LIST OF nGURES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 CODE CLAUSES
2.1 General
2.2 Code Section 3
2.2.1 Clause 16, Basis of design
2.2.2 Clause 17, Stability
2.2.3 Clause 18, Loads
2.2.4 Clause 19, Structural properties and analysis 2.2.4.1 Characteristic compressive strength of masonry, !k
2.2.4.2 Characteristic compressive strength of masonry in bending 2.2.4.3 Characteristic shear strength of masonry, t;
2.2.4.4 Characteristic strength of reinforcing steel, fy
2.2.4.5 Characteristic anchorage bond strength, fb
2.2.4.6 Elastic moduli, Em, Eo t;
2.2.4.7 Analysisofstructure
2.2.5 Clause 20, Partial safety factors
2.3 Section 4
2.3.1
2 3 5 5 5 5 5 7
10 10 10 12 13
5.0 5.1 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 5.2.4 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3
REINFORCED Mru.ONRY DESIGN EXAMPLES Beams
Example 1, Simply supported beam Example 2, Cantilever beam Columns
Example 3, Axially loaded short column Example 4, Axially loaded slender column
Example 5, Short column and slender column subjected to single axis bending Example 6, Short column subjected to biaxial bending
Retaining walls Example 7, Grouted cavity retaining wall
Example 8, Quetta bond retaining wall
Example 9, Pocket
44 44 44. 47
SYMBOLS
Am crosssectional area of masonry
Amc crosssectional area of masonry in compression
As crosssectional area of primary reinforcing steel
AS1 area of compression reinforcement in the most compressed face
As2 area of reinforcement in the least compressed face
Asv crosssectional area of reinforcing steel resisting shear forces
a shear span
a, distance from face of support to the nearest edge of a principal load
b width of section
be width of compression face midway between restraints
b, width of rib or pier
b, width of section at level of the tension reinforcement
c lever arm factor
d effective depth
de depth of masonry in compression
d. the depth from the surface to the reinforcement in the more highly compressed face
d2 the depth of the centroid of the reinforcement from the least compressed face
E, modulus of elasticity of concrete
Em modulus of elasticity of masonry
Eli nominal earth or water load
E, modulus of elasticity of steel
ex resultant eccentricity in plane of bending
fh characteristic anchorage bond strength between mortar or concrete infill and steel
fk characteristic compressive strength of masonry
fkx characteristic flexural strength (tension) of masonry
fs stress in the reinforcement
fs1 stress in the reinforcement in the most compressed face
fs2 stress in the reinforcement in the least compressed face
f, characteristic shear strength of masonry
fy characteristic tensile strength of reinforcing steel
Gk characteristic dead load
g acceleration due to gravity
gB design load per unit area due to loads acting at right angles to the bed joints
h clear distance between lateral supports
hcf effective height of wall or column
I moment of inertia
KA active ground pressure coefficient
L length of the wall
I span of beam
M bending moment due to design load
M, increase in moment due to slenderness
Md design moment of resistance
M, design moment about the x axis
M;' effective uniaxial design moment about the x axis
My design moment about the y axis
My' effective uniaxial design moment about the yaxis
m ratio of E, to Em
N design axial load
Nd design axial load resistance
Ndz design axial load resistance of column, ignoring all bending
P lateral force due to earth pressure
p overall section dimension in a direction perpendicular to the x axis
Q moment of resistance factor
Qk characteristic imposed load
q overall section dimension in a direction perpendicular to the yaxis
R reaction
RA arch rise
s spacing of reinforcing bars
s, spacing of shear reinforcement along member overall thickness of a wall or column
tc width of cavity
tet effective thickness of a wall or column
2
tf thickness of a flange in a pockettype wall
V shear force due to design loads
v shear stress due to design loads
W point load
W k characteristic wind load
w uniformly distributed load
Z section modulus
z lever arm
CI. coefficient for column design or bending moment coefficient for lateral load design
'Yf partial safety factor for load
'Ym partial safety factor for material
'Ymb partial safety factor for bond strength between mortar or concrete infill and steel
'Ymm partial safety factor for compressive strength of masonry
'Yms partial safety factor for strength of steel
'Ymv partial safety factor for shear strength of masonry
p Aslbd
Ps soil density
& angle of friction between retained earth and back of wall
f.L orthogonal ratio
LIST OF FIGURES]
I. Beams and slabs limiting deflections
2. Overall stability  minimum horizontal loading
3. Cracking due to differential movement
4. Design width of masonry with raked joints
5. Damp proof course in reinforced masonry
6. Characteristic compressive strength, fk' for masonry of units with ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of 0.6
7. Characteristic compressive strength, fk' for masonry of solid blocks with ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of 1.0
8. Characteristic compressive strength, fk' for masonry of solid blocks with ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of between 2.0 and 4.0
9. Characteristic compressive strength, fb for masonry of blocks other than solid with ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of between 2.0 and 4.0
10. Definition of principal load
11. Alternative cross sections for derivation of relative stiffness
12. Load cases
13. Determination of effective span
14. Limiting spans for lateral stability
15. Wall beam/tied arch analogy/simply supported beam
16. Flange thicknesses of pocket type walls
17. Flange width of pocket type walls
18. Effective width, reinforced hollow blockwork
19. Stress blockshort column minimum reinforcement case
20. Stress blockshort column design reinforcement case
21. Variation of depth of compression block, dc, with stress in reinforcement in least compressed face of column, fs2
22. Maximum reinforcement sizes
23. Pocket wall maximum reinforcement size
24. Bar spacing recommendations
25. Link anchorage
26. Arrangement of column links
27. Effective anchorage of hooks and bends
28. Reinforcement anchorage, internal supports
29. Reinforcement curtailment
30. Reinforcement anchorage, simply supported ends
31. Anchorage of reinforcement where principal loads occur
32. Typical flexural design flow chart
33. Links in vertical joints
I Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
3
1.0 ] ] INTRODUCTION I
This Section of the Handbook deals with the objectives of the design of reinforced masonry to BS56281: Part 2 and the general and detailed design recommendations as contained in Sections 3 and 4 of the Code. The intention is that, whilst reference may be made to Section 1 of this Handbook as necessary, Section 2 covers those parts of the Code that relate to the carrying out of structural design calculations.
2.0
I CODE CLAtT8ES I
2.1
2.2 2.2.1
GENERAL
Sections 3 and 4 of BS5628 Part 2 contain the information required to enable the designer of reinforced masonry to carry out structural calculations and also enable the design philosophy adopted by the Code to be followed.
As already described in Section 1 of this Handbook, the Code adopts the Limit State philosophy which has been used by many countries and organisations for their most recent Codes of Practice or equivalent design documents. Code Section 3 sets out the design objectives embodied in the limit state philosophy and discusses the general stability requirements of reinforced masonry structures. Detailed design information and guidance is given in Code Section 4.
Also given in Code Section 4 are recommendations on the detailing of reinforced masonry.
CODE SECTION 3
CLAUSE 16, BASIS OF DESIGN
This clause deals with the 'basis of design' and outlines the requirements of the limit state approach to design as adopted by the Code. The clause also refers to the need to provide an adequate factor of safety against the ultimate limit state, ie collapse, being reached. Thus the design strength must be equal to, or exceed, moments etc, resulting from the design load. In general terms:
'Ym x characteristic strength of reinforced masonry must be greater than or equal to
'Yf x characteristic applied load effects
where 'Ym and 'Yf are the partial safety factors on materials and loads respectively appropriate to the ultimate limit state.
The design must also satisfy the requirements of the serviceability limit states of deflection and cracking and/or others where appropriate. The same relationship as given above must be satisfied for each of the serviceability limit states. To satisfy this relationship partial safety factors are used, appropriate to the limit state under consideration, as given in the Code, or otherwise derived.
