Infill Modelling Influence on Dynamic Identification and Model Updating of Reinforced Concrete Framed Buildings

Table 3

Expressions proposed in literature for the evaluation of the ratio (see [9]).

Authors (year)	Proposed expression	Notes
Holmes (1961) [32]	= 1/3	λh < 2
Stafford Smith (1967) [14]	0.10 <  < 0.25	The value depends on λh
Mainstone (1971) [33]	= 0.16λh^−0.3	For λh, see equation (1)
Mainstone (1974) [34]	= 0.175λh^−0.4	Adopted by FEMA-274 [35] and FEMA-306 [36]
Bazan and Meli (1980) [16]	= (0.35 + 0.022 β) hm	0.9 ≤ β ≤ 11; for β, see equation (3)
Hendry (1981) [17]		For zb and zb, see equations (6) and (7)
Tassios (1984) [37]	= 0.20 β sinθ	1 ≤ β ≤ 5
Te-Chang and Kwok-Hung (1984) [38]		25° ≤ θ ≤ 50°
Decanini and Fantin (1987) [39] for uncracked panels		For
		For
Decanini and Fantin (1987) [39] for cracked panels		For
		For
Paulay and Priestley (1992) [18]	= 0.25	For
Durrani and Luo (1994) [19]	= γ sin(2θ)	For γ, see equations (8) and (9)
Cavaleri et al. (2005) [1]; Amato et al. (2008) [20]		In which, coefficients c and β take into account the Poisson ratio; k takes into account the vertical load; z is a geometrical parameter; is a parameter depending on the elastic and the geometric features of the system