Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Out-of-plane flexure behaviour of fly ash-lime-gypsum brick masonry walls T

a b,⁎
K. Gourav , B.V. Venkatarama Reddy
a
Department of Civil Engineering, The National Institute of Engineering, Mysore 570008, India
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India

A B S T R A C T

Industrial by-products such as fly ash is being used for the manufacture of building products such as fly ash
bricks. This paper is focused on understanding the out of plane flexural behaviour of fly ash-lime-gypsum (FaL-
G) brick masonry, through experimental investigations. Results of the flexure strength of FaL-G brick masonry
walls (under different pre-compression) in the two orthogonal directions, are discussed. Load displacement and
moment-curvature relationships for the two cases presented. The cracking flexural stress using linear elastic
analysis was predicted and compared with the experimental value. The results reveal that (a) the flexure strength
of FaL-G brick masonry walls increases linearly with the increase in pre-compression, (b) the flexure strength
parallel to bed joints is two times more than that of the flexure strength perpendicular to bed joints under zero
pre-compression, (c) lateral displacements for the FaL-G brick masonry walls are larger for the case of bending
perpendicular to bed joints when compared with those for bending parallel to bed joints and (d) The cracking
flexural stress for the FaL-G brick masonry can be predicted closely with those of experimental values using
linear elastic analysis.

1. Introduction the main sources of pozzolana. Therefore, lime (calcium hydroxide)

The masonry consists of the masonry units and the mortar joints.
Varieties of concrete-based products and fired clay units are used as
masonry units for the structural masonry. Even though these materials
are durable, they have been questioned as unsustainable options be-
cause of the issues concerning energy, environment and conservation of
natural resources. Also, the walling materials are consumed in bulk
quantities and hence consume large quantities of natural resources in
an unsustainable fashion. There is a need for energy efficient and en-
vironment friendly alternative materials for the masonry. The fly ash
blocks/bricks represent one such alternative for the conventional ma-
sonry units. The fly ash is a by-product from the coal based thermal
power plants. In India, coal based thermal power stations contribute to
about 70% [1] of the power generation producing about 164 million
tonnes of fly ash annually [2]. Though part of the fly ash (40%) is being
consumed by the cement industry in India [2], there is a need for bulk
utilisation of the fly ash to circumvent the environmental problems
related with the storage and the disposal of fly ash.
The class F or equivalent grade fly ash is pozzolanic in nature and
has low calcium content. The fly ashes with lower lime fractions (Class
F) are used for the manufacture of the fly ash bricks or blocks [3]. The
pozzolanic nature of the fly ash is exploited in the manufacture of the
fly ash bricks. The reactive silica and alumina present in the fly ash are
becomes an essential additive to fly ash for deriving strength from the
lime-fly ash mixtures. The lime pozzolana or the lime-fly ash reactions
are slow at ambient temperatures and environmental conditions. It
becomes essential to accelerate these reactions and enhance the rate of
strength gain, in order to derive meaningful strengths for the lime-fly
ash products in a reasonable duration of curing time (28 days). The
lime-fly ash reactions can be accelerated either by using the accel-
erating additives such as gypsum [4–16] or by curing at elevated
temperatures [16–20].
Fly ash – lime – gypsum (FaL-G) compacted at optimum moisture
into a brick is termed as FaL-G brick. FaL-G brick technology is quite
popular in India as there are more than 700 small scale FaL-G brick
manufacturing units using high volume fly ash with gypsum as an ad-
ditive to accelerate the rate of strength gain [6]. The FaL-G bricks
manufactured from these units are being used for the load bearing
masonry walls and infill walls in framed structures (Fig. 1).
There are several investigations on the FaL-G material and the FaL-G
brick technologies in the recent past [4–16]. There are limited studies
on the behaviour of FaL-G brick masonry.
Chitharanjan [4] investigated on the compressive strength of the
masonry wallettes built using low density FaL-G blocks having a com-
pressive strength of 4.12 MPa. The masonry compressive strength was
in the range of 1.5–2.0 MPa for different aspect ratio of the masonry