The Code suggests that the designer should consider whether the proportion of concrete infill to the overall crosssection makes reinforced concrete design to BS81102 more appropriate than BS5628 : Part 2 design, ie will the section behave as reinforced masonry or as reinforced concrete incorporating masonry. No guidance is given, however, as to what the limiting proportions should be, but it might be assumed that if more than 50% of the section is concrete, BS8110 would be more appropriate.
In relation to the ultimate limit state the Code refers to the strength of the structure being adequate for the design loads, taking account of the possibility of overturning and buckling. Thus the designer must ensure that an ultimate limit state is not reached as a result of buckling due to elastic or plastic instability, considering, where appropriate, the effects of sway. These recommendations are not peculiar to reinforced masonry and designers experienced in the design of reinforced concrete to BS8110 will have no difficulty in coping with them.
Compliance with the Code requirements for the serviceability limit state of deflection is intended to ensure that the performance of the structure or its applied finishes in service is not impaired, especially with respect to weather resistance. To this end the following limiting deflections are recommended in the Code and illustrated in Figure 1:
a) Final deflection (including that due to temperature, creep, shrinkage, etc,) not greater
length . span
than 125 for cantilevers and 250 for other elements.
b) Postconstruction deflection (ie that due to imposed loads) not greater than span or 500
20mm, whichever is less, in order to minimise risk of damage to partitions and floor finishes.
Handbook to 8S5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
5
Successful and economic use of posttensioned brickwork in this unique building for the Salvation Army. The Orsborn Memorial Halls, Bournemouth.
c) Upward deflection of prestressed masonry members not greater than sr;On where finishes are to be applied, unless uniformity of camber between adjacent units can be ensured.
These recommendations were based on those which were given in CPl103 with the exception of the additional limitation on cantilever members given in a) and the reduction in permitted
deflection in b) from sf5~n to sf~n. These reflect the conservative approach of the Code to actual performance of reinforced masonry in areas in which information is limited.
Item c) above applies to factory prestressed masonry units (beams, slabs etc,) laid side by side; in common with similar prestressed concrete members, such units are likely to vary in precamber with consequent difficulties in the application of finishes. No such 'factory' prestressed masonry units are as yet available in this country, however.
Compliance with the requirements of Code Sections 3 and 4 should, in the majority of cases, satisfy the limiting deflections given. In unusual cases, to achieve these limiting deflections, it is suggested that the designer considers reducing the stresses in the reinforcement to control both deflection and cracking. This artifice has commonly been used in the design of retaining walls by reducing the design strength of high tensile reinforcement to that of mild steel.
Appendix C to the Code gives some guidance in general terms on the estimation of deflection, suggesting that an elastic analysis should be used.
No guidance on the limiting values of crack width for reinforced masonry is given in the Code. However, it is pointed out that fine cracking or opening up of joints may occur in reinforced masonry structures but that the cracking must not be such as to adversely affect the appearance or durability of the structure. Attention is also drawn to the need for movement joints or other precautions to deal with the effects oftemperature, creep, shrinkage and moisture movement.
6
reinforced masonry cantilever
I
:= 3
J=16 lo'alload6"; 1~5
J
I
I ..
L
reinforced masonry beam or slab
I
F =t~ i
I.. L .1
L total load iJ. ~ 250
deflected shape after construction of partitions / and finishes but before J[:"""="""""!"fj,d"""'=:]:t applicationof imposed load
1_ ~ 1 _ _I iJ.d deflection due
rtl to dead load
1 iJ.1 1 iJ.1  deflection due
L to Imposed load
.. .
. spans up to 10.0m
" :5:: L <.11 ""< 500
iJ.1 ~ 20mm
spans over 10.0m
thus by implication:
spans up to 10.0m
spans over 10.0m
L
iJ.d ~ 250  20mm
prestressed masonry member before application of finishes
L iJ. ~ 300
unless uniformity of camber between adjacent members can be ensured
iJ. L
.1
I ..
Movement joint in posttensioned brickwork.
Reinforced brick beam test structure under construction.
Figure 1 Beams and slabs =limiting deflections
It is apparent that reinforced masonry elements will often have, in reinforced concrete terms, high covers to the tension reinforcement; thus strains at the tensile face of the masonry may also be high in comparison with reinforced concrete. Cracks will tend to open only at joints between units, concentrating their size. Limiting the design strength of the reinforcement can reduce the incidence of cracking.
CLAUSE 17, STABILITY
Clause 17 deals with stability. General recommendations are given regarding the need for one designer to be responsible for the overall stability of a structure and for ensuring that stability req uirements are incorporated in the design of the various elements of the structure even when they may be carried out by different parties (trussed rafter roofs, reinforced concrete plate floors etc,). Reference is also made to the need for a 'robust and stable design' which is particularly important in reinforced masonry structures because of the more open layouts
2.2.2
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
7
Figure 2 Overall stability  minimum horizontal loading
possible in comparison with traditional unreinforced load bearing masonry. In order to assist the designer three recommendations are given as follows:
1) Buildings should be capable of resisting, at any level, 1.5% of the total characteristic dead load above that level, acting as a horizontally distributed load as illustrated in Figure 2.
2) Robust connections should be provided between elements ofthe structure, particularly at floors and roofs. Reference is made to Appendix C of BS5628: Part 1 which gives information on the use of metal anchors and joist hangers capable of resisting lateral movements, and for the forming of these connections in buildings of up to 6 storeys in height. Whilst these details can often be used without further calculations, the designer must be satisfied that the connection meets the requirements of his design assumptions. In general it is also important that undue reliance is not placed upon the structural performance of individual connections because of the often variable nature of their installation.
3) Consideration should be given to the effects of the differential behaviour of structural elements of different materials on the connections between them. This recommendation draws attention to the variations in behaviour between masonry, reinforced concrete and steelwork etc under the influence of thermal and moisture changes. Whilst the introduction of reinforcement and grouted voids into masonry sections modifies to some degree the behaviour of the masonry, the tendency of clay brickwork to long term expansion, as opposed to the long term contraction of reinforced concrete for example, should be borne in mind when connecting different materials together, see Figure 3.
possible cracking
\
shortens with time
may expand with time
Figure 3 Cracking due to differential movement
The attention of the designer is also drawn to two constructional matters, namely the raking out of bed joints and the inclusion of dpcs, both of which may adversely affect the assumptions made in the design, see Figures 4 and 5.
Clause 17 also refers to the stability of earth retaining and foundation structures. Although the geotechnical procedures for the calculation of the forces acting upon these structures are not given in the Code (being obtainable in numerous suitable text books':"), guidance is given on the "if values to be used when designing reinforced masonry elements. Stability of these
reinforced masonry
reinforced concrete
the use of pinned joints may avoid stress build up and cracking, but effect on stability must be considered
8
raked joints
I width of masonry for I
.... ~
design purposes
Figure 4 Design width of masonry with raked joints
freestanding grouted cavity wall
2 courses of
damp proof course bricks as dpc,
if required, and as appropriate to walling
if membrane type dpc required then reduced bending and shear capacity will result
The brickwork in the curved walling over the glazed entrance to this offices and shops building in King Street, Hammersmith is reinforced.
Figure 5 Damp proof course in reinforced masonry structures or structural elements will usually be governed by geotechnical criteria. The 'Yf values to be used are the equivalent of those applied to other forms of loading, ie 1.4 for loads which are considered to be dead loads and 1.6 for loads considered to be imposed. For the reasons discussed in Sectiori 1 of this Handbook no distinction is made between adverse and beneficial loads in the application of 'Yf to earth and water pressures. This considerably simplifies design procedures. There is some dissension as to the value of "tt to be assigned to earth and water
loads but the Code adopts a value of 1.4 when combined with dead and imposed loads, and of 1.2 when wind load is also included.
As with other recent structural Codes of Practice+", BS5628: Part 2, in clause 17 requires the designer of reinforced masonry structures to consider the effect of misuse or accident upon his design. The principle to be followed is that the extent of any damage should not be disproportionate to the cause. There is also the need to allow for particular types of damage to which structures may be susceptible by virtue of their use.
