Steel frames, Masonry infill, infilled frames, Cyclic loading, Controlled behaviour.