See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313799454

Sensitivity-and-Reliability-Analysis-of-Masonry-Infilled frame

Article · December 2016

CITATIONS READS

10 246

2 authors:

Avadhoot Bhosale Pradip Sarkar

National Institute of Technology Rourkela National Institute of Technology Rourkela
11 PUBLICATIONS 235 CITATIONS 86 PUBLICATIONS 909 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Avadhoot Bhosale on 17 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016

Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Masonry

Infilled Frames
Avadhoot Bhosale, Robin Davis P., Pradip Sarkar

1
building and the demand modelling. The most sensitive
Abstract—The seismic performance of buildings with irregular variables (structural properties and loading conditions) that can
distribution of mass, stiffness and strength along the height may be affect the performance of the structure can be found out from
significantly different from that of regular buildings with masonry the sensitivity analysis [14]. In the present study to examine the
infill. Masonry infilled reinforced concrete (RC) frames are very
common structural forms used for multi-storey building construction.
most sensitive random variable, Pushover analysis was carried
out for infilled RC frame using OpenSees software [15]. To
International Science Index, Structural and Construction Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10005911

These structures are found to perform better in past earthquakes owing

to additional strength, stiffness and energy dissipation in the infill study the variation in response of a building, 5%, mean and
walls. The seismic performance of a building depends on the variation 95% probability value of random variables are considered.
of material, structural and geometrical properties. The sensitivity of Based on the Tornado Diagram Analysis (TDA) method, it can
these properties affects the seismic response of the building. The main be easily determined how changes in that variable will impact
objective of the sensitivity analysis is to found out the most sensitive
parameter that affects the response of the building. This paper presents
the structural response of a building. In addition to these, the
a sensitivity analysis by considering 5% and 95% probability value of effects of probability of exceedance of damage are expressed in
random variable in the infills characteristics, trying to obtain a terms of a reliability index for the selected frames.
reasonable range of results representing a wide number of possible
situations that can be met in practice by using pushover analysis. The II. LITERATURE REVIEW
results show that the strength-related variation values of concrete and
masonry, with the exception of tensile strength of the concrete, have An extensive literature review has been conducted to
shown a significant effect on the structural performance and that this understand the subject and to know the current status of the
effect increases with the progress of damage condition for the research in this area. Literature review has been divided in two
concrete. The seismic risk assessments of the selected frames are different parts as discussed below:
expressed in terms of reliability index.
A. Literature Review on Sensitivity Analysis
Keywords—Fragility curve, sensitivity analysis, reliability index, Evaluation of seismic risk assessment of RC Masonry
RC frames. infilled frames involves a sensitivity study and modelling of
infill walls. Kwon and Elnashai [7] studied the sensitivity of
I. INTRODUCTION random variables, compressive strength of concrete (fck) and

I NFILL walls confined by RC frames on all four sides play a

vital role in resisting the lateral seismic loads on buildings. It
has been shown experimentally that infill walls have a very
yield strength of steel (fy) as random variables using a tornado
diagram (TD). Celik and Ellingwood [10] considered additional
parameters, such as modulus of elasticity of steel (Es), damping
high initial lateral stiffness and low deformability. Thus ratio (), bond slip factor, joint shear strength, shear strain of
introduction of infill walls in RC frame changes the lateral-load concrete at first cracking, yielding, maximum and residual
transfer mechanism of the structure from predominant frame levels. Kim et al. [9] conducted a sensitivity study for steel
action to predominant truss action which is responsible for the frames using pushover analysis and the variable yield strengths
reduction in bending moments and increase in axial forces in of steel (fy) and damping ratio. Mitropoulou et al. [11] studied
the frame members. Infill walls are used in RC frames in almost sensitivity analysis for an “L” shaped RC frame structure using
all types of building construction in many parts of the world random variables as the mass of the structure. Celarec and
because of low cost material, good sound and heat insulation Dolsek [13] conducted sensitivity analysis for infilled frame
properties and local availability. and bare frame by considering additional infilled parameters, in
The response of infilled RC frame at the design stage is addition to bare frame like shear cracking strength (τcr),
difficult to predict with certainty due to its non-linear nature Modulus of elasticity of masonry (Em), Shear modulus of
and uncertain input parameters [12]. masonry (Gm). Panandikar and Narayan [17] performed
With regard to the structural analysis, there are a number of sensitivity analysis for capacity curve considering material
uncertainties involved in the estimation of the performance of strength and geometric modelling parameters.
the building for given levels of intensity. These uncertainties
concerned both the capacity modelling of the examined B. Literature Review on Seismic Risk Assessment
Structural fragility curves are said to be the key component
while quantifying the seismic risk assessment. Fragility curves
Avadhoot Bhosale, Ph. D Scholar, Robin Davis P., Assistant Professor, and are usually defined as the probability of exceeding a specific
Pradip Sarkar, Associate Professor, are with the National Institute of
Technology Rourkela, India, 769008 (e-mail: [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]).