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: venkat@iisc.ac.in (B.V. Venkatarama Reddy).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.114
Received 5 November 2017; Received in revised form 26 June 2018; Accepted 27 June 2018
Available online 04 July 2018
0141-0296/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy
Fig. 1. FaL-G brick masonry building (confined masonry walls).
wallettes. Gourav and Reddy [16] carried out experimental investiga-
tions on the characteristics of the compacted FaL-G bricks, compressive
strength and flexure bond strength of FaL-G brick masonry. This in-
vestigation revealed that the FaL-G brick masonry with cement lime
mortar resulted in very high flexural bond strength when compared
with the flexure bond strength of burnt clay brick masonry. Higher
bond strength in FaL-G brick masonry was attributed to the develop-
ment of the chemical bond at the interface between the mortar and the
FaL-G brick in the FaL-G brick masonry, in addition to mechanical in-
terlocking of cement hydration products. There are hardly any studies
on the behaviour of FaL-G brick masonry walls under flexure and shear.
The masonry walls can experience lateral loads due to seismic,
wind, eccentric loads etc., causing out-of-plane bending or in-plane
shear. The flexural strength of unreinforced masonry (URM) is influ-
enced by the bond between the masonry unit and the mortar, the ma-
sonry unit strength (particularly for flexural strength parallel to bed-
joints) and the pre-compression.
Knowledge on the flexural behaviour of the FaL-G brick masonry
walls is essential for assessing flexure strength of masonry walls and
structural design of masonry. Hence, the present study is focused on the
out-of-plane flexural behaviour of FaL-G brick masonry through ex-
perimental investigations. The out-of-plane flexural behaviour of FaL-G
brick masonry wallettes were evaluated considering lateral bending
parallel to and perpendicular to bed-joints.
2. Earlier work on the flexure strength of masonry
A number of investigations addressing various aspects of the flex-
ural behaviour of masonry walls can be found in the literature. Majority
of these investigations pertain to the burnt clay brick masonry and the
concrete block masonry.
Hendry [21] reviewed the research work on the flexural strength of
brickwork, with and without pre-compression, and suggested that it
was possible to estimate the flexural strength of various types of walls
by introducing global safety factors depending wholly on resistance of
brickwork to tensile bond strength or arching effects. Lawrence et al.
[22] performed a series of lateral loading tests on brickwork to de-
termine the flexural strength and the modulus of elasticity in the two
orthogonal directions. Hamid and Drysdale [23] reported the flexural
tensile strength of concrete block masonry, for both the cases of normal
and parallel to the bed-joints. Drysdale and Essawy [24] tested concrete
block walls for out-of-plane bending and showed that the pre-com-
pression, delays the development of cracking stress, and the first
cracking and the failure pressures were highest with pre-compression.
Sinha et al. [25] described the failure criterion and the behaviour of
brickwork in biaxial bending. The experiments showed that the mod-
ulus of elasticity in the two orthogonal directions (stiffness orthotropy
of the brickwork) exerted great influence on the behaviour and the
242
Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250
failure of brickwork panels. The experimental results were compared
with the predicted results based on the yield line method, the FE ana-
lysis in conjunction with the Rankine maximum stress theory and
fracture line analysis.
Griffith et al. [26] tested unreinforced wall panels under out-of-
plane static and dynamic loading and proposed an empirical force-
displacement relationship for displacement-based method of analysis.
The static push tests were conducted and the nonlinear force-dis-
placement behaviour was compared with the linear elastic theory and
the rigid body theory. The linear elastic theory results agreed well with
the experimental values rather than the rigid body theory results. Lu
et al. [27] developed a comprehensive finite element model for un-
reinforced masonry considering the material and the geometric non-
linearity, with the capability of capturing post-cracking and the post-
buckling behaviour.
Griffith and Vaculik [28] subjected the unreinforced clay brick
masonry walls to out-of-plane loading, to investigate the load-deflection
behaviour of unreinforced masonry (URM) walls beyond their peak
points. The experimental results showed that the laterally loaded ma-
sonry walls have some ductility and a substantial displacement capacity
beyond the point of cracking and displacement.
Popehn et al. [29] experimentally studied the behaviour of slender
URM walls subjected to axial compression and out-of-plane lateral
loads. The experimental force-displacement responses were validated,
in turn, verified using two mathematical models, a finite element model
and a linear elastic buckling solution.
Najafgholipour et al. [30] proposed an analytical method for in-
plane /out-of-plane capacity interaction in brick walls. The method was
based on numerical investigations considering wall aspect ratio and the
material properties, which had the most influence on the level of the
interaction. The results showed that the analytical method produced
the accurate results.
Vaculik and Griffith [31] described a methodology for modelling
the nonlinear, inelastic load-displacement behaviour of two-way span-
ning unreinforced masonry walls subjected to out-of-plane loading. The
out-of-plane load-displacement model provided an acceptable lower
bound estimate verifying the experimentally measure data.
Bui and Liman [32] experimentally studied the out-of-plane beha-
viour of hollow concrete block masonry walls unstrengthened and
strengthened with Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) composite.
The study concluded that under the real boundary condition, the ef-
fectiveness of the strengthening system is smaller than the simply
supported walls.
Navarrete-Macias et al. [33] experimentally determined the out-of-
plane behaviour of confined masonry walls subjected to concentrated
loads. The results showed that for walls with the same aspect ratio, as
the axial stress increases, the out-of-plane strength increases and for
walls with the same axial stress, as the aspect ratio increases, the
strength decreases.
Jayasinghe and Mallawaarachchi [34] reported flexural strength of
compressed stabilized earth block masonry. Both flexural strength
parallel to and perpendicular to bed-joints were determined. Tennant
et al. [35] studied the flexural behaviour of cement stabilized soil
blocks (CSSB) masonry and verified the same using the masonry
building code. Graziotti et al. [36] studied the out-of-plane behaviour of
unreinforced calcium silicate masonry, single leaf and cavity walls
using shake table tests. Messali et al. [37] tested unreinforced calcium
silicate masonry both for in-plane and out-of-plane using shake table.
Out-of-plane testing’s were done with one-way, two-way and two-way
with opening conditions.
The literature on the flexural behaviour of masonry reveals the
following.
1. Masonry resists flexural stresses due to good bond between the
masonry unit and the mortar. Masonry is orthotropic in nature, the
flexural strength of masonry when tension developed is parallel to
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250

bed-joints is more than the flexural strength of masonry when the Table 1
tension developed is perpendicular to bed-joints. Experimental programme and specimen designation.
2. The pre-compression significantly influences the flexural behaviour Sl. No. Pre-compression Specimen designation
of masonry. Flexural strength increases with increase in pre-com-
pression. Some analytical and numerical models have been explored kN MPa PD-specimen (flexural PL-specimen (flexural
to predict the masonry behaviour under bending. tension perpendicular to tension parallel to
bed-joints) bed-joints)
3. Majority of the studies focused on understanding the flexural be-
haviour of the burnt clay brick and the concrete block masonry. 1. 0 0 0-PD 0-PL
There are hardly any studies on the flexural behaviour of FaL-G 2. 10 0.15 10-PD 10-PL
brick masonry walls, except some limited studies on flexure bond 3. 30 0.45 30-PD 30-PL
4. 40 0.61 40-PD 40-PL
strength of FaL-G brick masonry prisms [16].

The main objective of the present investigation was to understand
the flexural behaviour of FaL-G brick masonry walls. Considering the
limited research in this area, the scope of the work included (1) testing
the FaL-G brick masonry wallettes for flexural strength in the direc-
tions, perpendicular to bed-joints and parallel to bed-joints, (2) gen-
erating moment-curvature relationships for the FaL-G brick masonry
based on the displacement responses of the wallettes under lateral load
and (3) carrying out linear elastic analysis to determine the cracking
flexural stress for the FaL-G brick masonry.
pre-compression. The specimen designation indicates the pre-com-
pression load intensity and the bending direction. For example, 10-PD
represents the wallette tested for flexural strength when tension de-
veloped is perpendicular to bed-joints with 10 kN pre-compression.
Similarly, 10-PL represents the wallette tested for flexural strength
when tension developed is parallel to bed-joints with 10 kN pre-com-
pression.
3.1. Characteristics of materials and the masonry used in the investigations

