International Journal of Engineering Science Invention Research & Development; Vol. III, Issue XII, JUNE 2017 www.ijesird.com, e-ISSN: 2349-6185 RESPONSE OF PRECAST WALL INFILLED STEEL FRAMED STRUCTURE IN LATERAL LOAD Hafeef M T1, Dr Sunilaa George2 1 2 P.G. Student, Professor and Head , Department of Civil Engineering, EASA College of Engineering and Technology Navakkarai, Coimbatore, India Abstract- Precast wall panel are now a day’s gaining importance due to speedy construction, economy, good quality due to controlled environment, exact shape due to factory condition, less wastage of materials etc. The panels can be made more effective by insulation sections within concrete panels in making of sandwich panels. The main drawback in using the precast panels is in the resistance to lateral loads .This can be made more beneficial by using them as infill in steel frames. Steel framed models are made with and without precast infill walls and shake table tests are performed for both the models. The response in terms of displacement, velocity and acceleration and storey drift are studied. The results of the study showed that the precast panel filled in steel frames showed better performance in lateral loads compared to conventional steel framed models. Keyword: Precast walls, steel framed structures, lateral load, shake table Improper design of the structure will lead to collapse of the structure when subjected to lateral loads. By implementing proper connections with the main frame the precast walls provide better performances. By using the precast walls in steel frame the fixing and fastening becomes easier and gives more stiffness. In this study, an attempt is made to know whether precast walls can be used in seismic areas, the concept of precast wall in steel framed structure for seismic regions. 2. MODEL SPECIFICATION 2.1CONVENTIONAL FRAME MODEL 1. INTRODUCTION Pre fabricated structures are now getting more popular. The difficult form works are not needed in precast construction.In the construction of multi storied structures . The construction time can be reduced drastically. When using precast walls they should be fastened properly to resist the lateral loads also. [N.Uchinda et.al].Precast walls can be used successfully in structures if the connections are given carefully with respect to lateral strength, stiffness and unity of components [Bindurani.P, A. et.al]. Though precast structures precast panels can also be used to clad building façade have got many advantages, the main disadvantage is the vulnerability to earthquake. [Fintel, M. ] Hence the solution for achieving these qualities to the structure or making the precast structures to withstand from earthquake is by steel framing. i.e., Steel framed precast infill walls will be having all the benefits of precast structures as well as the steel framed structure. Hafeef M T and Dr Sunilaa George Fig 2.1 conventional frame model Fig 2.2 conventional frame model 3D view ijesird, Vol. III, Issue XII, June 2017/827 International Journal of Engineering Science Invention Research & Development; Vol. III, Issue XII, JUNE 2017 www.ijesird.com, e-ISSN: 2349-6185 For studying the earthquake responses, a three-storied steel model was fabricated as shown in Fig2.1. The overall external dimension of the model is 300 mm X 240 mm at the base and a floor height of 300mm each. The total height of the structure is 900 mm and the model is made of mild steel. The total dead load on the steel structure was 10kg. Live load of 2kg, 2kg, 1kg was kept at first, second and third floors respectively the 3D view of model for study is shown in fig2.2. `Columns were made up of hollow mild steel section of 30mm x 30mm, which has a thickness of 2mm. Slab sections were made with 300mm x 230mm plate with a thickness of 2mm All the members were connected using welding. 