International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 10(12) 2016 1452 scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10005911
 World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016

mit state of a building for a given level of ground m

lim motion IV. SENSITIV ES OF BARE & INFILL FRAMES
VITY ANALYSE
intensity. T
The purpose oof sensitivity analyses is to find the m most
Singhal and Kiremidjian [[1] developed fragility curvves for senssitive parametter that affectt the structuraal response off any
low, mid, and highh rise RC frames that w were designedd using buillding. The sennsitivity Δy is ddefined as:
seeismic provisioons. Monte Carlo simulatioons were conssidered
to quantify the uuncertainties iin structural caapacity and deemand. y ( Pn )  y ( Pmeean ) (1)
Coornell et al. [2] developedd a probabiliistic framewoork for y   100 (%)
y ( Pmean )
seeismic design and assessmeent of structures in a demannd and
caapacity formaat addressingg the uncerttainties in hazard, h wheere, y(Pn) is ressponse at the nth percentilee value of variable
strructural, damaage, and loss analyses. Kim m and Shinozuuka [4]
(5th or 95th perceentiles) and y(Pmean) responsse consideringg the
deeveloped fragiility curves off two sample bridges beforre and
affter column retrofit for the southern
s Califfornia region. Lupoi meaan value of thee variables.
[5] has developped empirical fragility curvves for free staanding T
There are diffferent types of o uncertaintiies which incclude
eqquipment baseed on experimeental test and regression anaalyses. matterial propertiees of concrete, steel and infilll wall. Dampiing is
International Science Index, Structural and Construction Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10005911

Kiircil and Polatt [6] developed fragility currves for mid-riise RC another source oof uncertaintyy that can afffect the dynamic
buuildings in thhe Istanbul reegion designed according to the respponse of a bbuilding. It iss important to incorporatee the
Tuurkish seismicc design codee. Lagaros [8] conducted frragility uncertainties in alll potential maaterial and modelling param meters
annalyses for tw
wo groups of RC R buildings.. The first grooup of in the computaational modeel to deliveer a naturalistic
strructures was ccomposed of fully infilled, weak groundd story reprresentation of the responses in a probabilistic judgment.. The
annd short colum mns frames aand the secondd group consists of strength of conccrete, yield sstrength of m main steel, ellastic
buuilding framess designed wiith different vvalues of behaavioral moddulus of concrrete and steel, compressive and a shear craccking
factors. Celik and Ellingwoood [10] studdied the effeects of strength of infilll are considered as randdom variabless for
unncertainties inn material, struuctural properrties and moddelling senssitivity and relliability analysis are given aas in Table I.
paarameters for ggravity load deesigned RC frrames.
TAB
BLE I
DETAILS OF RAN NDOM VARIABLES S CONSIDERED IN THE SEISMIC RISK
K
III. SELEECTED FRAMESS ASSESSSMENT
In the presennt study, baree frame 4S2B and Infilled frame COOV
M
Material/Proper rty Variable Mean Distributiion
(%
%)
4SS2B-F, considdered for senssitivity and fraagility analysees, are Concrete compresssive
fck 30.28 MPa 21.0 Normall
deesigned for zonne V with PG GA of 0.36g as per Indian staandard strength
IS
S 1893 [3] forr medium soiil conditions having h N-valuue lies 468.90
Y
Yield strength of stteel fy 100.0 Normall
MPa
beetween 10 to 30.3 The charaacteristic strenngth of concreete and G
Global damping raatio ξ 5% 400.0 Normall
steeel were takenn as 25 MPa and 415 MPaa, respectivelyy. The Conncrete tensile streength ft 2.2 222 Normall
prresent study iss limited to R RC multi-storeey framed buiildings Shear strength oof 0.2041
τcr 122.0 Normall
that are regular in plan, and hhence, represeentative singlee plane masonry infill MPa
fraame is consiidered along one directionn. All the seelected Elastic modulus of o
Ec 29000 115 Lognormmal
concrete
buuilding framess 4S2B and 4S2B-F havee four bays w with a Elaastic modulus of ssteel Es 2.1 × 105 5 Lognormmal
unniform bay widdth of 5 m andd story height 33.2 m. The deaad load
off the slab for 5 m × 5 m pannel with floorr finishes is taken as P
Pushover analyysis is used inn present studdy to examinee the
3.75 kN/m2 andd live load as 3 kN/m2. Moore details aboout the mosst sensitive ranndom variablee. Pushover annalyses are caarried
deesign of the fraames are preseented in Davis et al. [16]. Moodulus out for bare and infilled fram me by using O OpenSees softw ware
off elasticity andd thickness of infill wall aree considered ass 2300 [15]]. To study thee variation in response
r of a bbuilding, 5%, m
mean
M
MPa and 2300 mm, resppectively. Figg. 1 presentts the andd 95% probabiility value of rrandom variabble are consideered.
coonfigurations oof all the seleccted frames. A reepresentation using TD is usedu to presennt the sensitivity of
the various variabbles involved.