3. Experimental programme
Experimental programme included testing FaL-G brick masonry wal-
lettes under lateral loading, with and without pre-compression. Masonry
wallettes were cast using FaL-G brick and cement-lime mortar. Two types
of masonry wallettes were cast to determine the flexural strength perpen-
dicular to bed-joints and the flexural strength parallel to bed-joints desig-
nated as PD and PL-specimen respectively. PD specimens had a dimension:
1032 × 600 × 108 mm (height × width × thickness) corresponding to the
height/thickness ratio of 9.5. Whereas, PL specimen had a dimension:
1083 × 600 × 108 mm (height × width × thickness) corresponding to the
height/thickness ratio of 10. The FaL-G brick masonry wallettes were tested
under lateral load (four point bending test) in the vertical position.
Fig. 2 shows the schematic representation of four-point bending test
set-up for both PD and PL-specimens, along with supports, loading lines
and dial-gauge positions on the wallette. The pre-compression loads
applied included 0, 10, 30 and 40 kN corresponding to 0, 0.15, 0.45 and
0.61 MPa stress, respectively on both the PD-specimens and the PL-
specimens individually. Table 1 gives the details of experimental pro-
gramme and the specimen designation for the wallettes tested with the
FaL-G bricks, river sand, lime, Portland cement and cement-lime
mortar were used for the construction of FaL-G brick masonry prisms
and the masonry wallettes.
3.1.1. FaL-G bricks
FaL-G bricks (size: 230 × 108 × 75 mm) were manufactured in a
manually operated brick making machine by using fly ash, river sand,
lime and gypsum (CaSO4·2H2O). Fly ash from a local thermal power
station was used in the manufacture of FaL-G bricks. The fly ash belongs
to class F as per ASTM C618-08 [3] specification. The characteristics of
FaL-G brick are influenced by the fly ash to sand ratio, gypsum content
and density. Investigations of Reddy and Gourav [16], and Gourav and
Reddy [38] reveal that lime-fly ash ratio in the range of 0.3–0.5 with
2% gypsum results in good quality FaL-G bricks. Therefore, fly ash to
sand ratio of 0.35: 0.65 (by mass) was used with 10.5% lime and 2%
gypsum. After 28 days of curing the FaL-G bricks were allowed to dry in
the open air for four weeks. Cured and air dried FaL-G bricks were used
in the investigations. The dry density of the FaL-G brick was maintained
constant at 1650 kg/m3.
The FaL-G brick characteristics determined included flexural

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of four-point bending test set-up for masonry wallette.

243
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250

strength, compressive strength, and stress-strain relationships. The Table 2

28 day cured and air dried FaL-G bricks were oven dried at 50 °C till Characteristics of FaL-G bricks, mortar and FaL-G brick masonry (Standard
constant mass was attained. The oven dried bricks were tested to obtain deviation value in parenthesis).
the compressive strength and flexure strength in the dry state. While the Sl. No. Details of the property Value
oven dried specimens were soaked in water for 48 h and then tested in
saturated condition to determine the compressive strength, flexure 1. FaL-G brick
′
Compressive strength, fbrick (MPa)
strength and stress-strain relationships in wet state.
Dry 15.01 (0.97)
Compressive strength of the FaL-G brick was determined following
Wet (saturated) 10.66 (1.58)
the procedure outlined in the IS 3495 – 1992 code [39]. Flexure Flexure strength, fbrick (MPa)
strength was determined by testing the bricks under four-point bending Dry 3.19 (0.43)
test. The stress-strain characteristics of FaL-G bricks were determined in Wet (saturated) 2.18 (0.51)
a displacement controlled universal testing machine. Cured and air Water absorption (%) 14.82 (0.45)
Initial tangent modulus, Ebrick (MPa) 9500
dried FaL-G bricks were soaked in water for 48 h prior to the experi-
Strain at peak stress, εpeak − brick 0.0015
mentation. The FaL-G bricks were tested in the vertical position by Poisson’s ratio, υbrick 0.26
applying load parallel to its length, to accommodate the extensometer
2. Cement-lime mortar (M1)
and clip gauge. An axial extensometer with 100 mm gauge length was
′
28 day compressive strength, fmortar (MPa) 5.42 (0.70)
attached at mid height of the brick to acquire longitudinal displace-
28 day flexural strength, fmortar (MPa) 0.66 (0.02)
ment. A clip gauge with 20 mm gauge length was attached at the mid Initial tangent modulus, Emortar (MPa) 8600
height to acquire the lateral displacement. Fig. 3 shows the stress-strain Strain at peak stress, εpeak − mortar 0.0011
relationships under compression for the FaL-G brick in wet state. The Poisson’s ratio, υmortar 0.10
water absorption (i.e. saturated water content) of the FaL-G bricks was 3. FaL-G brick masonry
determined following the procedure outlined in IS 3495 – 1992 code Prism compressive strength, ′
f prism (MPa) 7.81 (0.55)
[40] through 24 h cold water immersion test. Initial tangent modulus, Eprism (MPa) 6700
Table 2 gives the details of characteristics of the FaL-G brick. The Strain at peak stress, εpeak − prism 0.0029
values in the Table represent the mean of six experimental values. The Flexure bond strength, fprism (MPa) 0.42 (0.04)
compressive strength of the FaL-G brick was 10.66 and 15.01 MPa in
the wet and dry conditions respectively. The Flexure strength of the
FaL-G brick was 2.18 and 3.19 MPa in wet and dry conditions respec- 1956 code [42]. The stress-strain relationships for mortar cylinders
tively. The strengths in the dry condition were 50% more than the (150 mm diameter and 300 mm height) were determined in the satu-
strength in the wet (saturated) condition. The FaL-G bricks absorb rated condition using displacement controlled universal testing ma-
about 15% water (by mass) in saturated condition. The initial tangent chine. An extensometer with 100 mm gauge length was attached at mid
modulus of the bricks in wet state was about 9500 MPa. The strain at height of the mortar cylinder to acquire longitudinal displacement. An
peak stress and the Poisson’s ratio of the FaL-G brick were 0.0015 and electrical resistance strain gauge of 120 mm gauge length was used to
0.26 respectively. The FaL-G bricks show high Poisson’s ratio when acquire lateral strains at the mid height of the mortar cylinder. Fig. 3
compared with other brittle materials. shows the stress-strain relationships under compression for the mortar.
Table 2 gives the properties of the cement-lime mortar. The 28 day
3.1.2. Mortar compressive strength and flexure strength was 5.42 and 0.66 MPa re-
Cement lime mortar of proportion 1:1:6 (cement: lime: sand, by spectively. The initial tangent modulus and the strain at peak stress
volume) was used in the investigations. The compressive strength of the were 8600 MPa and 0.0011 respectively, with a Poisson’s ratio of 0.10.
mortar was determined by testing 50 mm cubes, following the proce- All these experimental results represent the mean of six experimental
dure outlined in IS 2250 – 1981 code [41]. The flexural strength of the values.
mortar was assessed by testing mortar prisms (100 × 100 × 500 mm
size) in saturated condition as per the procedure outlined in IS 516 –
3.1.3. FaL-G brick masonry characteristics
M1 mortar FaL-G brick masonry prisms were used to determine the compres-
9.0
FaL-G brick sive strength, the flexure bond strength and the stress-strain relation-
8.0 FaL-G brick masonry ships for the FaL-G brick masonry. Five bricks height masonry prisms
(stack bonded) of size 230 × 108 × 423 mm with a 12 mm thick mortar
7.0 joint were cast following the procedure outlined in ASTM C1314 - 16
code [43]. Partially saturated bricks (75% saturation) were used for
Compressive stress, MPa