In addition to consideration of these general recommendations, for buildings of five storeys and above design should follow the requirements of clause 37 of BS5628: Partl , The use of mortar designation (iii) in this connection is again excluded for reinforced masonry except where it onlycontains bed joint reinforcement and is designed in accordance with Appendix A of the Code.
Whilst there is no theoretical reason why buildings of 5 storeys and above should not have a structure composed entirely of reinforced masonry, this is unusual in the United Kingdom and elements of reinforced masonry are more likely to be combined with elements of reinforced concrete or, indeed, steelwork. The designer has to consider what accidental damage design requirements are appropriate to his structure in these circumstances. In general, the recommendations given in BS8110 and BS5628: Part 1 are similar. In both codes the designer is permitted to analyse the behaviour of his structure or follow the tying rules laid down. When dealing with reinforced masonry, compliance with Option 3 in BS5628: Part 1 would also satisfy BS8110 requirements for any reinforced concrete elements, since reinforcement suitable to function as ties is likely to be available in the masonry.
9
Handbook to BSS628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.2.4.1
The final point made in Clause 17 requires the designer to consider whether any special precautions or temporary propping are necessary for the stability of the structure, or its elements, during construction. As masonry will often be reinforced to permit increases in slenderness over unreinforced masonry (retaining walls, shed type structures etc,), stability considerations during construction may be more onerous than with unreinforced masonry and in such circumstances the contractor should be advised that special precautions are necessary.
CLAUSE 18, LOADS
Clause 18 gives definitions of the various loads to be used in the design of reinforced masonry structures, as follows:
(a) Characteristic dead load, Gk for:
str~cture I fimshes .
fixtures
partitions (permanent)
taken as equal to the dead load as defined in and calculated in accordance with BS6399: Part 1.
weights to be based on unit weights given in BS648 or from actual known weights.
services (including tanks and
contents)
(b) Characteristic imposed load, Qk
Load assumed to be produced by occupancy or use including:
movable partitions
distributed loads concentrated loads impact loads inertia loads
snow loads
(c) Characteristic wind load, Wk
Load due to the effect of wind pressure or suction taken as equal to the wind load as defined in and calculated in accordance with CP3: Ch. V: Part 2.
taken as equal to the imposed load as defined in and calculated in accordance with BS6399: Parts 1 and 3 or other appropriate Code of Practice eg BS6180 for protective barriers in and about buildings
(d) Nominal earth load, En
Load to be obtained in accordance with current practice, eg as described in CP2004. CP2004 in turn refers also to Civil Engineering Code of Practice N 0.24 for the derivation of lateral earth pressures.
CLAUSE 19, STRUCTURAL PROPERTIES AND ANALYSIS
Clause 19 deals with the structural properties of materials used in reinforced masonry and the analysis of reinforced masonry structures.
Characteristic compressive strength of masonry, fk
Table 3 of the Code gives values of fk for various combinations of masonry unit and mortar designation loaded in the normal manner. The values are also given graphically in Figure 10f the Code. The information given in Table 3 and Figure 1 are included here in Figures 6 to 9.
For those familiar with masonry design in accordance with BS5628: Part 1, obtaining fk will present few problems, indeed the process is simplified when concrete units having a height to width ratio of 1.0 are used, as explained in Section 1 of this Handbook, since a separate table for this case is included in Part 2. Complications may arise with the partial reinforcement of hollow concrete blockwork. However, as the sections considered to be reinforced will have their voids filled with concrete, those tables relating to solid blocks can be used for obtaining fk' provided that the strength of the concrete infill is at least equal to the strength of the block.
In reinforced masonry it is preferable, where possible, to arrange for the units to be orientated such that the compressive force on the unit is normal to its bed face ie in the usual unreinforced masonry manner. If the units are loaded compressively on other than their normal bed faces there can be a considerable reduction in the characteristic compressive strength of the units, eg if they are hollow or perforated.
Where the compressive force is parallel to the bed face of the unit ie the direction of loading is normal to the stretcher or perpend face, the appropriate section of Table 3 can be used to obtain the characteristic compressive strength for frogged brick masonry (filled frogs), solid units and
10
26
s:
E 24
E
..
z 22
~
c 20
0
<II
!II
E 18
a
s: 16
0,
c
~ 14
iil
Q) 12
>
·iii
<II
~ 10
a.
E
0 8
o
o
.~ 6
.;::
~ 4
~
!II
16 2
~ ~
~ ~
mortar designation (i)I~...,..., ~
"",........ "'"""""'"
./
~ ", ~ ~
V ~ ~
./ L/~
/ /mortar designation (ii)
~ V I
IP' i
~
I
I o o
50
60
70
90
100
7 10
20
30
40
80
compressive strength of unit (N/mm2)
masonry constructed with bricks or other units having a ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of 0.6
Figure 6 Characteristic compressive strength, A, for masonry of units with ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of 0.6.
26
24
N 22
E
E
Z 20
e
c 18
0
<II
!II
E 16
'0
s:
"5 14
c
~
iil 12
Q)
>
·iii 10
<II
Q)
B
E 8
0
u
o 6
~
s
ts 4
!II
....
!II
..c 2
o
mortar deSignatio~ ./'
V"
~ JIll'"
L ./ ".
/ ./ ~
~L:a:: de';90.'OO I;;)
:
/ V
ff
, "...
I
I
I o o
80
7 10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Figure 7 Characteristic compressive strength, fk> for masonry of solid blocks with ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of 1.0.
filled hollow blockwork. For cellular or perforated brick masonry the characteristic compressive strength may be obtained using the test described in Appendix D to the Code. This
compressive strength of unit (N/mm2)
block masonry constructed with solid blocks having a ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of 1.0
Handbook to 8S5628: Part 2 : SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
11
40
38
36
34
32
N 30
E
E 28
Z
e 26
c:
0
III
ca 24
E
'0
s: 22
'5
c:
~ 20
1i5
Q)
> 18
'00
III
~
a. 16
E
0
0
0 14
"ti
.~ 12
t5
~
ca 10
s:
0
8
6
4
2
/
mortar deSignatio, V
L
L ./'
/ / ,.
/ /'
~V /
I v/ :art., deslqnation (li)
/J
//
J'/
h v
/L
f~
I
I
I
l o o
7 10
20
30
50
40
60
70
80
compressive strength of unit (N/mm2)
block masonry constructed with solid blocks having a ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of between 2.0 and 4.0
Figure 8 Characteristic compressive strength, fk' for masonry of solid blocks with ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of between 2.0 and 4. O.
test may of course be used to determine fk for any masonry materials stressed in any direction. Alternatively, if no test data are available and the extent of the works does not warrant testing, the value obtained from Table 3 may be divided by three to give a value for fk. In the unusual case where hollow or cellular block work is subjected to compressive forces parallel to the bed face of the unit, the value for fk is obtained from Table 3, using the compressive strength of the unit determined in the direction parallel to the bed face of the unit in which the block will be loaded in service. Unless this information is available from the manufacturer, tests will be required to obtain the unit strength. The Code does not specify a method of determining the unit compressive strength, but the method described in Appendix B of BS6073: Part 1: 1981 may be used for this purpose.
BS5628: Part 2 also refers to units of unusual format and unusual bonding patterns and suggests that fk may be obtained for brick masonry using the method given in Appendix D of the Code, and for block masonry using the value given in Code Table 3 for the appropriate block strength. For brick masonry the value of fk must not exceed that which would be obtained using Table 3. The appropriate block strength may be obtained as above using the method given in Appendix B of BS6073: Part 1.
Characteristic compressive strength of masonry in bending
In 19.1.2 the Code refers to the characteristic compressive strength of masonry in bending. This is
2.2.4.2
12
N
E E

z
20
../
mortar deSignatio~ ~
V
~ __",
~V Y ....
