Confined masonry wall using Crissafulli Model

02-Getting started with the modelling
Post Reply
saeiduv
Posts: 2
Joined: 26 Feb 2019, 09:01

Confined masonry wall using Crissafulli Model

Post by saeiduv » 26 Feb 2019, 09:41

SeismoSoft Group
with best regard

I have a question about INFILLED FRAMES (MASONRY INFILLS) EXAMPLE 1 – One storey, single bay infilled frame (Crisafulli) in CHAPTER 4. Software verifications (comparison with experimental results)

>>>>> Shear curve parameters difined as (inf shear response curve): shear bond strength = 50 kPa, friction coefficient = 0.2, maximum shear resistance = 200 kPa in the infill modelling with the FE analysis program SeismoStruct.
Whereas in experimental data of this example in the thesis of Crisafulli (1997), these values are different and are as follows:
shear bond strength = 410 kPa, friction coefficient = 0.7, maximum shear resistance = 800 kPa.

What is the connection between defined values in EXAMPLE1 and the experimental data?

Yours sincerely

User avatar
seismosoft
Posts: 567
Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55

Re: Confined masonry wall using Crissafulli Model

Post by seismosoft » 28 Feb 2019, 09:32

Hello saeiduv,

Which is the example that you are referring to?
During his thesis Crissafulli carried out several tests. The experimental data for the one that we included in SeismoStruct's Verification Report were sent by him.
Seismosoft Support

saeiduv
Posts: 2
Joined: 26 Feb 2019, 09:01

Re: Confined masonry wall using Crissafulli Model

Post by saeiduv » 01 Mar 2019, 14:55

>>>>>>>>>>>>
as I have noticed, In Crisafulli thesis, two uint of confined masonry walls (framed masonry wall) are tested, UNIT1 and UNIT2.
According to Section 9.3.2 of this thesis, similar masonry materials have been employed in the two tested units. it led to shear strength parameters and in section 9.4.3 has been reported this shear strength parameters of used masonry materials.

now, my question is about EXAMPLE1 (One storey, single bay infilled frame in CHAPTER 4. Software verifications) refer to UNIT2 (though, It doesn't make any difference depending on the description).

What is the connection between values Shear curve parameters difined in Infill1 (CHAPTER4 Software verifications) and the experimental shear strength parameters of used masonry materials in UNIT2 in section 9.4.3?

Thanks

User avatar
seismosoft
Posts: 567
Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55

Re: Confined masonry wall using Crissafulli Model

Post by seismosoft » 04 Mar 2019, 18:28

Why do you say that Example 1 corresponds to Unit 2? All the tests by Crissafulli has similar 1-bay configurations.
Seismosoft Support

civil.kiani
Posts: 2
Joined: 23 Apr 2019, 18:38

Re: Confined masonry wall using Crissafulli Model

Post by civil.kiani » 24 Apr 2019, 10:31

Hello
I have a same problem and I think there is a mistake in simulation of Crissafulli on Seismostrct.
How did you find properties of the infill panel?
for e.x in your model, Shear curve parameters were defined as : shear bond strength = 50, friction coefficient = 0.2, maximum shear resistance = 200, reduction shear factor = 1.6

But in Crissafulli's thesis (1997) in page 253, the value of these parameters are different.

User avatar
seismosoft
Posts: 567
Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55

Re: Confined masonry wall using Crissafulli Model

Post by seismosoft » 26 Apr 2019, 08:12

Hello civil.kiani,

As explained above Crisafulli in his thesis carried out several experimental tests, not just one.
The one presented in our verification report is one of all these.
Seismosoft Support

Post Reply