Comparative Study on Asymmetric Structure with Different Infill Materials Using ETABS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRSET251303Keywords:
Seismic analysis, RC frame, infill materials, Response Spectrum Analysis, ETABS, asymmetric structure, masonry infill, brick, AAC block, lateral displacement, story drift, seismic performance, base shear, stiffness, plan irregularity, earthquake resistanceAbstract
The study investigates the seismic behavior of irregular reinforced concrete (RC) frame structures with various infill materials using Response Spectrum Analysis (RSA). Infill walls, commonly made of brick or AAC blocks, are non-structural elements that influence the lateral stiffness and seismic response of buildings. The primary objective is to evaluate the effect of different infill materials on the lateral stability, displacement, drift, shear, and stiffness of an L-shaped asymmetric RC frame structure in a high seismic zone (Zone V), modeled using ETABS software. The analysis considers bare frames as well as frames with unreinforced masonry infills using two types of materials: brick and AAC blocks.The study demonstrates that the inclusion of infill materials significantly enhances the overall stiffness and base shear of the structure. Specifically, the brick infill models exhibited higher lateral resistance and lower displacement compared to the bare frame and AAC block models. However, the AAC block infill, with its lower weight and stiffness, showed increased displacements and reduced stiffness, particularly in the top stories of the asymmetric building. The results suggest that while masonry infill contributes to the structure's seismic resistance, material selection and the building’s plan irregularities play crucial roles in determining the seismic performance.
📊 Article Downloads
References
Ozyurt, M. Z., & Almannaa, W. (2023). Effect of modelling the infill wall as a strut element on the structure behaviour. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences, 17(1), 100755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2023.100755 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2023.100755
Salahat, E. M., Varouqa, I. F., & Al-Btoush, M. a. K. (2022). Seismic analysis of RC building having plan irregularity according to ASCE 7-10 using ETABS software. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7500920
Ahmed, S. R., & Deshmukh, A. H. (2019). Comparative analysis and design of framed structure with different types of infill walls. International Journal of Advance Research, Ideas and Innovations in Technology, 5(3), 402–407. https://www.ijariit.com/manuscript/comparative-analysis-and-design-of-framed-structure-with-different-types-of-infill-walls
Abd-Elhamed, A. M., & Mahmoud, S. (2017). Linear and nonlinear dynamic analysis of masonry infill RC framed buildings. Civil Engineering Journal, 3(10), 881. https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-030922 DOI: https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-030922
Sigmund, V., & Penava, D. (2012). Experimental Study of Masonry Infilled R/C Frames with Opening. 15wcee. https://bib.irb.hr/prikazi-rad?&rad=595689
Gornale, A. (2012). Seismic Performance Evaluation of Torsionally Asymmetric Buildings. Ijser https://www.ijser.org/researchpaper/Seismic-Performance-Evaluation-of-Torsionally-Asymmetric-Buildings.pdf
Mahdi, T., & Bahreini, V. (2013). Seismic response of asymmetrical infilled concrete frames. Procedia Engineering, 54, 341–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.03.031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.03.031
IS: 1893-2016 Code of practice for criteria for earthquake-resistant design of structures, general provisions and buildings, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
The standards IS:875 (Part I)-1987, IS:875 (Part II)-1987 cover guidelines for dead loads and imposed loads on building and structures excluding earthquake loads.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.