V .. V
~ V mortar designation (ii)
... ~ V
r ,....
I
i
! 18
>.
C
o
~ E
16
14
.s:::
0,
c
~ Ul Q)
> 'iii
(/)
~
c.
E 8
o
.~
.~
~
ro .s::: o
12
10
8
6
4
2
o o
80
7 10
20 30 40 50 60
compressive strength of unit (N/mm2)
70
block masonry constructed with structural units other than solid concrete blocks having a ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of between 2.0 and 4.0
Figure 9 Characteristic compressive strength, fk' for masonry of blocks other than solid with ratio of height to least horizontal dimension of between 2.0 and 4. O.
given as fk' the characteristic compressive strength of masonry, and is determined as described above. Thus it is unnecessary to factor fk when using flexural design formulae.
Characteristic shear strength of masonry, fv
The characteristic shear strength of reinforced masonry is dependent upon whether the reinforcement in the section is embedded in mortar or concrete. The basic characteristic shear strength for both infill mortar and concrete is taken as 0.35 N/mm2 ie the same as for unreinforced masonry. In both cases the value of fk may be further governed in beams by the area of the main reinforcement and the shear span (the ratio of maximum design bending moment to maximum design shear force) of the beam. In the case of point loads, the shear span may be taken as the distance from the support to the line of action of the point load, and for uniformly distributed loads as the span divided by 4. For combinations of loads the shear span must be calculated accordingly.
2.2.4.3
In clause 22.5.2 the designer's attention is drawn to the detailing requirements when a principal load is within 2d of the support. These requirements are discussed in 2.3.6 in this Handbook.
a) Reinforcement embedded in mortar
The characteristic shear strength for reinforcement embedded in mortar is 0.35 Nrmm? in all cases except for simply supported beams or cantilevers where the ratio of the shear span, a, to
effective depth,d, is less than 2. In this case, f, may be increased by the factor 2d where av is
av
the distance from the face of the support to the face of a principal load, see Figure: 10, however, f, must not exceed 0.7N/mm2• No enhancement is permitted for uniformly distributed loads.
all main tension reinforcement to be fully anchored at support see fig 30
w ~ 0.7R (principal load)
Figure 10 Definition of principal load
13
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
The Code points out that where a wall is subjected to considerable vertical loading the wall may have adequate shear resistance when considered as unreinforced in accordance with BS5628:
Part 1. In this case, the shear strength would be taken as 0.35 Nzmnr' plus 0.6 times the design vertical load per unit area due to vertical dead and imposed loads for the appropriate load case, up to a maximum of 1. 75 Nzmrrr'. It should be noted that the BS5628: Part 1 material partial safety factor 'Ymv of2.5 must be applied as opposed to the value in BS5628: Part 20f2.0.
Interestingly, the same value of fv is used for racking shear in reinforced shear walls, where the basic value of 0.35 is enhanced by 0.6 times the design load per unit area (gB) for the appropriate loading condition from clause 20, ie. dead and wind load or dead, imposed and wind load. However, in this case a 'Ymv value of 2.0 is used. Again the upper limit for I, is 1.75N/mm2.
2.2.4.4
b) Reinforcement embedded in concrete
When the reinforcement is surrounded by infill concrete the characteristic shear strength is taken asO.35 + 17.5 pup to a maximum of 0.7 Nrrnrrr'where pis the crosssectional area of main reinforcement divided by the effective depth times the section width, b. This shear strength can be further increased in simply supported beams and cantilever retaining walls, where the ratio of shear span to effective depth is less than 6. In this case fv is increased by the factor (2.5 0.25(a/d» up to a maximum of 1.75 Nzmrrr'.
Where the main reinforcement in a shear wall is surrounded by infill concrete the value of f, for racking shear may be taken as either 0.35 + 0.6 gB, as above, or as 0.7 Nzmnr' provided that the ratio of the height of the wall to its length does not exceed 1.5, whichever method gives the greater value.
It is common practice to build unreinforced masonry walls off a dpc on concrete ground slabs. Whilst such a practice may not be common in reinforced masonry construction, if it is done, the presence of a dpc will probably reduce considerably the shear resistance of the wall and should therefore be allowed for in design.
Characteristic strength of reinforcing steel, fy
The characteristic tensile strength of reinforcement as given in the Code is reproduced in Table 1 below. Clause 19.1.4 states that the characteristic compressive strength of reinforcemen t should be obtained by multiplying the values of fy in the Table by a factor of 0.83. In Table 4 of the Code the values of fy for plain steel bars and for high yield steel bars have been transposed. A future amendment will deal with this error.
TABLE 1: CHARACTERISTIC TENSILE STRENGTH OF REINFORCING STEEL, fy (FROM BS5628: PART 2)
Designation
Nominal Size
Characteristic tensile strength, fy
Hot rolled plain steel bars complying with BS4449
All
N/mm2 250'
Hot rolled deformed high yield steel
bars complying with BS4449
All
460'
Cold worked steel bars complying with BS4461
All
460
Hard drawn steel wire complying with BS4482 and steel fabric complying with BS4483
Up to and including 12
485
Stainless Steel complying with BS970: Part1 grades 304S 15, 316S31 or 316S33
All
460
* Corrected from Table 4 in BS5628 " Part 2
14
2.2.4.5
2.2.4.6
Characteristic anchorage bond strength, fb
The value of fb depends upon whether the reinforcement is:
a) of circular cross section with a plain surface,
b) of type 1 or 2 having a deformed or ribbed surface,
c) embedded in mortar,
d) embedded in infill concrete.
The values of fb are given in Table 2.
TABLE 2: CHARACTERISTIC ANCHORAGE BOND STRENGTH, r,
Reinforcement Mortar/Concrete fb<N/mml)
embedded in mortar 1.5
Plain bars
embedded in infill concrete 1.8
embedded in mortar 2.0
Deformed Bars
types 1 &2 embedded in infill concrete 2.5 The recommendations given in Clause 19.1.6 may not apply where bed joint reinforcement is incorporated purely to increase the lateral load resistance of the wall. In this case most proprietary reinforcement systems rely upon the mechanical anchorage afforded by their welded latticed form. Because of the limited thickness available in bed joints the usual means of lapping the bars will be impossible with some of these latticed systems. The ends of each strip of reinforcement should be cut to provide the longitudinal bars with as much side by side lap as possible without removing internal reinforcement or overlapping the strips of reinforcement in the vertical plane. An absolute minimum of 150 mm lap between the longitudinal bars should be provided, and the positions of the laps should be staggered in adjacent bed joints.
The recommendations given in Clause 19.1.6 may not apply where bed joint reinforcement is incorporated purely to increase the lateral load resistance of the wall. In this case most proprietary reinforcement systems rely upon the mechanical anchorage afforded by their welded latticed form. Because of the limited thickness available in bed joints the usual means of lapping the bars will be impossible with some of these latticed systems. The ends of each strip of reinforcement should be cut to provide the longitudinal bars with as much side by side lap as possible without removing internal reinforcement or overlapping the strips of reinforcement in the vertical plane. An absolute minimum of 150 mm lap between the longitudinal bars should be provided, and the positions ofthe laps should be staggered in adjacent bed joints.
Elastic moduli, Em, Ec, Es
Being a composite and anisotropic material, masonry, and often more so reinforced masonry, will have a value of elastic modulus, Em, which depends upon the masonry materials used, and the direction ofloading etc. For accurate determination of deflection, rotation etc. it will, therefore, be necessary to carry out tests to arrive at a value for the elastic modulus. However, in most cases it will be sufficient to use a value for Em of 0.9 fk as given in Code Clause 19.1.7 even though the range is substantial in practice, 0.5 fk2.0 fk (see Handbook Section 1). Also given in this clause are elastic moduli for concrete infill, Ec, and for prestressing tendons, E s s for use in the calculation of losses of prestress. A further value of Es, the elastic modulus for all steel reinforcement, is given as 200 kN/mm2• This value is accurate enough for all design calculations.