6.0 casting masonry prisms. The prisms were cured for 28 days under wet
burlap. The flexure bond strength was determined using bond-wrench
5.0
set-up and following the procedure outlined in ASTM C1072 - 13 code
4.0
[44]. The compressive strength and stress-strain characteristics of FaL-
G brick masonry were determined using a displacement controlled
3.0 universal testing machine. Cured and air dried (for 14 days) FaL-G brick
masonry prisms were soaked in water for 48 h prior to the experi-
2.0 mentation. An extensometer with 100 mm gauge length was attached at
the mid height of the masonry prism (covering two mortar joints) to
1.0 acquire longitudinal displacements.
Fig. 3 shows the stress-strain relationships under compression for
0.0
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 the FaL-G masonry. Table 2 gives the characteristics of FaL-G brick
Strain masonry. The compressive strength of the FaL-G brick masonry prism
was 7.81 MPa. Initial tangent modulus and strain at peak stress for the
Fig. 3. Stress-strain relationships under compression for FaL-G brick, cement- masonry were 7600 MPa and 0.0029. The modulus of the FaL-G brick
lime mortar and their masonry in wet condition. masonry is less than that of its constituent materials (brick and mortar).

244
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250

The flexure bond strength of the FaL-G brick masonry was 0.42 MPa.

3.2. Casting FaL-G brick masonry wallettes

Two types of FaL-G brick masonry wallettes (mentioned below)

were used to understand the flexural behaviour.

(a) PD specimens – wallettes for flexural strength perpendicular to bed-

joints.
(b) PL specimens – wallettes for flexural strength parallel to bed-joints.

The wallettes were cast in the stretcher bond pattern using FaL-G
bricks and cement-lime mortar. The procedure adopted for casting the
FaL-G brick masonry wallettes is as follows.

• The FaL-G bricks were saturated to the 75% of their saturation value
by soaking them in water prior to casting.
• The mortar flow value was kept constant at 85% for casting the
masonry wallettes. A mortar joint thickness of 12 mm was main-
tained for all the wallettes.
• The PD specimens were two and half brick wide, and twelve brick
height. Fig. 3 shows the dimensions and details of the PD specimen.
• The PL specimens were four and half brick wide, and seven brick
height. After casting and curing, the specimens were rotated by 90°
and tested such that the flexural tension developed is parallel to the
bed-joints. Fig. 3 shows the dimensions and details of PL specimen
as used in the test condition.
• After 24 h of casting, the masonry wallettes were cured under wet
burlap for 28 days.

3.3. Testing procedure for flexural strength of FaL-G brick masonry

wallettes
Fig. 4. Test set-up for flexure strength of the masonry wallette.

The FaL-G brick masonry wallette was subjected to flexural load

3.0 Flexural strength perpendicular to bed joint (PD-specimen)
perpendicular to the face of the wall through a four point bending test.
The wallettes were tested in the vertical position, pinned at both the Flexural strength parallel to bed joint (PL-specimen)
2.5
ends using well-greased heavy duty pin support, allowing free rotation
Flexural strength, MPa

(Figs. 2 and 4). The clear span between the simple supports was 2.0

950 mm and that of the loading points was 450 mm.

1.5
The lateral load was applied gradually at the rate of 0.01 mm/s
using a mechanically operated motor-gear system and the lateral load 1.0
was measured using a 250 kN load cell. The vertical load was applied
gradually using a 1000 kN motor driven hydraulic-jack causing pre- 0.5

compression. The vertical load was uniformly distributed through

0.0
quarter point loading assembly and kept constant throughout the test. 0 10 (0.15) 20 (0.30) 30 (0.45) 40 (0.61)
The lateral line load was applied through load spreader arrangement. Pre-compression, kN (MPa)
The response of the wallette at various load increments was mon-
Fig. 5. Flexural strength of the FaL-G brick masonry wallettes versus pre-
itored using digital dial gauges facing the two loading points and one at
compression.
mid-point along the height, having a least count of 0.001 mm. An
electrical resistance strain gauge of 120 mm gauge length was used to
acquire tensile strain at the extreme fibre of the wallette (at the mid 1 (8Δ)
The curvature, = 2
height). The position of the dial gauges and strain gauge are shown in R leff (2)
Figs. 5 and 6. For each of the wallette specimen tested the lateral dis-
where R = radius of the circular arc ; Δ = central deflection ;
placement was measured (Fig. 2).
leff = effective length (940 mm)
Based on the experimental data the flexure strength of the masonry
wallette, the load–deflection curves and the moment-curvature re-
lationships were obtained/generated. 4. Results and discussion

M V
The flexure strength of the wallette, fwallette = − 4.1. Flexural strength of FaL-G brick masonry wallettes
Z tw w w (1)
where fwallette = flexural strength of wallette ; M = bending moment((Pl × Table 3 gives the flexural strength of FaL-G brick masonry wallettes
a)/2) ; Pl = lateral load ; Z= section modulus (I / y ) ; along with range and standard deviation values for different pre-com-
a = shear span(245 mm) ; pression values. The flexural strengths of PD-specimens under 0, 0.15,
y = distance of extreme tensile fibre from neutral axis(tw /2); 0.45 and 0.61 MPa pre-compression, are 0.37, 0.84, 2.16 and 2.47 MPa
I = moment of inertia((ww t w3 )/12) ; tw = thickness of wallette(108 mm); respectively. Similarly, the flexural strengths of PL- specimens under 0,
ww = width of wallette(600 mm) and; V = vertical compressive load ; 0.15, 0.45 and 0.61 MPa pre-compression, are 1.10, 1.47, 1.46 and

245
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250

Fig. 6. Crack pattern and locations of flexural cracks in PD-specimens.

