46 Vth International Brick Masonry Conference

11-3. Brick Durability Tests and the Method of Freezing

T. Ritchie
Division ofBuilding Research, National Research Council ofCanada, Ottawa, Ontario KJA OR6

ABSTRACT
The testing of bTicks fOT durability has come under critical review in recent years because of differences in the
performance of bricks in the standard freeze-thaw test and in service in the walls of buildings. The difference
in perfonnance is believed by the author to be due in part to differences in the process of freezing; bricks in
service are frozen by the passage of a fre ezing. plane through the exposed face of the brick, whereas in the
standard test the freezing of the brick takes place thTOUgh several of its surfaces.
The two pTocesses of fTeezing, "unidirectional" and "omnidirectional", were aPPlied to bars of elay bricks and
other masonry materials, which had been fitted with reference points for measurements of length changes. The
bars were subjected to freezing and thawing, with length measurements made periodically. Certain bars showed
little difference in behaviour regardless of the method of freezing, but for several materiais the bars frozen
omnidirectionally expanded quickly and excessively, while companion bars frozen unidirectionally were either
unajJected or underwent much less expansion. The dependence of the durability of a brick on the particular
freezing process emPloyed, and its implications in lhe testing of bTicks, is discussed.

Requirements for the durability of day bricks set out in
Canadian and V.S. Standards 1 • 2 are based on a procedure
for freezing ;:ind thawing bricks used by McBurney and
Lovewell Y This procedure was to immerse half-bricks in
water, then set them on edge in a shallow tray containing
a half-inch of water; the tray was placed in a cold chamber
to freeze the bricks, which were then thawed by immersion
in water. The bricks were subjected to 50 freezings and
thawings . From such tests of several thousand bricks, they
conduded that certain combinations of values of the com-
pressive strength, water absorption and saturation coeffi-
cient could be used to predict the performance of bricks
in their freeze-thaw test.
Recent failures in service of bricks that apparently met
specification requirements have brought the durability
testing of bricks under scrutiny. Blachere and Young"
drew attention to the influence of such factors as sample
saturation, size of sample, the rate of cooling and the
scheduling of the freeze-thaw cyde on the results obtained.
Inadequacies of the present durability test for bricks have
been described by Robinson, Holman and Edwards,3 who
tested a large number of bricks by the standard method
with the aim of improving the accuracy of predicting brick
durability from the properties of water absorption, com-
pressive strength and saturation coefficient. Even with the
improvements suggested by their study, however, they
believed that the test method a nd specification would
remain illlpel-fect.
Discrepancies between the performance of bricks in the
standard test and in service in a wall are believed by the
author to be due, at least in part, to differences in the way
bricks are frozen, in particu lar, the manner in which the
freezing plane passes into the brick. In the standard
method of test, bricks are frozen by heat loss from ali
surfaces exposed to cold air, i.e ., omnidirectionally, while
in service in a wall bricks are frozen through the face only,
i.e., unidirectionally . In a study 6 comparing the behaviour
of bricks frozen by the standard method with the behav-
iour of similar bricks frozen unidirectionally, significantly
different results were obtained by the two freezing meth-
ods, as assessed by visual examination of the bricks for
cracking and spalling.
The present study is similar to the former investigation
except that bars of masonry materiais instead of half-
bricks were used, and the effects of freezing were assessed
by measurements of the length changes of the samples,
some of which were frozen unidirectionall y and others
omnidirectionally.
MATERIALS
The materiais studied induded three day bricks, two
masonry mortars, one concrete block , and one natural
stone, which were made into bars one square inch (25 mm)
in cross-section and five inches (127 mm) in effective
length.
Bricks, concrete block and sandstone were cut into bars
with a diamond saw. Holes were drilled in their ends into
which were cemented, with epoxy, round-ended stainless-
steel studs. The ends of the studs provided the surfaces
against which the length meas urements were made, using
the standard comparator for cement testing. Three dif-
ferent bricks were used, one formed by dry-pressing, the
other two by stiff-mud extrusion. Bars of the former brick,
however, had to be withdrawn early from test because
cracks developed at their ends, apparently associated with
the epoxy cement and studs, but this prohlem did not arise
with any other of the materiais studied.
One of the mortars was prepared from portland
cement, hydrated lime and sand in volume proportions of
1: I :6; the second mortar consisted of masonry cement and
sand, proportioned 1: 3 by volume. The materiais were
mixed with sufficient water to produce morta r of stiff con-
sistency; the flows were 116 and 114 per cent, respectively,
for the two mortars. The fresh morta r was cast in standard
cement-testing moulds, which provide bars one square
inch (25 mm) in cross-section and five inches (127 mm)
effective length. Round-e nded stainless-steel studs ,
embedded in the mortar when cast, projected from the
ends of the bar for length measurement.
Session li, Papel' 3, BTick Dumbility Tests and the Method of heezing
The concrete block used in the study had been made
from lightweight aggregate; the stone was Wall ace sand-
stone from j ova Scotia .