Reinforced brick stair tread under construction.
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2 : SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
IS
2.2.4.7
Am = total masonry section ignoring reinforcement Ame = compression area of masonry
As = area of reinforcement
m = ratio of Es to Em
(i)
Analysis of structure
The implication of the first paragraph of clause 19.2 is that calculations will be required for a number of limit states. In fact for reinforced masonry design, compliance with the span/depth ratios and slenderness requirements given in Section 4 of the Code will mean that in general only ultimate limit state calculations will be necessary. Since reinforced masonry will often be used in con junction with reinforced concrete, property differences of the materials should be allowed for in analysis of the structure, similarly if clay brickwork and concrete blockwork are used in conjunction. The Code also requires that the analysis ofthe structure should recognise indeterminacy where appropriate and make due allowance for continuity and joint stiffness in the derivation of forces in members. Three assumptions for the calculation of the stiffness of members are given in terms of the member crosssection and are illustrated in Figure 11. For obvious reasons the first ofthese will be appropriate for the design situation. The latter two methods will be more useful when analysing existing structures. It should be noted that the three methods can give considerably different answers in certain circumstances.
AmAs+ (m x As) Ame + (m x As)
(ii) (iii)
Figure 11 Alternative cross sections for derivation of relative stiffness
2.2.5 CLAUSE 20, PARTIAL SAFETY FACTORS
Clause 20 deals with partial safety factors for materials bmm etc.) and for loads ('Yf)'
The values of 'Yf used in BS5628: Part 2 are based upon those in Part 1 and the same four load cases are adopted. The Code accepts that in certain circumstances other values of 'Yf may be appropriate eg for farm buildings where type of structure and design life are factors.
It also accepts that alternative values of 'Yf for En may be more appropriate in the derivation of design loads for earth and water pressure, but the designer must carefully consider the implications of amending the values given.
Each of the four load cases referred to in 20.2 must be considered by the designer and the critical case or cases must be used in the design. Generally, consideration having been given to Clause 17.3 'accidental forces', no further detailed design requirements involving loading case 20.2.1(d) will be necessary unless the building exceeds four storeys in height, ie it is a category 2 structure as defined in BS5628: Part 1.
It should also be noted that when dealing with earth or water loads the Code considers it unnecessary to make any distinction between adverse and beneficial loading conditions. Thus there is no need to consider an alternative value of 'YfofO.9 or 1.0 in cases (a), (b) and (c) in relation to these loads although this might appear to result in more critical loading.
Because of the need for closer control and efficient design of reinforced masonry, those partial safety factors on materials which are also used in BS5628: Part 1 have been modified in Part 2. Table 3 below gives the values of the material partial safety factors used in BS5628: Part 2, together with those used in Part 1 for comparison purposes. The Table gives the values of 'Ymm for use in the ultimate limit state, the case of analysis for accidental damage and also the serviceability limit state. Clause 20.3.1 in the Code gives values for the partial safety factors for loads, 'Yf, for the serviceability limit state. These were as used by CPllO. No serviceability values of 'Yf for earth and water loads are given; thus some judgement is required if calculating deflection etc, involving earth or water pressures.
The Code rightly reminds the designer that it may be necessary, in certain cases, when dealing with the limit states of deflection and cracking, to allow for additional deflections resulting from moisture expansion in clay brick reinforced masonry, drying shrinkage in reinforced concrete blockwork and creep movements in both. All of these movements are time dependent, being at
16
TABLE 3: PARTIAL SAFETY FACTORS FOR MATERIALS
Material partial safety factors Limit 8S5628: 8S5628:
state Part 2 Partl
Compressive strength of masonry V.L.S. 2.3,2.0 3.5,3.1,2.8,2.5
'fmm S.L.S. 1.5 
A.D. 1.15,1.0 1.75,1.55,1.4,1.25.
Strength of steel V.L.S. 1.15 
'fms S.L.S. 1.0 
A.D. 1.0 
Shear strength of masonry V.L.S. 2.0 2.5
'fmv A.D. 1.0 1.25
Bond strength V.L.S. 1.5 
'fmb A.D. 1.0  U LS  Ultimate limit state SLS  Serviceability limit state
AD  M isuse and accidental damage
their greatest immediately after construction and becoming of less significance, although never quite ceasing, with the passage of time.
It may be noted that with BS5628: Part 1 and CPllO the selection of partial safety factors was governed, inter alia, by the desire to achieve comparable global factors of safety with those inherent in permissible stress design. Thus in CPllO global factors of safety on strength ranged from 1.61 to 1.84, and in BS5628: Part 1 from 3.5 to 5.6. In BS5628: Part 2 there is no predecessor and the global factors of safety are pitched between the two ranges mentioned above ie 2.8 to 3.68.
In the analysis of continuous members, the Code requires consideration of only two loading arrangements as follows (see Figure 12):
1) maximum design load on alternate spans and minimum design dead load on the remaining spans,
2) maximum design load on all spans.
Thus it is not necessary to consider the case with maximum design load on adjacent spans and minimum design load on the remainder.
1) IIIIII III IIIIII IIIII 11111 IIIII
t t t t t t t
2)
t t t + t t t
~1.6Qk
~1.4Gk
IIIIlIIIIIII 0.9 Gk
Figure 12 Load cases 2.3
It should be noted from Figure 12 that, where spans differ, case (1) may need to be carried out twice to obtain the maximum design bending moments and shear forces.
CODE SECTION 4.
CLAUSE 21, GENERAL
The designer is permitted to assume that in the majority of cases, when designing reinforced masonry, the ultimate limit state wiII be critical. Thus compliance with the design guidance and particular recommendations given in the Code obviate the need for special calculations for the serviceability limit states of deflection and cracking. These calculations, of course, can be
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
17
2.3.2
2.3.2.1
2.3.2.2
carried out where particular circumstances warrant.
CLAUSE 22, REINFORCED MASONRY SUBJECTED TO BENDING
Clause 22 deals with reinforced masonry elements subjected to bending and covers the design of beams, slabs, retaining walls, buttresses and piers etc. It must be accepted that the design of slabs, and perhaps beams, in reinforced masonry is not very common. It is also important to realise that the sizing of reinforced masonry elements will be controlled by the size of the masonry unit and the direction in which the units are loaded.
Wall panels resisting lateral loads may also be designed in accordance with this section but, where only wind loading is involved the use of the methods in Appendix A will be more appropriate.
Effective span
The effective span of elements follows reinforced concrete practice as shown in Figure 13.
I * I
usethl
smaller
of
.. effective span ..

..... distance between .. ¢'s of supports
a) continuous beam
.. ==...._
I
useth~ I
smaller __.' f4Q
of 2
.....
effective span
effective span
..
..
b) cantilever beam
Figure 13 Determination of effective span Limiting dimensions
In Clause 22.3, limiting dimensions are given to control deflection and cracking; these are assumed to result in compliance with the recommendations of Clause 16.2.2 discussed in 2.2.1 previously. It can be seen from Code Table 8 that where a wall is subjected to lateral wind loading it may often be beneficial to design to Appendix A methods since these permit greater panel sizes, except when the 30% increase permitted by this clause for freestanding walls is used, as shown in Table 4 below.
However, methods one and two in Appendix A refer back to Clause 22.4.3 and it is not made clear which of the limiting dimensions requirements apply. It is reasonable to assume that since Appendix A relates specifically to bed joint reinforced panels, the limiting dimensions in the Appendix override those given in Table 8 so that Table 8 may be taken as referring to laterally loaded walls which are reinforced other than with bed joint reinforcement.