4 holes were kept on the bottom plate for fixing the model in the shake table apparatus. table the structural models or building components can be subjected to lateral loads with a wide range of simulated ground motions, including reproductions of recorded Earthquake time-histories. The specifications of the shake table are given in table3.1 and the picture of shake table given in figure 3.1 2.2 PRECAST INFILLED FRAME MODEL Three storied steel model was made for the precast infilled framed model. The total dead load on the steel structure was 12kg. The live load on the each story was 2kg, 2kg and 1kg for first, second and third floor respectively. Same model as that of conventional framed model are made, with same size and shape. The structure was made of mild steel and all the members are connected using welding. The difficult task in this model making was the making of precast wall members for this model which should only have a 5mm thick. For this special moulds were made with 5mm thickness and precastmembers were made for the model. Precast wall was cast with steel mesh of 1mm thickness sandwiched between concrete of mix M30. The size of the precast wall for the bigger face was 240mm x 300mm. And for smaller face was 180mm x300mm. The wall panel mesh protruding from the wall is fixed with the steel frame. 3.1SHAKE TABLE SPECIFICATION 1) Maximum payload 30 kg 2) Sliding table dimension 400mm x 400 mm 3) Circular mounting plate dimension 390 mm diameter 4) Motor 1 HP 5) Frequency 0-25 Hertz 6) Frequency Control 5% 7) Amplitude 0 to 10 mm 8) Resolution 1 mm Fig 3.1 Horizontal Shake Table 3. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY A shake table study was carried out for both the frames of conventional model as well as for the infill precast wall model. By using shake Fig3.2 Shake table with precast in fill in steel frame Hafeef M T and Dr Sunilaa George ijesird, Vol. III, Issue XII, June 2017/828 International Journal of Engineering Science Invention Research & Development; Vol. III, Issue XII, JUNE 2017 www.ijesird.com, e-ISSN: 2349-6185 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION ACCELERATION SPECTRA ACEELERATION vs TIME PERIOD The responses of two models are studied by performing shake table tests. Responses such as relative displacement spectra, acceleration spectra, velocity spectra are found out and the results are tabulated. Story drift are also found out using the relative displacement obtained from the tests. Graphs are plotted with these obtained values and compared between both the models. The responses are discussed in section 4.1 GF Acceleration SF Acceleration 1 Acceleration (G) 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1.111 0.541 0.357 4.1 RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT SPECTRA RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (mm) 0.263 0.208 0.176 0.152 0.131 TIME PERIOD (S) DISPLACEMENT SPECTRA RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT vs TIME PERIOD FF Displacemet FF Acceleration TF Acceleration Fig 4.4 Acceleration Spectra-Precast Infilled SF Displacement TF Displacement 4.3 VELOCITY SPECTRA 20 VELOCITY SPECTRA CONVENTIONAL VELOCITY vs TIME PERIOD GF Velocity SF Velocity 15 10 5 FF Velocity TF Velocity 0 1 0.5 0.33 0.25 0.2 0.17 0.14 0.13 900 TIME PERIOD (S) Fig 4.1 Displacement Spectra for conventional frame VELOCITY (mm/s) 800 RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (mm) DISPLACEMENT SPECTRA RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT vs TIME PERIOD FF Displacemet SF Displacement TF Displacement 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 12 0 10 1.111 8 0.526 0.352 0.263 0.212 0.174 0.149 0.129 TIME PERIOD (S) 6 4 Fig 4.5 Velocity Spectra – Conventional frame 2 0 1 0.5 0.33 0.25 0.2 TIME PERIOD (S) 0.17 0.14 0.13 VELOCITY SPECTRA PRECAST WALL VELOCITY vs TIME PERIOD Fig 4.2 Displacement Spectra of precast infilled model 4.2 ACCELERATION SPECTRA GF Velocity FF Velocity SF Velocity TF Velocity GF Acceleration FF Acceleration SF Acceleration TF Acceleration Acceleration (G) 3 2 VELOCITY (mm/s) 400 ACCELERATION SPECTRA ACEELERATION vs TIME PERIOD 300 200 100 2 1 0 1 1.111 0 0.541 0.357 0.263 0.208 0.176 0.152 0.131 TIME PERIOD (S) 1.111 0.526 0.352 0.263 0.212 0.174 0.149 0.129 TIME PERIOD (S) Fig 4.6 Velocity Spectra – Precast infilled Fig 4.3 Acceleration Spectra for Conventional frame Hafeef M T and Dr Sunilaa George ijesird, Vol. III, Issue XII, June 2017/829 International Journal of Engineering Science Invention Research & Development; Vol. III, Issue XII, JUNE 2017 www.ijesird.com, e-ISSN: 2349-6185 STORY DRIFT vs TIME PERIOD FF SF TF 0.0200 0.0180 0.0160 0.0140 STORY DRIFT The response of the in filled precast wall was found to