focalinterest.com

AI Summary of Peer-Reviewed Research

This page presents an AI-generated summary of a published research paper. The original authors did not write or review this article. [See full disclosure ↓]

Publishing process signals: STRONG — reflects the venue and review process. — venue and review process.

AAC infill improved ductility more than clay infill

—

in
Several workers in dark clothing stand inside a concrete structure with bare masonry block walls and exposed concrete framing, surrounded by construction debris and materials on the floor in what appears to be an indoor laboratory or testing facility.
Research area:Structural engineeringCivil and Structural EngineeringSeismic Performance and Analysis

What the study found

The study found that both autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks and traditional clay masonry infill increased the lateral strength of reinforced concrete (RC) frames by about 60%. AAC infill performed better than brittle clay infill in improving ductility, which is the ability to undergo deformation without sudden failure.

Why the authors say this matters

The authors present AAC as a novel and environmentally friendly alternative to traditional clay masonry infill used in Egypt. The study suggests that the combination of AAC infill and advanced reinforcing steel may be relevant for improving seismic resistance in RC frames.

What the researchers tested

The researchers experimentally tested three 2/3-scale RC frames under cyclic lateral loading, comparing frames infilled with clay bricks and AAC blocks. They also used numerical macromodeling with multi-strut and single-strut models in SeismoStruct and SAP2000, along with concentrated and distributed plasticity approaches for the RC elements.

What worked and what didn't

Both infill types contributed similarly to lateral strength improvement. AAC infill was better than clay infill at increasing ductility, while clay infill was described as brittle. In the numerical work, the multi-strut macromodel captured the hysteresis behavior of the infilled RC frames more accurately than the single-strut model.

What to keep in mind

The abstract reports results from only three 2/3-scale frames, so the scope of the experimental evidence is limited. It also notes several modeling parameters that affected accuracy, including strut width, post-cracking degradation rate, shear-to-axial stiffness ratio, and infill strain at peak stress.

Key points

  • Both AAC and clay infill increased RC frame lateral strength by around 60%.
  • AAC infill improved ductility more than brittle clay infill.
  • Three 2/3-scale RC frames were tested under cyclic lateral loading.
  • The multi-strut macromodel was more accurate than the single-strut model for hysteresis behavior.
  • The study used advanced reinforcing steel designed to improve seismic resistance.

Disclosure

Research title:
AAC infill improved ductility more than clay infill
Authors:
Ahmed M. El-Kholy, Huda Sayed, Ibrahim M. Metwally, Ayman A. Shaheen
Institutions:
Fayoum University, Fayoum University, Fayoum University, Housing and Building National Research Center, Misr University for Science and Technology
Publication date:
2026-02-10
DOI:
10.1007/s10518-025-02358-9
OpenAlex record:
View
AI provenance: This post was generated by gpt-5.4-mini (OpenAI). The original authors did not write or review this post.