Limiting span to effective depth ratios for beams are the same as those used in BS811O, as are the limiting distances between lateral restraints; this is as illustrated in Figure 14.
be is not defined for cantilevers but where the width of the compression face varies it may be taken as the average width. Following reinforced concrete practice, it may be assumed in the case of upstand beams that lateral restraint is provided by a slab attached to the tension zone of the beam, provided that the slab thickness is at least one tenth ofthe effective depth of the beam and that the beam does not project above the slab by more than ten times its width.
The limiting span/effective depth ratios given in Code Table 9 are set to limit the deflections of beams to those values given in 16.2.2.1. If the designer wishes to use a different limiting
deflection of say ~ of a beam of span s, it is necessary only to multiply the values in Table 9 by the
x
18
TABLE 4: LATERALLY LOADED WALLS: LIMITING DIMENSIONS
Code Table 8 Code Appendix A
Limiting dimensions Limiting dimensions
maximum maximum maximum
span span area
one simply 35d 60td
way supported (45.5d) 
span continuous 45d 60ter
(58.5d)
[] 20rmore 1800tj
sides 60ter
continuous
support on 3 edges other 60tcr l600t<£2
of wall cases
2 way span 45d
(58.5d)
maximum area I I 30rmore 60td 27OOte/
2025d2 sides
(3422d2) continuous
support on 4 edges other cases 60ter 2400t<?
of wall
cantilever 18d
~d ~O.OO5 (23.4d)   
Bm;o;m"m cover []O
15 mm
~ ~ t,,~t,+t2+t,
t2 = maximum 100mm
t1 tz t3
solid wall grouted cavity wall Values in brackets for freestanding walls
~60 be or 250 be2 d
view a
'viewa view b
U~d
'viewb
~d
a) simply supported or continuous beam
b) cantilevers 
lateral restraint at support only
Figure 14 Limiting spans for lateral stability
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
19
2.3.2.3
ratio of the limit in 16.2.2.1 to that required, ie by 2;0, because a constant value of ~ will give deflection limits in fractions of the span.
Resistance moments of elements
Clause 22.4 deals with the resistance moment of reinforced masonry elements. Simplifying assumptions for analysis from first principles are given, the usual approach used being that of strain compatibility. It is worth noting that the rectangular stress block referred to in assumption (b) simplifies analysis in comparison with the, perhaps more theoretically correct, parabolic or rectangular/parabolic stress blocks, especially where irregular sections are being analysed. Assumption (f) is included because the Code considers that where the span to effective depth ratio is less than 1.5 a beam no longer acts in simple bending but as a tied arch or wall beam. The general pattern offorces in such a wall beam is indicated in Figure 15 below.
The presence of a small axial thrust will in fact increase the moment of resistance of the section, but the Code considers that the added complexity of the calculation to make allowance for it is unwarranted.
The Code gives two methods of designing singly reinforced rectangular beams, either by using the design formulae given in 22.4.1 (an iterative process), or by using the Table or graph giving values of moment of resistance factor Q. Design procedures are discussed in 3.0.
Assumption (a) in 22.4.1 is conventional for elastic analysis ie that plane sections remain plane. Whilst this is not strictly true, the errors resulting from it do not become significant until the depth of the beam exceeds about half its span and a different method of analysis becomes necessary.
A _ IyI xYms
s fyxO.Shett.
I ..
] "" "0. 5S
lever arm = O.Sheff.
~I
14
L
S = 1.15L
S
ct
a) tied arch
nb. tension reinforcement to be fully anchored in both cases
b) Simply supported beam
Figure 15 Wall beamtied arch analogy/simply supported beam
The Code states that the tension reinforcement providing the tie force should resist a tensile force calculated on the basis that the lever arm is equal to 0.67 of the beam depth, provided this does not exceed 0.7 times the span. Particular attention must be given to the anchorage of the tension reinforcement and the provision, if necessary, of shear and hanging reinforcement where the beam is bottom loaded.
It is worthy of comment that whilst the Code in 22.4.2 refers to the span to depth ratio being not less than 1.5 in assumption (f), in 22.4.1 it refers to the span to effective depth ratio being not less than 1.5. Consequently there is a small overlapping area where a deep beam could be analysed either in bending or as a tied arch. The anomaly will perhaps be dealt with in a future revision.
Wall beams may alternatively be designed as simply supported beams provided that the effective depth is limited as shown in Figure 15b.
Sub Clause 22.4.3 deals with walls in flexure in which the reinforcement is concentrated locally. Two cases are considered, namely, flanged members, with the reinforcement concentrated in ribs or pockets, and reinforced hollow blockwork where only intermittent holes are reinforced.
In the former case the thickness of the flange is taken as shown in Figure 16.
The width of the flange (see Figure 17) is taken as the least of:
20
tf'~~l=S' 4{~,,;Jd
flange
a) pocket within wall thickness
b) pocket projects behind wall
Figure 16 Flange thicknesses of pocket type walls
a) width of pocket or rib + 12 x flange thickness, or
b) the spacing of pockets or ribs, or
c) one third the height of the wall.
The design moment of resistance of the section Md, is obtained in the same way as for rectangular beams but in this case, to avoid an overreinforced section, M, must not exceed
_&_ b tf(d  0.5 tf)
'Ymm
b = lesser of i) 12t1 + b,
ii) spacing of pockets iii) height of wall
3 .
Figure 17 Flange width of pocket type walls
Where the spacing of the ribs exceeds 1m consideration should be given to the ability of the masonry between the pockets or ribs to span horizontally between them. It may be possible to design the wall in accordance with Appendix A, ie using bed joint reinforcement, where the lateral load is low or the span short, or as arching between pockets or ribs.
In the case of hollow blockwork the width of the reinforced section is considered to be equal to 3 times the thickness of the blockwork, as shown in Figure 18 below.
p aiD ~lblalD g}
• b 31 ..
Figure 18 Effective width, reinforced hollow blockwork
2.3.2.4 Shear resistance of elements
Clause 22.5 deals with the shear resistance of reinforced masonry elements. The design shear stress, v, is for practical purposes calculated as the average shear stress on the section ie.
V v=bd
Thus for flanged beams and locally reinforced hollow blockwork the area considered to resist shear for design purposes is the area given by b (Figures 17 & 18) x d (or for a pocket wall the actual thickness of the masonry between the pockets if this is less than d).
If v is less than the characteristic shear strength of the masonry I, as given in Clause 19.13 of the Code, divided by 'Ymv, shear reinforcement is not generally needed. However, the Code suggests that in beams the designer should consider the use of nominal links in order to minimise the risk of sudden shear failure. Where the characteristic shear strength, fv divided by 'Ymv is exceeded links should be provided to resist the excess shear stress such that
Asv> b(vfvl'Ymv) 'Yms
s; fy
where As, is the crosssectional area of the shear reinforcement and s, is its spacing.
Nominal links should be provided where required in accordance with Code subclause 26.5.2 such that
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
21
One of the first buildings to exploit the potential of posttensioned diaphragm walls was the Oak Tree Community Centre, Mansfield.
ASY = 0.002 b, for mild steel s
v
and Asy = 0.0012 b. for high yield steel, sy
2.3.3
bl being the width at the level of tension reinforcement.
No reference is made to bent up bars, as their incorporation will often be impractical in reinforced masonry beams. In walls in bending, eg retaining walls, the provision of shear reinforcement is not usually practical and, where the design shear strength is exceeded, it is necessary to increase the area of the masonry resisting shear, usually by thickening the wall.
In subclause 22.S.2 the Code draws the designer's attention to the need to ensure the adequate anchorage, in accordance with the last paragraph of Code Clause 26.9, of the main tension reinforcement in a beam where a principal load is close to the support, see Figure 10. A principal load is defined as a load which contributes more than 70% of the total shear force at the support.
CLAUSE 23, REINFORCED MASONRY SUBJECTED TO A COMBINATION OF VERTICAL LOADING AND BENDING.