METHOD OF TEST
Six bars of each materia l were stored for two weeks in a
laboratory maintained at abo ut 50 per cent relative humid-
ity and 73°F (23°C). Prior to the freezing tests, the bars
were immersed in water at 73°F for four hours, removed ,
and the length was measured. Three bars of each material
were then placed in the freezillg chambel· with ali surfaces
exposed to the cold air; this provided the test condition
for what is termed here , omnidirectional freezing.
The other three bars or each materia l were placed to
fill an opening in one side of a box whose other five sides
were closed anel heavily insulated. These bars, arranged
side-by-side a nel close together, were frozen unidirection-
ally when the box was placed in the freezing chamber; the
freez ing plane passed from that surface of the bars
exposed to the air of the freezer , to the opposite surface,
across the one-inch thickness of the bars.
The bars remained in lhe freezer, where the air tem-
perature was usually in the range of 0° to - IOoF (-18° to
-23°C) for 20 hours , then IVere removed for thawing in
water. Those bars forming part of the insulated box \Vere
removed for thawing. After four hours in the thawing
ta nk , the bars were measureel for length anel again placed
in the freezer. This arbitrarily selected process of freezing
and thaIVing, with length measurements made after each
thawing, was continued until the tenth thaw ing, after
wh ich the bars were stored in the laboratory for one week
before another series of \ O freezings began. This period
of time was intended to a ll ow the bars to dry, so that the
gradual in crease in their saturation with repeateel thawing
in water did not I-esult in their reaching a high degree of
saturation. The bars were subjected to a tota l of 100 freez-
in gs if they had not deteriorated before this number was
reached.
RESULTS
The length changes of the bars, expressed as a percentage
of the original length (after the first 4-hour immersion),
are plotted again st the number of freezings in Figures \ ,
2 and 3.
Bars of three materiais, the mortar prepared from
masonry cement and sand, one of the bricks , and the
sandstone, showeel no significant difference in behaviour
when frozen 100 times unidirectionally and omnielirec-
tionally , but the other materiais tested behaved quite dif-
ferently, as shown in the graphs.
The mortar bars of cement, lime and sand (Figure I)
were frozen unidirectionall y about 80 times before appre-
ciable expansion occurreel. The three compan ion bars fro-
zen omn idirectiona ll y, however, expaneled a lmost contin -
uously from the Slan or test and at such a rale lhat the
expansion exceeded 0.05 per cent before 50 freezings and
0. \ O per cent before 70 freezings. After 90 freezings the
bars had eXpandeel O.:W per cent and were broken before
\ 00 freezings.
47
The bars of brick A (Figure 2) that were frozen unidi-
rectionally showed little length change in the 80 freezings
to which they \Vere subjected. Their companion bars, how-
ever, frozen omnidirectionall y, expanded very rapidly
after \ O freezings, were cracked between \9 and 25 freez-
ings , a nd were in such a deteriorated condition after 30
freezings that they had to be removed from test.
The ba rs prepared from concrete block (Figure 3) and
frozen unidirectionally expanded slightly over the course
of their 100 freezings, whereas the companion bars , frozen
omnidirectionaIl y, expanded at a very rapid rate such that
their length change exceeded 0.\ O per cent before 20
freezings had been carried out. The expansion exceeded
0.50 per cent after 35 freezings and the bars , markeel with
a very fine pattern of cracks, were so fragile that they had
to be removeel from test.
DISCUSSION
The results confirm those of a previous study" that bricks
frozen by heat loss from severa l surfaces simul taneously
behave quite differently rrom bricks frozen unidirection-
ally.
Another study' of unidirectional fl-eezing indicated that
the water in a brick is forced away from the advancing
freezing plane and may be forced from the brick, a proc-
ess that may provide relief from stress. But no such pos-
sibility of stress relief can operale when freezing planes
pass simu ltaneously into severa I of the brick surfaces,
wh ich probably accounts for the differences in the effects
of freezing by the two processes, although this remains to
be proven.
The apparent relief of freezing stresses has been noted
by the author in the freezing of cylindrica l specimens (1-
1/8 in. , 29 mm, diameter and of length equal to brick
height) cored from various bricks. Three such samples
from a brick were compared with three other samples
from the same brick in which a 1/4 in. (6.3 mm) hole was
drilleel down the centre. The samples were saturated, fro-
zen by exposure in a cold chamber and thawed in water.
Man y of the solid samples crackeel in the first freezing
and others after the second or third freezing. The samples
with centra l holes, however, IVere unaffecteel by many
freezings, presumably beca use under essentia ll y similar
rates of freez ing and moisture content there was no con -
finement of the freezing water.
CONCLUSIONS
The behaviour of certain bricks and othe r masonry mate-
I-ials frozen unidirectionall y, such as occurs in service in
a wall , differed significantly from their behavioul- when
frozen through severa l surfaces . This difference is believed
to account in part for the reported difficu lties in relating
the results of freeze-thaw tests or bricks by the standard
(A.S.T.M.) method to their performance in service. The
stanelard method or freeze-thaw lesting or bricks accord-
ingly shou ld be cha nged to correspond more closel)' to the
actual cond itions af lhe freezing of bricks in service in a
wall, which is unielirectional.
48 Vth International Brick Masonry Con ference