1.59 MPa respectively. The orthogonal strength ratio – defined as the
ratio of the flexural strength perpendicular to bed-joints and the flex-
ural strength parallel to bed-joints is 0.33, 0.57, 1.47 and 1.55 for 0,
0.15, 0.45 and 0.61 MPa pre-compression, respectively. Fig. 5 shows
the measured flexural strength of FaL-G brick masonry wallettes versus
pre-compression. The linear relationships between flexural strength and
pre-compression are as follows.
Flexural strength of PD-specimen, fPDwallette = 3.66x p + 0.36 MPa
Flexural strength of PL-specimen, fPLwallette = 0.65x p + 1.21 MPa
where x p = pre-compression in MPa .
The plots clearly show that the flexural strength increases with in-
crease in pre-compression. The slope of the line is steeper for the PD-
specimen for different pre-compression values, when compared with
that for PL-specimen. At zero pre-compression and initially up to
0.28 MPa pre-compression the PL-specimen (i.e. tension developed
parallel to bed-joints) gives higher flexural strength when compared to
PD-specimen (i.e. tension perpendicular to bed-joints). Beyond
0.28 MPa pre-compression, flexural strength of PD-specimen is greater
than that of PL-specimen. PD-specimens fail by opening up of a bed-
joint, in such cases the flexural strength and pre-compression are line-
arly and directly related [24,26,28,29,35,45], and pre-compression has
more influence on bond strength. In case of PL-specimen the failure is
partially through the head joint and partially through the brick i.e.
crack passes through the masonry units in alternate courses, the pre-
compression increases the torsional shear resistance to the toothed
cracking around the units, thus doesn’t contribute to the increase in
flexural strength significantly [45]. The flexural strength of FaL-G brick
masonry wallettes (without pre-compression), is 0.37 and 1.10 MPa for
PD and PL-specimen respectively. Indian code of practice IS 1905 –
1987 [46] allows 0.07 and 0.14 MPa for flexural strength perpendicular
to bed-joints and parallel to bed-joints respectively, for similar brick
strength and mortar proportions.
4.2. Failure pattern and displacement profile of FaL-G brick masonry
wallettes
4.2.1. Failure pattern
(3)
The failure pattern of the masonry wallette under flexure depends
on the support conditions, bond strength of masonry and the flexural
(4)
strength of the brick. In the present investigation the wallette was
tested in simply supported conditions spanning one-way. The wallette
typically fails between the two line loads in the region of constant
bending moment and zero shear force. Fig. 6 shows the typical flexural
failure of the PD - specimen. The PD-specimen cracks along the bed-
joint, in either of the two locations highlighted or both as shown in
Fig. 6. Typical flexural failures of the PL - specimen is shown in Fig. 7.
PL-specimens failed only in either of the two locations highlighted in
Fig. 7, along head-joints and through the brick. The failure patterns
shown are the failures at the ultimate lateral load.
4.2.2. Displacement profile
The lateral displacements (response) of the wallette at various lat-
eral load increments until the failure were recorded using digital dial-
gauges, positioned along the vertical height at the loading points and
mid-height, as shown in Figs. 2 and 4. The support displacements are
zero, corresponding to 0 and 0.94 m height of the wallette. The dis-
placement profiles of 0-PD, 10-PD, 30-PD and 40-PD specimens are
shown in Fig. 8. Similarly, the displacement profiles of 0-PL, 10-PL, 30-
PL and 40-PL specimens are given in Fig. 9. Each displacement profile
represents the average of three results at the ultimate load. The

Table 3
Flexural strength of FaL-G brick masonry wallettes (Standard deviation value in parenthesis).
Sl. No. Pre-compression Flexural strength perpendicular to bed-joints (MPa) [PD- Flexural strength parallel to bed-joints (MPa) [PL- Orthogonal strength ratio
specimen] specimen]

kN MPa Mean value Range Mean value Range

1. 0 0 0.37 (0.05) 0.34–0.40 1.10 (0.19) 0.96–1.32 0.33

2. 10 0.15 0.84 (0.13) 0.70–0.93 1.47 (0.06) 1.42–1.53 0.57
3. 30 0.45 2.16 (0.14) 2.06–2.27 1.46 (0.09) 1.36–1.54 1.47
4. 40 0.61 2.47 (0.18) 2.27–2.60 1.59 (0.13) 1.50–1.74 1.55

Orthogonal strength ratio = (Flexural strength perpendicular to bed-joints/Flexural strength parallel to bed-joints).

246
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250

Fig. 7. Crack pattern and location of flexural failures of PL-specimens.