The clause deals with the design of columns and walls which carry substantial vertical loads and are required to resist bending moments arising from the eccentricity of the vertical load, and/or from lateral loading, such that the resultant eccentricity exceeds O.OS times the member thickness in the direction of the eccentricity.
The maximum slenderness ratio, for walls and columns, defined as the ratio of effective height to effective thickness as in BSS628: Part 1 and BS811O, is given as 27, except for cantilevers which are limited to 18. The ratio 27 corresponds to that for unreinforced masonry in BSS628:
Part 1 and 18 to that for laterally loaded walls given in Table 8 of the Code. Again a warning is included regarding deflection where the area of reinforcement in cantilever members exceeds the arbitrary limit ofO.S% of the effective depth times the breadth ofthe section.
Derivation of the effective height of walls and columns uses the same concepts for lateral supports as BSS628: Part 1, and it may be obtained by calculation or from tabulated values. The more rigorous approach to the assessment of effective height recommended by the Code involves consideration of the momentrotation characteristics of the connections between the walls or columns and the structural elements providing lateral support, in order to establish the deflected shape of the member. Such a process is unlikely to be warranted in the design of the majority of reinforced masonry walls and columns. Effective heights based on Code Table 11 are illustrated in Table S.
22
TABLE 5: EFFECTIVE HEIGHTS OF WALLS AND COLUMNS
walls
h.,
columns
h
enhanced resistance to lateral movement
timber. concrete (precast or
insitu), F===LI::::===; reinforced '_...,....rT'h
masonry II
enhanced resistance to lateral movement
0.75h
0.75
movement restricted in both directions
movement restricted in yy direction
y
enhanced resistance
0.75
h
1
.. Ih
floor
L.....L.L_~1
h
h
xx axis h
xx axis h,
h.,
h
yyaxis 2h
yyaxis h2
simple resistance
simple resistance
r
t
".
timber /
floors 'II )r
_j
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
23
TABLE 6: EFFECTIVE THICKNESS tef
single leaf wall cavity wallone leaf reinforced grouted cavity wall
tet= t tet = greater of tet = t 1 + t2 + te
a) 2/3 (tl + t2) or where te:;;;100mm
b) thickness of thicker leaf
tQ] ~ ~ li" t t
fA tLl1 : ~ .. ~ ...... [= t1
... . . te
. IID=DII~=:JI' r l t2
e.q. quetta bond wall, for practical reasons the reinforced iftc>100mm
reinforced hollow block wall etc leaf will usually be the thicker leaf Ie = t1 + t2 + 100 The effective thickness of reinforced masonry walls is illustrated in Table 6.
Design guidance is divided into that for columns and that for walls. Design for columns is further subdivided into short columns, short columns subjected to biaxial bending and slender columns. Walls are subdivided into short and slender walls.
Short columns may be designed from first principles, assessing the moment and axial load capacity of the column using the assumptions given earlier in the Code for bending mem bers, or using the design equations given. The first equation is used where the load is predominantly axial and does not exceed the capacity of the masonry alone. A check using this equation will establish whether the reinforcement capacity must be used, in which case further equations are given for the vertical load capacity and the moment capacity ofthe section. In each case a rectangular stress block as illustrated in Figures 19 and 20 is used.
I~
Figure 19 Stress block  short column minimum reinforcement case (load capacity if masonry alone adequate)
The solution of the latter equations requires an assumption of the depth of the compressive stress block dc, so that the steel stresses can be obtained. This can be done on the basis of the stress strain curves for reinforcement given earlier in the Code or using the guidance given in clause 23.3.1.1 and illustrated in Figure 21. Design is thus an iterative process involving assumptions of de and estimation of steel stresses which give load and moment capacities which exceed the design values. Design charts based on these equations and the stress strain curves given in the Code, are included in section 4.0 enabling the design process to be simplified.
1. t
2 2
Nd= _v,lk b (t  2ex) mm
where b is the width 01 the section
Posttensioned reinforced brick pier under construction.
An alternative method of design when bending predominates, permits the axial load to be ignored and the section designed as a beam resisting an increased bending moment. The resulting area of steel may then be reduced to allow for the vertical load effect.
The Code states that in general it is only necessary to consider single axis bending, even when moments occur about both axes.
24
 (area of steel)
 (steel stress)
most compressed :="""'4 face
least compressed face
column(least comoressed face)
tension
Figure 21 Variation of depth of compression block, do with stress in reinforcement in least compressed face of column, fs2
However, in certain circumstances, eg square corner columns with substantial moments about both axes, it may be necessary to design the column for biaxial bending, BS5628: Part 2 enables this to be done by increasing the design moment about one axis, the axis being that which has the greater ratio of the design moment about the axis to the column's overall dimension perpendicular to the axis. Thus the design moment about the critical axis is increased by the moment about the other axis factored by the ratio of the column dimensions and a factor which depends upon the ratio of the axial design load to axial design capacity. There are two main errors in this clause which will be dealt with in the first revision to it. Firstly the ratio of the column dimensions in the expression for the increased moment about the y axis must be inverted, and secondly the expression for the design axial load resistance ofthe column, Ndz, should not include any contribution from the reinforcement or the partial safety factor for compressive strength of masonry. The correct expression is
Ndz = fk Am where Am is the plan area ofthe column.
Figure 20 Stress block  short column design reinforcement case.
minimum permitted value of dct<III1+i
t> Oc > (t  d2) value Off,,! O~....a",",. de
compression
increasing eccentricity
The whole section dealing with column design will be amended in the first revision to the Code to resolve the present anomalous use ofthe word 'axial'. The use ofthe word 'vertical' might be more appropriate in place of 'axial' in some instances, since eccentricity is also covered, see AppendixA.
Subclause 23.3.1.3 gives a method for the design of slender columns, ie columns with a ratio of effective height to column dimension in the plane of bending in excess of 12. Design must allow for the additional moment which is deemed to be induced by lateral deflection being a function
of the design load, N, the effective height hef and slenderness ratio of the columns, hef . As
t
with short columns, design may then be carried out from first principles, using the basic assumption given in the clause on analysis of section (22.4.1), or using the equations for short column design (the design moment including the additional slenderness moment) or using the design charts. In each case the design moment includes the additional slenderness moment, Ma,
given by .
M  N(her)2
a  2000t
The apparent discontinuity at a slenderness ratio of 12 is compensated for by the minimum
design moment of M, = N X 0.05t. .
Guidance on the design of walls resisting combined vertical loading and bending is limited in the
0.83 fyL... __J
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2 : SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
25
2.3.4
2.3.5
2.3.6
Code to the use of the basic assumptions given in 22.4.1 for determination of vertical load and bending resistance. As for columns, a slenderness ratio of 12 defines the change from short to slender walls, the latter being designed for an additional moment obtained as above for slender columns.
Because reinforced masonry walls will usually be singly reinforced the column design equations are not referred to, but there is no reason why they should not be used where appropriate, or if suitably modified. Where the resultant eccentricity exceeds 0.05t, the column equation cannot be used and the Code recommends that the walls are designed as flexural members, neglecting the axial load.
Whilst compliance with the Code recommendations generally satisfies serviceability requirements, Code clause 23.5 draws attention to the case of lightly loaded columns subject to bending ie where the design stress due to vertical load is less than fk/2, considered as a uniform compressive stress across the section. In order to control flexural cracking the Code recommends that the column is treated as a beam and reinforced in accordance with the detailing section of the Code.
CLAUSE 24, REINFORCED MASONRY SUBJECTED TO AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOADING
This clause deals with axially loaded walls or columns, ie walls or columns in which the eccentricity of load does not exceed 0.05 times the thickness of the section in the direction of the eccentricity.
The clause recommends such members are designed in accordance with BS5628: Part 1, ignoring the reinforcement, or with clause 23.3.1.1, using the equation for vertical load resistance, Nd, given in part (b) of that clause. Thus there is no automatic allowance for a minimum eccentricity in the design of these members.