V
V. SEISMIC RISSK ASSESSMEN
NT
A
An accepted pprobability based approacch is used inn the
pressent study. Thhe seismic rissks are compputed in the terms
seissmic fragility ccurves and reliiability indicees.
A
A. Fragility and Reliability A Analyses
A fragility funcction represennts the probabiility of exceeddance
of a selected enngineering deemand parameeter (EDP) ffor a
seleected structuraal limit state (L
LS) for a speciific ground mootion
inteensity measurre (IM). Thhe fragility curve repressents
Fig. 1 Selecteed building fram
mes
cummulative probbability disttribution thaat indicates the

International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 10(12) 2016 1453 scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10005911
 World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016

prrobability that a component/ssystem will bee damaged to a given

daamage state orr a more severee one, as a funnction of a parrticular
intensity measuure. The SA AC-FEMA method, whichh is a
simmplified methhod for the calcculation of seissmic risk introoduced
byy [2], is used iin the present study for the fragility evaluuation.
Thhe seismic fraagility, FR(x) can be expresssed in closedd form
eqquation as:

 S 
 ln D 
SC
D  C | IM )   
P (D 

(2)
2 2
  D| IM  c 
 
F
Fig. 3 TD for 4S
S2B Infilled fram
me
whhere, D is the drift demand, C is the drift ccapacity, SD and
a SC B
B. Fragility and Reliability AAnalysis
International Science Index, Structural and Construction Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10005911

arre the median demand and capacity at thhe chosen limiit state
F
Fragility curvees for the foour-storeyed frames,
f 4S2B and
(LLS), respectiveely. The disperrsion, βD/IM, of inter-storeyy drifts
4S22B-F, are plottted for two perrformance levvels (IO and CP P) as
(ddi) from the tim
me history anaalysis can be calculated as:
showwn in Figs. 4 and 5. It iss found that the probabilitty of
exceeedance of thhe 4S2B (barre frame) is m more than thaat of
 ln((d )  ln(aIM )b 2

 D|IM  i (3) 4S22B-F (infilled frame). Infill walls reduce the probabilitty of
N 2 exceeedance of innter-storey driift in a buildiing. Figs. 6 aand 7
showw the reliabiliity curves for different
d perfoormance levelss (IO
whhere a (IM) b represents thee mean inter-sstorey drift annd N is andd CP) for four-storey frames in the Manipuur region. It caan be
the number off building moodels. Disperrsion in limitt state seenn that bare fram
me yields the lowest
l values of reliability inndex
caapacities recommmended by different
d standdards and literratures for all PGAs. The T Infilled frrame 4S2B-F F shows relatiively
arre not in agreem
ment. highher values of reliability inddex compared to the 4S2B bare
fram
me.
VI. RESULTS
A. Sensitivity Analysis 1,0
Probabilty of Exceedance

Sensitivities of all param meters that affect the seismic 0,8

response of buillding are plottted, as shown iin Figs. 2 and 3.
Base shear att yield is consiidered as the sseismic responnse for 0,6
seensitivity analyysis. It can be observed from m the TDs thatt the fy,
fckk, Ec and Es arre sensitive vaariables for a bbare frame andd fy, fck, 0,4 4
4S2B
Ecc, Es and τcr arre the sensitive variables forr infilled fram
me. The 4
4S2B-F
0,2
peercentage channge of the basee shear (at yieldd) response froom the
m
mean value, afffected by the cchange of the selected param meters 0,0
froom 5% to 95% % probability vvalues can be read from Figs. 2 and 0 0,2 0,,4 0,6 00,8 1
3.
P
PGA, g
F
Fig. 4 Fragility curve – IO leveel