1 0 - PD 1
10 - PD 0-PL
30 - PD 10-PL
0.9 0.9
30-PL
40 - PD 40-PL
0.8 0.8
Normalized height of wallette, m/m

Normalized height of wallette, m/m

0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6

0.5 0.5

0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

0 0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Maximum lateral displacement, mm Maximum lateral displacement, mm
Fig. 8. Displacement profile along the vertical height of the Wallette for PD- Fig. 9. Displacement profile along the vertical height of the wallette for PL-
specimens. specimens.

displacement profiles shown in the Figures are quite symmetric about
mid-height. The mid-height displacement increased with increase in
pre-compression. The maximum lateral displacement of PD-specimens
is more than that of PL-specimens for similar pre-compression load,
except for zero pre-compression. In the case of PD-specimens, the
flexural failure happens through the brick-mortar interface, thus it can
accommodate higher lateral displacement with pre-compression.
Whereas, in case of PL-specimens the flexural failure happens through
the brick and head-joints, and the failure is dictated by the brick failure,
thus the lateral displacement for PL-specimen is smaller when com-
pared to the lateral displacement in PD-specimens.
The ultimate mid-height displacement of PD and PL-specimens and
the corresponding pre-compression are plotted in Fig. 10. The Figure
shows the effect of pre-compression on the ultimate mid-height lateral
displacement of the wallette. The ultimate mid-height displacements of
0-PD, 10-PD, 30-PD and 40-PD specimens were 0.181, 1.661, 3.564 and
4.188 mm respectively and corresponding ultimate lateral load was 3.6,
10.5, 26 and 30.3 kN respectively. Similarly, the ultimate mid-height
displacements of 0-PL, 10-PL, 30-PL and 40-PL specimens were 0.701,
0.801, 1.221, 1.673 mm respectively and the corresponding ultimate
lateral load was 10.8, 16.1, 18.6 and 21.73 kN respectively. The ulti-
mate mid-height displacements of PD-specimens are more when

247
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250

45 PD - specimen PL - specimen 4.0

40 3.5
Pre-compression, kN

35

Moment, kN-m
3.0
30 0-PD
2.5
25 10-PD
2.0 30-PD
20 40-PD
1.5
15
10 1.0

5 0.5
0 0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Ultimate mid-height displacement of wallette, mm Curvature - Ø, m-1 x 10-3
Fig. 10. Ultimate mid-height displacement of FaL-G brick masonry wallette for Fig. 11. Moment-curvature relationships for PD-specimens.
various pre-compression values.

compared with those of PL-specimens for similar pre-compression, ex-

cept for zero pre-compression. This is due to the flexural failure hap-
pening through the brick-mortar interface and the brick in the case of
PD and PL-specimens respectively.

4.3. Comparison of flexure strength of masonry using different types of

masonry units

Flexure strength of the masonry using different types of solid bricks

and cement-lime mortar (1:1:6, by volume) are compared in Table 4.
The Table gives the details of the type of brick, the compressive
strength of the brick, flexure strength of the masonry walls in the two
orthogonal directions. The flexure strength of the masonry walls using
burnt clay brick and pressed shale bricks is about 0.10 MPa in the di-
rection perpendicular to bed joints, while it varies in the range
0.52–0.74 MPa in the direction parallel to bed joints [47]. The in-
vestigations by Lawrence et al. [22] using semi-dry pressed bricks show
a flexure strength of 0.36 and 1.02–1.18 MPa in the directions per-
pendicular to and parallel to bed joints respectively. The results ob-
tained in the present study for FaL-G brick masonry are 0.37 and
1.10 MPa for the cases of tension perpendicular to and parallel to bed
joints respectively. These values are comparable to the results on semi-
dry pressed bricks by Lawrence et al. [22], even though the compressive
strength of the bricks used in these two studies vary widely.
4.4. Moment-curvature relationships
Fig. 12. Moment-curvature relationships for PL-specimens.
generate moment-curvature relationships. Figs. 11 and 12 show the
moment-curvature relationships for the PD and PL specimens respec-
tively. The ultimate moments of 0-PD, 10-PD, 30-PD and 40-PD speci-
mens are 0.43, 1.19, 3.19 and 3.72 kN-m and the corresponding cur-
vatures are 1.62, 14.72, 31.60 and 37.27 m−1 × 10−3 respectively.
Similarly ultimate moments of 0-PL, 10-PL, 30-PL and 40-PL specimens
are 1.32, 1.97, 2.28 and 2.66 kN-m and the corresponding curvatures
are 6.22, 7.10, 10.82 and 14.83 m−1 × 10−3 respectively. It is clear
from the results shown in Figs. 11 and 12, that for a given moment, the
PD specimens show larger curvature values when compared to the
curvature of PL specimens.

The load-displacement (mid height displacement) responses of the 4.5. Linear elastic analysis
wallettes recorded at regular intervals during flexure tests were used to
Linear elastic analysis was performed to determine the cracking
Table 4 flexural stress of the FaL-G brick masonry wallette subjected to four-
Comparison of flexural strength of various masonry using cement-lime mortar point bending with pre-compression.
and solid brick masonry units.
Mtw V
Reference Masonry unit/brick Flexural strength (MPa) From bending theory, σT = −
2I tw ww (5)
Type Compressive fPD − wallette fPL − wallette
strength (MPa) where σT = tensile stress in extreme fibre; M = bending moment ; I =
moment of inertia; V = vertical compressive load ; tw =
Satti [47] Fletton: deep 22.15 0.09 0.67 thickness of wallette and ww= width of wallette.
frog one face
Substituting the expressions for the lateral load, the distance be-
Pressed shale 13.25 0.10 0.52
brick tween supports and the loading points, cross-sectional area of the
Pressed shale 21.69 0.10 0.74 wallette, height of the wallette, location of failure crack along the
brick height of the wallette and mass per unit height of the wallette in Eq. (5),
Lawrence et al. Semi-dry 51.8 0.37 1.02 we get
[22] pressed brick
Semi-dry 32.5 0.36 1.18 6Pl a (h w−x ) mh g + Vpre
pressed brick σT = −
Present Fly ash-lime- 10.66 0.37 1.10 ww t w2 tw w w (6)
investigation gypsum (FaL-
G) brick where Pl = lateral load ; a = shear span ; h w = height of the wallette;
x = location of failure crack measured from the bottom of wallette ;

