EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE OF RETROFITTED CONFINED MASONRY WITH LARGE OPENING RATIO

• Main Author: Made Krisnajnana Putra, I
• Format: Theses
• Language: Indonesia
• Online Access: https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/81774
• Institution: Institut Teknologi Bandung

Well constructed confine masonry (CM) structure is one that performs well when receiving earthquake loads. Schools are an example of CM buildings, but there are many school buildings in Indonesia that are not safe from design loads (earthquake loads). Retrofitting is needed to improve the performance of CM with a simple method, fast, available construction materials and inexpensive. The existence of a large opening ratio in school masonry is also something that needs to be considered because the large opening ratio becomes the critical point of the CM during an earthquake. So experimental studies on the performance of retrofitted confined masonry with opening (CMO) are needed and also analyzed the effect of large opening ratio on structural performance by comparing CMO with CM without openings. Two options for CMO retrofitting methods in this research. Two confined masonry walls were retrofitted using ferrocement and wing wall methods. Both test objects were given in-plane cyclic lateral load. Additionally, material testing of the confined masonry walls was conducted to determine the properties of existing materials that in the future can be used for numerical modeling. Analysis results of the behavior retrofitted CM without openings as a comparison for CMO were taken from previous research by Firdaus, A. (2023). The lateral strength of ferrocement reinforcement (CMO-FC and CM-FC) is greater than that of wingwall reinforcement (CMO-WW and CM-WW). The stiffness of the CMO-FC specimen is 1.87 times greater than that of the CMO-WW specimen. Meanwhile, the CM-FC specimen is 1.12 times greater than the specimen with CM-WW specimen. Specimens with wingwall reinforcement show higher input energy values compared to specimens with ferrocement reinforcement, this difference occurs because the collapse pattern of CMO-FC and CM-FC specimens is limited to certain specific areas or critical areas and the collapse mechanism is not well distributed throughout the structural system.