1,0
Probabilty of Exceedance

0,8

0,6

0,4 4S
S2B
4S
S2B-F
0,2

Fig. 2 TD forr 4S2B bare fram

me 0,0
0 0,2 00,4 0,6 00,8 1
PGA, g
F 5 Fragility curve – CP leveel
Fig.

International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 10(12) 2016 1454 scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10005911
 World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016

[2] C. A. Cornell, F. Jalayer, R. O O. Hamburger andd D. A. Foutch. “The

5 probabilistic baasis for the 20000 SAC/FEMA steel moment frame
44S2B guidelines”, Jouurnal of Structuural Engineeringg, 128(4), pp.5266-533,
4 2002.
Reliability index

[3] Indian Standard.. Indian standard ccriteria for earthquuake resistant dessign of
3 44S2B-F structures. IS 18893-02, Bureau of o Indian Standarrds, New Delhi, India,
2002.
[4] S. H. Kim, andd M. Shinozuka,, “Development of fragility curvves of
2 bridges retrofittted by column jacketing”, Probbabilistic Engineeering
Mechanics, 19(11-2), pp.105–112,, 2004.
1 [5] G. Lupoi, “Fraagility analysis of the seismic ressponse of freestaanding
equipment”, Ph..D dissertation, E European School of o Advanced studdies in
Reduction of Seeismic Risk- Rosee school, 2005.
0 [6] a Z. Polat.“Fraagility analysis oof mid-rise R/C frame
M. S. Kircil, and
0 0,5 1 buildings”, Engiineering Structurees, 28(9), pp.13355-1345, 2006.
PGA, g [7] O.S. Kwon andd A. Elnashai. “Thhe effect of materrial and ground motionm
uncertainty on the seismic vuulnerability curves of RC struccture”,
Engineering Struuctures, 28, pp.2889–303, 2006.
Fig. 6 Reliabiliity curve – CP llevel
[8] N. D. Lagaros, “Probabilistic ffragility analysis:: A tool for asseessing
International Science Index, Structural and Construction Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10005911

design rules of RRC buildings”, E Earthquake engineeering and engineeering

7 vibration, 7(1), ppp.45–56, 2008.
[9] J. H. Kim, I. Chhoi, and J. Park. ““Uncertainty analyysis of system fraagility
6 for seismic safetty evaluation of NNPP”, Nuclear Enngineering and Design,
D
4S2B 241(7), pp. 25700–2579, 2010.
5
Reliability index