248
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy
f prism f prism f brick
f mortar f mortar
Fig. 13. Failure pattern of PD and PL-specimen to determine the bending stress.
Vpre = vertical pre-compression ; mh = wallette mass per unit area and
g = acceleration due to gravity .
The cracking lateral load (Plcr ) for selected values of pre-compres-
sion (10, 30 and 40 kN) was determined by equating the bending stress,
individually for PD and PL-specimen and solving for the cracking lateral
load (equation 7). For the PD-specimens, the failure happens along the
bed-joint thus, flexural bond strength of masonry prism ( fprism ) and
flexural strength of mortar ( fmortar ) was considered to determine the PD-
specimen bending stress. Whereas, for the PL-specimens failure happens
along head-joints and through the brick thus, flexural bond strength of
masonry prism ( fprism ), flexural strength of brick ( fbrick ) and flexural
strength of mortar ( fmortar ) was considered to determine the PL-spe-
cimen bending stress as shown in Fig. 13.
The flexural bond strength of the masonry prism, the flexural
strength of the FaL-G brick and the flexural strength of the mortar are
0.42, 2.18 and 0.66 MPa respectively. Thus the bending stress of PD and
PL-specimen is 0.42 and 1.07 MPa respectively. These bending stress
values are used in the Eq. (7), given below to determine the cracking
lateral load.
1 flexure increases with increase in pre-compression and the lateral
Finally, Plcr = [wt w2 fbending − stress + (h w−x ) mh gtw + Vpre tw]
6a
where Plcr = lateral cracking load , fbending − stress = bending stress of the wallette .
The predicted cracking stress through the linear elastic analysis was
compared with the experimental value of the cracking stress. The ratio
of linear elastic analysis results to the experimental results for 10-PD,
30-PD and 40-PD is 0.97, 0.95 and 0.91 respectively. Whereas, the ratio
of linear elastic analysis results to the experimental results for 10-PL,
30-PL and 40-PL is 0.95, 0.98 and 0.95 respectively. Fig. 14 shows the
plots of the cracking flexural stress versus the pre-compression. The
experimental value of cracking stress closely matched with the pre-
dicted value from linear elastic analysis (Fig. 14).
5. Summary and conclusions
Experimental investigations were carried out to understand the out
of plane flexural behaviour of FaL-G brick masonry. The flexural
Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250
PD-specimens
PL-specimens
2.0 Linear elastic analysis (PD-specimens)
Cracking flexural stress, MPa
Linear elastic analysis (PL-specimens)
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0 10 (0.15) 20 (0.30) 30 (0.45) 40 (0.61)
Pre-compression, kN (MPa)
Fig. 14. Cracking flexural stress versus pre-compression: experimental and
linear elastic analysis.
strength of FaL-G brick masonry (with and without pre-compression) in
the two orthogonal directions was determined. The failure patterns
were analysed and displacement profiles of the FaL-G brick masonry
wallettes, the moment-curvature relationships were generated.
Additionally, a linear elastic analysis was performed to determine the
cracking flexural stress. The investigations for the first time threw some
light on the out of plane flexure behaviour of FaL-G brick masonry
walls. The following conclusions can be drawn from these experimental
studies.
1. The flexural strengths of FaL-G brick masonry wallettes perpendi-
cular to bed-joints and parallel to bed joints under zero pre-com-
pression are 0.37 and 1.10 MPa respectively. For the FaL-G brick
masonry, under zero pre-compression the flexure strength parallel to
bed joints is two times more than that of the flexure strength per-
pendicular to bed joints.
2. Initially (up to about 0.3 MPa pre-compression) the masonry flexure
strength parallel to bed joints is more than that of the flexure
strength perpendicular to bed joints. Beyond certain pre-compres-
sion (∼0.30 MPa) the flexure strength perpendicular to bed joints is
more than that of the flexure strength parallel to bed joints. This
behaviour is attributed to the failure cracks propagating through the
mortar brick interface in one case and through the head joint and
the brick in the other case.
3. The relationship between the flexural strength and the pre-com-
pression is linear. The flexural strength increases with increase in
pre-compression for both the cases of flexure parallel to and per-
pendicular to bed joints.
4. The lateral displacement capacity of the FaL-G brick masonry under
displacement for the case of bending perpendicular to bed joints is
(7)
more than that of the case for bending parallel to bed joints.
5. The cracking flexural stress can be predicted closely with those of
experimental values using linear elastic analysis.
6. The out of plane flexure strength of FaL-G brick masonry walls ob-
tained in this investigation are comparable to the values obtained
using other types of masonry units.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the
online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.114.
References
[1] Ministry of Power. Government of India 2014. http://powermin.nic.in/JSP_
SERVLETS/internal.jsp (accessed December 16, 2014).
249
K. Gourav, B.V. Venkatarama Reddy
[2] Central Electricity Authority (CEA). Annual Report on Fly-ash utilization (2012-
2013), India; 2012.
[3] ASTM C618-08.. Standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined natural
pozzolan for use in concrete. West Conshohocken (United States): American Society
for Testing and Materials; 2008.
[4] Chitharanjan N. Compressed lime–fly ash–gypsum blocks. Indian Concr J
1983;57:153–6.
[5] Bhanumathidas N, Kalidas N. New trend in bricks and blocks: the role of FaL-G.
Indian Concr J 1992;66:389–92.
[6] Bhanumathidas N, Kalidas N. Fly ash for sustainable development. ARK Commun
2002.
[7] Bhanumathidas N, Kalidas N. Dual role of gypsum: set retarder and strength ac-
celerator. Indian Concr J 2004;78:1–4.
[8] Singh M, Garg M. Phosphogypsum — fly ash cementitious binder — its hydration
and strength development. Cem Concr Res 1995;25:752–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/0008-8846(95)00065-K.
[9] Ambalavanan R, Roja A. Feasibility study on utilization of waste lime and gypsum
with fly ash. Indian Concr J 1996;70:611–6.
[10] Kumar S. Fly ash-lime-phosphogypsum cementitious binder: a new trend in bricks.
Mater Struct 2000;33:59–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02481697.
[11] Ghosh A, Subbarao C. Microstructural development in fly ash modified with lime
and gypsum. J Mater Civ Eng 2001;13:65–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0899-1561(2001) 13:1(65).
