Riccardo Milanesi, Paolo Morandi, Sanja Hak and Guido Magenes
Riccardo Milanesi,Research fellow, Dept. of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Pavia, Italy. Via Ferrata 3, Pavia, Italy. riccardo.milanesi@unipv.it
Paolo Morandi, Senior Researcher, Dept. of Structures and Infrastructures, Eucentre, Via Ferrata 1, Pavia, Italy. paolo.morandi@eucentre.it
Sanja Hak, Project Manager, Dept. of Structural Safety, Basler & Hofmann AG, Zurich, Switzerland. sanja.hak@gmail.com
Guido Magenes, Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Pavia, Italy. Via Ferrata 3, Pavia, Italy. guido.magenes@unipv.it
ABSTRACT
The unreinforced masonry infills (URM) rigidly attached to the structures and built after the complete hardening of the structural member represent the “traditional” masonry infill, that is a
commonly adopted non-structural member. Despite many studies have been accomplished in the last decades, the materials and the details utilized for masonry infills have been continuously changing to satisfy architectural, thermal and economic needs and, therefore, their interaction with the structure and their seismic performance needs to be furtherly investigated. Moreover, the recent post-seismic surveys have highlighted the out-of-plane vulnerability of traditional URM infills. Within this work, a new prospective towards the out-of-plane verification of traditional URM infills is presented. The study is based on the interpretation of experimental tests conducted on commonly adopted masonry typologies. The out-of-plane design procedure proposed addresses
the out-of-plane resistance of masonry infills by also including its degradation due to in-plane damage. Additionally, the influence of the in-plane response in the modification of the out-ofplane
stiffness, and therefore of the fundamental period of the URM infill, has also been considered to compute the out-of-plane seismic demand. Finally, although most of the current standards do not provide a path for out-of-plane verifications by including the in-plane/out-of-plane interaction in terms of out-of-plane strength and stiffness reduction, their inclusion could modify the safety check and lead to more realistic out-of-plane verifications.
KEYWORDS: design implications, in-plane/out-of-plane interaction, out-of-plane seismic demand for infills, out-of-plane verifications, URM infills