[10] O.C. Celik, andd B.R. Ellingwoood. “Seismic fraggilities for non-dductile
4 4S2B-F reinforced conncrete frames – Role of aleaatoric and episstemic
uncertainties”, SStructural Safety 32,
3 pp.1–12, 20100.
3 [11] C.C. Mitropouloou, N.D. Lagaros, and M. Papadraakakis. “Life-cyclle cost
assessment of ooptimally designeed reinforced conncrete buildings under
2 seismic actions””, Reliability Enggineering and Sysstem Safety, 96, 1311–
1331, 2011.
1 [12] D. Celarec, P. R
Ricci, and M. Dolššek. "The sensitivvity of seismic ressponse
0 parameters to tthe uncertain moodelling variablees of masonry-innfilled
reinforced conccrete frames." Enngineering Structtures, 35, pp.1655-177,
0 0,5 1 2012.
PGA, g [13] D. Celarec, and M M. Dolsek, “The impact of modelliing uncertainties on the
seismic performmance assessment of reinforced conncrete frame builddings”,
Fig. 7 Reliabiliity curve – CP llevel Engineering Struuctures, 52, 340––354, 2013.
[14] J. Kim and S.. Han. "Sensitivvity analysis forr seismic responnse of
VII. CO
ONCLUSIONS reinforced conccrete staggered w wall structures." M Magazine of Conncrete
Research 65, no. 22, pp. 1348-1359, 2013.
The salient coonclusions of this study are as follows: [15] OpenSees. Opeen system for eaarthquake engineeering simulationn”, A
1. The sensitiivity analysess were perforrmed based oon the Program for Sttatic and Dynam mic Nonlinear A Analysis of Strucctures.
(Online). < http:://opensees.berkelley.edu/ >, July 220-21, 2016.
nonlinear pushover
p for ffour-story baree and infilled frame [16] R. Davis P, H. PPragalath D.C., P. Sarkar. “Open Grround Storey Builldings
models. It wwas clearly obbserved that sppecial care shoould be designed as perr various Internattional Codes – A Seismic Perform mance
given whenn assigning vvalues to reprresent the struuctural Comparison Sttudy” Recent IInnovation in Civil C Engineerinng &
Technology, Sepp 24-25, 2014.
characteristtics, esppecially the m
material [17] N. Panandikar aand K.S. Babunarrayan. “Sensitivityy of Pushover Cuurve to
characteristtics-related vvalues. Concrete and maasonry Material and G Geometric Modelling—An Anaalytical Investigaation”,
strength-rellated variationn values have shown a signnificant ISTRUC-19; 21, pp.91- 97, 2015.
effect on thhe building cappacity.
2. Infilled framme are less frragile as comppared to bare frame
building beecause of addditional stiffnness in the foorm of Avvadhoot Bhosalee was born in K Kolhapur, Maharaashtra,
infill. Alsoo, the reliabillity index forr infilled fram mes is Inddia, in 1986. H He received the B.E. degree in civil
enngineering from thhe Shivaji Universsity, Kolhapur, Inddia, in
higher thann bare frame buildings, w which indicatees that 20007, and a M. Tecch. degree in strucctural engineeringg from
infilled framme buildings having less probability of failure thee National Instiitute of Technollogy (NIT) Rouurkela,
during an eearthquake. Orrissa, India, in 20112. In 2012, he joined the Departm
ment of
Ciivil Engineering, TKIET Collegee of Engineering,, as a
Asst. Professor, and iin 2013 as Juniorr commission offficer (JCO) in Military
ACKNOW
WLEDGMENT Engiineering Services,, Government of India. Since Januuary 2014, he hass been
with the Department of civil Engineeering, NIT Rourkkela, where he iss PhD
The Authors acknowledgee the financiaal support (Saanction Schoolar. His currennt research interrests include eaarthquake engineeering,
Noo. SB/FTP/ET TA-445/2012) received from
m SERB, Deparrtment strucctural dynamics annd earthquake ressistance structuress.
off Science and Technology,
T G
Government of India.
Roobin Davis P wass born in Thissur, Kerala, India, in 1978.
Hee received B. Tecch degree in civill engineering froom the
REFEERENCES Goovt. Engineering C
College, Thrissur,, India, in 1999, annd the
[1]] A. Singhal andd A. S. Kiremidjian.“Method for pprobabilistic evaluuation of M.. Tech. degree inn structural enginneering from thee PSG
seismic structuural damage”, Joournal of Structurral Engineering, 1122(12), Coollege of Technoology, Coimbatorre, India, in 2002. He
pp.1459–14677, 1996. recceived PhD degreee in civil engineeering from the Indian
I
Instittute of Technoloogy Madras, Tammil Nadu, India, in 2009. He joineed the
Depaartment of Civil Engineering, National
N Institute of Technology (NIT)

International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 10(12) 2016 1455 scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10005911
 World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016

Roourkela, Orissa, IIndia as Assistantt Professor in 20012. His current research

r
intterests include proobabilistic earthquuake engineering and structural dyynamics.
Drr. Davis is a membber of Intuition off Engineers (Indiaa).

Pradip Sarkaar was born in M Mohoboni, West Bengal,

India, in 19755. He received the
t B.E. degree in civil
engineering aand the M.E. degree in engiineering
mechanics froom Bengal Enginneering College, S Shibpur,
India, in 19999 and 2002, and thhe Ph. D. degree in civil
engineering from
fr the Indian Institute of Techhnology
Madras, Tamil Nadu, India, in 2009. In 2009, hhe joined
the Departmennt of Civil Engineeering, National IInstitute
of Technology (NIIT) Rourkela, Orissa, India as A Associate Professsor. His
currrent research intterests include earrthquake engineerring, structural dyynamics
and earthquake resiistance structuress. Dr. Sarkar is a member of Intuuition of
Enngineers (India).
International Science Index, Structural and Construction Engineering Vol:10, No:12, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10005911

International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 10(12) 2016 1456 scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10005911