I have performed a fragility analysis based on Incremental dynamic analysis for the Bare frame and open ground storey frame and full infill frame.

I sent the manuscript to Springer Journal.

Reviewer's comments are as follows:

The research has made some contribution by comparing the seismic fragility of RC frames with and without masonry infills. However, the results need to be justified with regard to following concern:

It is conjectured that the infilled frames performed better. We need more strong evidence for such a claim. The numerical analysis results showing the development of relative stiffness and strength between the infills and main frame during the dynamic analysis may be presented. Also, reference may be made to other researches confirming the statement.

My main question is how such an unfavorable element (infill) which detrimentally adds to the stiffness of the structure and causes the absorption of more seismic force, and at the same time is not strong enough to last for the entire seismic event, and even is not ductile to absorb seismic energy, could improve the overall performance.

Similar questions and discussions