This paper is a contribution from the Division of Bui ld-

ing Research, National Research Counci l of Canada and
is published with the approval of the Director of the
Division.
I

;;
Z
~

..
o. 14

o .12
MORT A R
1 , 1 ,6 CEMENT . LIME , SAND 7
•
0.30%
EXPANS ION
AFTER 90
FREEZ I NGS
I

/
EACH PO INT RE PR E S E N T S THE
0.10
REFERENCES ~ AVERAGE VALUE FO R TH RE E
t:> BA RS
~
0.08
I. American Society for Testing Materiais , Specification C62-75a, O
""""
I
~
"B uilding Brick (Solid mason ry units made from day or shale)." O
O MN I D I REC T IO NA L ______ o I
0.06 FREE Z I NG~ • I
2. Canadian Standards Association, Standard A82.1-1977 , "Burned
day brick ." ". Z .y ,
I
I
I
I

.~N I
20 .04

.-0--- \
3. McBurney, j.W. and Lovewell, C.E. "Strength, water absorp- Z I
.. o
~

u Z DI RECT l ONA L FREEZ ING o

tion and weather resistance of bui ld ing bricks produced in the ~
I
I
~
~ .02
U nited States." Proceedings, A.S.T.M., Vol. 33, Part 11 , 1933.
4. Blachere, R., and Young, j.E. "Freezing and thawing tests and
X
,(0___ -0----0-___ 0____ 0_---0----0.._ //
".z l
w

theories of frost damage." A.S.T.M. journal or Testing and Eval-

. '-,!'
uation , Vol. 3, No. 4, july, 1975 . I
U
0.02.---.----r---r---;----r---~--;_--_.--_.--_,
5. Robinson, C.C ., Holman, j.R., and Edwards, j.F. "Relation
... __ MORTA R 1,3 MASONRY CEME N T
between p h ysical properties and durabi lity of commerciall y mar- '7 -="'::"'::i"="'::"::":Q=-== -=--=..::0 __
ke ted brick." Bulletin or lhe American Ceramic Society, Vol. 56, OM N I DI RECT 10 NA L FR EE Z I Ny-·--------.
No. 12 , 1977. U NID IRECT IONA L FREEZI N G -=~~
0.02 L-__ ~ __ ~ ____ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~

Ritch ie, T. "The lest method of freez ing bricks: its influ ence on
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
their durability." journal or the Canad ian Ceramic SocielY, Vol.
NUM8ER OF F REEZINGS
44, 1975.
7. Ritchie, T. "Freeze-thaw actio n on brick." journal or the
Canadian Ceramic Society, Vol. 4 1, 1972.
FiguTe 1. Length ch anges of mortar bars frozen
unidirectionally and omnidirectionally

I o 11 BR IC K A ;: o . 14
CONeRETE!

" " ~~;~~;~O~R//Z~~Eg~

NOTE , BA RS CP.ACKEO BETWEEN 1 9

I
Z ANO 15 FREEZ I NGS, ANO Z BLOCK;. 0.50%
~
0.10
~
o 11
wERE REMOVE D FROM TE S T
.
~ o . OB
AFTER 30 FREEZ I NGS
..
Z O. 10
EACH PO I NT REPRESENTS THE
t:> EACH POINT REPRESENTS t:> AVERAGE VALUE FOR THREE BARS
O

O
2
Z
O. 06
.-. TH E AVERAG E VALUE FOR
TH REE BARS
~

O
O.OB

.
.04 0.06

I
.......... OM N I D IREC TIO NA L FREEZ I NG

":: ..
Z
UN IOIRECT IONAL FREEZ I NG ".. Z
-----OMN I D I REC T IONAL FREEZ I NG

l-A---__ ---0----0
~ 0.02 2 0.04
Z Z
U

l <>--o- ___
U .o
Z
UN I DI RECT IONAL FREEZ IN G

/0 \
~ ~
~

~ ~ x .02 _-0----<>----0--_
/"o..._O""_~-().. - --o----~-

"..z 0.02 ".z l

I I
u u
.02 0.02
;: I

"z
~
"
Z
~
0.02~ __ ~ __ ~ __-L__ ~ __~~__L___~__~__~__~
0.02
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 BO 90 100 o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

NUMBER OF FREEZINGS NUMBER O F FREEZ I NGS

FiguTe 2. Length changes of brick samples frozen Fig'uTe 3. Length changes of bars of concrete an d
unidirectionally and omnidirectiona ll y sandstone frozen unidirectio na lly a nd
omnid irectionally