be appreciable and the as the wall is a sandwiched one with middle layer of steel mesh the wall in lateral load showed good repose. This may be due to the resistance in shear by the steel mesh. Hence the diagonal crack was not seen in the wall the failure was seen in the connection between the wall and the steel frame. as an overview to the response of the infill precast wall in steel frame showed better performance than the conventional frame without precast wall. 0.0120 0.0100 0.0080 0.0060 0.0040 0.0020 0.0000 1 0.52 0.33 0.25 0.2 0.17 0.14 0.13 TIME PERIOD (S) 5.0 STOREY DRIFT Fig 5.2 Story Drift of Infilled frame Story drift refers to the movement of a story with respect to others storeys for a given story height. It is the relative displacement for that particular storey height. Story drift of a floor can be can calculated using a simple equation. Story drift= relative displacement between the floors /story height of that floor. From the graph of conventional framed model, it can be noted from the peak that at 5Hz frequency, drift is at the maximum for all the floors.Whereas from the graph of precast infilled model, the peak for all the floors appears at 6Hz STORY DRIFT vs TIME PERIOD FF SF TF 0.0300 STORY DRIFT 0.0250 0.0200 0.0150 0.0100 0.0050 0.0000 1 0.5 0.33 0.25 0.2 0.17 0.14 0.13 TIME PERIOD (S) Fig 5.1 Storey Drift Conventional Frame Hafeef M T and Dr Sunilaa George 6. CONCLUSION The following conclusions are drawn from the study  The maximum relative displacement obtained was 8.35 mm for 5Hz at the third floor for conventional frame  The maximum relative displacement obtained was 5.2 mm for 6Hz at the third floor for precast infilled frame.  The minimum relative displacement obtained was 0.18 mm for 3Hz at first floor for conventional framed model whereas for precast infilled model it was obtained at 8Hz frequency for the first floor  For conventional frame, the maximum acceleration obtained was 0.96 m/s2 and for infilled frame maximum acceleration was 0.56 m/s2.  At the time when conventional frame reached a maximum of 420.35 mm/s at 5 Hz, it was only 118.58 mm/s for the precast infilled frame for third floors  In the case conventional framed model, it can be noted from the peak that at 5Hz frequency, drift is at the maximum for all the floors.  Whereas in the caseof precast infilled model, the peak for all the floors appears at 6Hz ijesird, Vol. III, Issue XII, June 2017/830 International Journal of Engineering Science Invention Research & Development; Vol. III, Issue XII, JUNE 2017 www.ijesird.com, e-ISSN: 2349-6185 REFERENCES 1. Sri Sritharan, Sriram Aaleti Derek J. Thomas“Seismic Analysis and Design of Precast ConcreteJointed Wall Systems”Iowa state university , digital repositoty , Reports and White Papers. December 2007, Pp1-129 2. Absar Khan , P.M. Kulkarni “Analytical Investigation of Precast Panel and its Utilization in Low Cost Housing” international journal of advanced research and innovative ideas in education Vol-3 Issue-1 2017, Pp 2395-4396 3. Patrick Liq Yee Tiong, Sing Ping Chiew, Beng Hur Teow,”Case study of load-bearing precast wall system subject to low seismic intensity by linear and nonlinear analyses”Elsevier Open acess journal Volume 6, December 2016, Pp11-21 4. A.Surekha , J.D.Chaitanya Kumar , E.Arunakanthi “ANALYSIS AND CONNECTION DESIGNS OF PRECAST LOAD BEARING WALL” International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology , Volume: 03 Issue: 09 | Sep-2014,Pp449-457 5. Mohammed Nauman , Nazrul Islam , “Behaviour of RCC Multistorey Structure With and Without Infill Walls,International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 3, Issue 1, JANUARY 2014Pp8455-8465 6. Polat Gulkan “Dynamic seismic response of precast panel structures” Paper No. 838 Eleventh world conference on world quake engineering, Elsevier science Ltd,Pp1-8 7. Fintel, M. “Shear walls: An Answer for Seismic Resistance?”, Concrete International,PCI Journal, Vol.40, No.3, June may 1995 ,Pp62-80 8. Anil k Chopra (2007) „Dynamic of Structures‟ Pearson Education, Inc. and Dorling Kindersley, India. 9. Pankaj Agarwal and Manish Shrikhande (2011) Earthquake resistant Design of Structures’, PHI Learning Private Limited, New Delhi Hafeef M T and Dr Sunilaa George ijesird, Vol. III, Issue XII, June 2017/831