[12] Shen W, Zhou M, Zhao Q. Study on lime–fly ash–phosphogypsum binder. Constr
Build Mater 2007;21:1480–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.07.
010.
[13] Marinkovic S, Kostic-Pulek A. Examination of the system fly ash–lime–calcined
gypsum–water. J Phys Chem Solids 2007;68:1121–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpcs.2007.02.039.
[14] Freidin C. Cementless pressed blocks from waste products of coal-firing power
station. Constr Build Mater 2007;21:12–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2005.08.002.
[15] Yang J, Liu W, Zhang L, Xiao B. Preparation of load-bearing building materials from
autoclaved phosphogypsum. Constr Build Mater 2009;23:687–93. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.02.011.
[16] Venkatarama Reddy BV, Gourav K. Strength of lime–fly ash compacts using dif-
ferent curing techniques and gypsum additive. Mater Struct 2011;44:1793–808.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1617/s11527-011-9738-5.
[17] Ma W, Brown PW. Hydrothermal reactions of fly ash with Ca(OH)2 and
CaSO4·2H2O. Cem Concr Res 1997;27:1237–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0008-
8846(97)00116-6.
[18] Cicek T, Tanrıverdi M. Lime based steam autoclaved fly ash bricks. Constr Build
Mater 2007;21:1295–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.01.005.
[19] Venkatarama Reddy BV, Lokras SS. Steam-cured stabilised soil blocks for masonry
construction. Energy Build 1998;29:29–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-
7788(98)00033-4.
[20] Venkatarama Reddy BV, Hubli SR. Properties of lime stabilised steam-cured blocks
for masonry. Mater Struct 2002;35:293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02482135.
[21] Hendry AW. The lateral strength of unreinforced brickwork. Struct Eng
1973;51:43–50.
[22] Lawrence SJ, Morgan JW. Strength and modulus of elasticity of brickwork in lateral
bending. Proc Br Ceram Soc 1975;24:79–90.
[23] Hamid AA, Drysdale RG. Flexural tensile strength of concrete block masonry. J
Struct Eng 1988;114:50–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)
114:1(50).
[24] Drysdale RG, Essawy AS. Out-of-plane bending of concrete block walls. J Struct Eng
1988;114:121–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)
114:1(121).
[25] Sinha BP, Ng CL, Pedreschi RF. Failure criterion and behavior of brickwork in
biaxial bending. J Mater Civ Eng 1997;9:70–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0899-1561(1997) 9:2(70).
250
Engineering Structures 173 (2018) 241–250
[26] Griffith MC, Lam NTK, Wilson JL, Doherty K. Experimental investigation of un-
reinforced brick masonry walls in flexure. J Struct Eng 2004;130:423–32. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004) 130:3(423).
[27] Lu M, Schultz AE, Stolarski HK. Analysis of the influence of tensile strength on the
stability of eccentrically compressed slender unreinforced masonry walls under
lateral loads. J Struct Eng 2004;130:921–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-9445(2004) 130:6(921).
[28] Griffith M, Vaculik J. Out-of-plane flexural strength of unreinforced clay brick
masonry walls. Mason Soc J 2007;25:53–68.
[29] Bean Popehn JR, Schultz AE, Lu M, Stolarski HK, Ojard NJ. Influence of transverse
loading on the stability of slender unreinforced masonry walls. Eng Struct
2008;30:2830–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.016.
[30] Najafgholipour MA, Maheri MR, Lourenço PB. Definition of interaction curves for
the in-plane and out-of-plane capacity in brick masonry walls. Constr Build Mater
2014;55:168–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.01.028.
[31] Vaculik J, Griffith MC. Out-of-plane load–displacement model for two-way span-
ning masonry walls. Eng Struct 2017;141:328–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2017.03.024.
[32] Bui TT, Limam A. Out-of-plane behaviour of hollow concrete block masonry walls
unstrengthened and strengthened with CFRP composite. Compos Part B Eng
2014;67:527–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.08.006.
[33] Navarrete-Macias D, Varela-Rivera J, Fernandez-Baqueiro L. Out-of-plane behavior
of confined masonry walls subjected to concentrated loads (one-way bending).
Earthq Spectra 2016;32:2317–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/061715EQS097M.
[34] Jayasinghe C, Mallawaarachchi RS. Flexural strength of compressed stabilized earth
masonry materials. Mater Des 2009;30:3859–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
matdes.2009.01.029.
[35] Tennant AG, Foster CD, Venkatarama Reddy BV. Verification of masonry building
code to flexural behavior of cement-stabilized soil block. J Mater Civ Eng
2013;25:303–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000566.
[36] Graziotti F, Tomassetti U, Penna A, Magenes G. Out-of-plane shaking table tests on
URM single leaf and cavity walls. Eng Struct 2016;125:455–70. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.07.011.
[37] Messali F, Ravenshorst G, Esposito R, Rots J. Large-scale testing program for the
seismic characterization of Dutch masonry walls16th World Conf. Earthquake,
16WCEE 2017. Santiago (Chile): The Institute of Theoretical and Applied
Mechanics; 2017. p. 9–13.
[38] Gourav K, Venkatarama Reddy BV. Characteristics of compacted fly ash bricks and
fly ash brick masonry. J Struct Eng 2014;41:144–57.
[39] BIS IS 3495–1992 (Reaffirmed 2002a). Methods of tests of burnt building bricks –
Part I: Determination of compressive strength. New Delhi (India): Bureau of Indian
Standards; 2002.
[40] BIS IS 3495–992 (Reaffirmed 2002b). Methods of tests of burnt building bricks –
Part II: Determination of water absorption. New Delhi (India): Bureau of Indian
Standards; 2002.
[41] BIS IS 2250-1981 (Reaffirmed 2000). Code of practice for preparation and use of
masonry mortars. New Delhi (India): Bureau of Indian Standards; 2000.
[42] BIS IS 516-1956 (Reaffirmed 2004). Methods of tests for strength of concrete. New
Delhi (India): Bureau of Indian Standards; 2004.
[43] ASTM C1314-07. Standard test method for compressive strength of masonry prisms.
West Conshohocken (United States): American Society for Testing and Materials;
2007.
[44] ASTM C1072-13. Standard test methods for measurement of masonry flexural bond
strength. West Conshohocken (United States): American Society for Testing and
Materials; 2013.
[45] Drysdale RG, Hamid AA. Masonry structures behavior and design. 3rd ed. Boulder
(Colorado): The Masonry Society; 2008.
[46] BIS IS 1905-1987. Code of practice for structural use of unreinforced masonry. New
Delhi (India): Bureau of Indian Standards; 1987.
[47] Satti KMH. Model brickwork wall panels under lateral loading. UK: University of
Edinburgh; 1972.