CLAUSE 25, REINFORCED MASONRY SUBJECTED TO HORIZONTAL FORCES IN THE PLANE OF THE ELEMENT
Clause 25 deals with reinforced masonry shear walls. Bending in the plane of the wall is unlikely to be critical, although the compression in the end of the wall due to bending should be checked. In walls carrying low vertical loads tension may occur at one end and reinforcement should be provided accordingly.
The Code concentrates on the racking shear design of shear walls permitting the assumption that the horizontal shear force is uniformly distributed across the plan area of the wall. The design shear strength ofthe masonry is obtained from clause 19.1.3.2, as discussed in 2.2.4.3 of this handbook.
Where the design shear strength is exceeded, horizontal shear reinforcement must be provided such that the area of shear reinforcement per unit height of wall (Asv) divided by its spacing (s.) is greater than, or equal to:
Asv :> t(vfy l'Ymv)
Sv fyl'Yms
where t is the thickness of the wall and v the shear stress due to design loads. v must not exceed 2.0/'Ymv·
As discussed above tension and compression in the ends of the shear wall due to horizontal forces should be checked and, where out of plane bending occurs, cit will be necessary to design the end of the wall carrying the maximum compression as a column. The Code specifically refers to the need to treat the end of the wall as a slender column where the slenderness of the wall at right angles to its plane exceeds 12.
CLAUSE 26, DETAILING OF REINFORCED MASONRY
The successful use of reinforced masonry and its future prospect as a major structural material are largely dependent upon the development of a simple and efficient system of detailing. Code Clause 26 gives the basic principles on which such a system must be based. The variety of masonry units and forms of construction available make generalisation difficult. Thus no explicit minimum area of main reinforcement is given in the Code, but the designer is advised to consider whether design to Part 1 of the Code would be more appropriate when the area of reinforcement is a small proportion of the gross area of the section. This, of course, relates to walls and columns since beams etc., are not covered by BS5628: Part 1. Conversely, as pointed out previously, where the masonry simply provides formwork to the concrete, design to BS8110 may be more appropriate.
The maximum size of reinforcing bars is limited, for practical reasons, as shown in Figure 22.
26
bar diameter not to exceed 6mm
Pockettype reinforced brick retaining wall forming bridge abutment and parapet.
maximum bar diameter
~m
plan
bed joint reinforcement
a) grouted cavity
b) hollow block
Figure 23 Pocket wall maximum reinforcement size
Pockettype reinforced brick retaining wall under construction at Banbury see inside front cover.
c) quetta bond
d) bond beams
e) masonry beam
f) column
bar diameter in cases a) to f) not to exceed 25mm
Figure 22 Maximum reinforcement sizes
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
27
s
b
s
s~ maximum aggregate size + Smm or bar diameter
or 10mm whichever is greater
T
r 1 T
I :31
column..l I
I I link spacing not
I greater than the
I I least of i) ii) or iii)
Lr1_l
s~SOOmm
d
Figure 24 Bar spacing recommendations
(a) minimum clear space between bars (vertical or horizontal). (b) maximum spacing of main and secondary reinforcement (except where reinforcement is concentrated locally as in pocket type walls etc). (c) only one bar (except at laps) permitted in voids or cores less than 125mm x 125mm. (d) spacing of shear/inks in direction of span not to exceed O. 75 d. (e) Where column links are required ie if the area of reinforcement exceeds 0.25 % of the masonry area, and more than 25% of the design axial load capacity is to be used, the spacing should not exceed the least of:
(i) the least lateral dimension of the column
(ii) 50 x link diameter (since links will often pass through bed joints 300mm would be the maximum spacing in this case, as 6mm diameter bars are the biggest permitted in bed joints).
(iii) 20 x main bar diameter.
If, for example, the concrete core to a reinforced masonry column is of adequate size to accommodate four 32mm diameter reinforcing bars the column should probably be designed as a masonry clad reinforced concrete column. Note that 25mm diameter bars are the largest permitted in a reinforced masonry column.
The minimum area of secondary reinforcement in oneway spanning walls and slabs should be 0.0005 times the effective depth times the breadth of the section. The exception to this is pocket type walls where secondary reinforcement is not usually provided unless it is necessary to tie the masonry to the pocket concrete infill, or where it is necessary to reinforce the masonry between pockets to resist lateral loads. Thus Quetta bond walls and reinforced hollow block walls require secondary bed joint reinforcement. As well as distributing the forces causing bending, this secondary reinforcement may also be used to assist in controlling cracking resulting from thermal and moisture movements. Bar spacing recommendations are illustrated in Figure 24.
28
Anchorage recommendations for links are illustrated in Figure 25 below:
4 x link dia
CIS 18025 BDA .. 8886148 0166780 633 ..
Figure 25 Link anchorage
When detailing column links, the links should surround the main vertical corner bars at the above spacing (Figure 24 (e)). Any main vertical internal bars need only be supported by the internal angle of a link at alternate link spacings, see Figure 26. The internal angles of the links should not exceed 135° and the radius should not be less than 2 x the manufacturer's guaranteed test bend.
~I 14 8 x link dia
~1i
8 x link dia
[J
~~
 4 x link dia
a [QJ
,
b
, aa
a [QJ
,
b
.
bb a
r
b
r
,, column
Figure 26 Arrangements of column links
All reinforcing bars should extend beyond any point such that the length is adequate to develop the design anchorage bond strength appropriate to the design stress in the bar at that point. Where laps or joints are required they should be positioned where practicable away from areas of high stress and should be staggered. The Code permits the use of mechanical couplers to hold bars in compression in concentric end bearing contact.
Lap lengths should be able to develop the required anchorage bond strength in the smaller of the bars being lapped, but should not be taken as less than 25 x the bar diameter + 150mm for a tension lap or 20 x the bar diameter for a compression lap, except in the case of bed joint reinforcement, see 2.2.4.5.
Where hooks or bends are required to provide anchorage to reinforcing bars their equivalent anchorage length values are as shown in Figure 27.
dimension x to be the least of i) 4 x bar diameter
ii) width of support / 2 iii) effective depth /2
where dimension x is the distance from the face of tho support to the start of the bend
effective anchorage length = lesser of 24 x bar diameter or 8 x r(must exceed or equal 12 x bar diameter)
a) 90· bend
a
r:
b
.
effective anchorage length = lesser of 24 x bar diameter
or' 4 x r (must exceed or equal 12 x bar dlamefer)
face of support
iI .. e_face of support
b) 180· bend
Figure 27 Effective anchorage of hooks and bends
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
29
For hooks and bends the Code refers to BS4466 which gives the minimum permissible radii to which they may be formed, and it also reminds the designer that in no case should the internal radius of any bend be less than twice the radius of the manufacturer's guaranteed test bend. The bend or hook must also be of sufficient radius to avoid overstressing the concrete or mortar. The calculation method given in BS8110 for bearing stress inside bends may be used where Fbt is taken as the tensile force due to design loads.
In flexural members every main tension reinforcing bar should extend, except at end supports, beyond the point at which it is no longer needed for a distance as shown in Figure 28.
11 = d1 or 12 x bar diameter whichever is greater
12 = d~ or 12 x bar diameter whichever is greater
bending moment envelope
11
Figure 28 Reinforcement anchorage, internal supports
When curtailing bars in the tension zone at internal supports, see Figure 29, the curtailed bar should extend a full anchorage length beyond the point where it is no longer required, or
a) to a point where the design shear capacity of the section at the point where the bar ends is at least twice the shear force due to design loads, or
b) the continuing bars provide double the required moment capacity at that point.
curtailment in tension zone
dimension x = full anchorage length, or if a>2b or if c > 2e, 12 x bar diameter or d whichever is greater
~curtailed bar no+++++"'" longer required to lef1 of line
bending moment envelope
c
la
. t ~
moment capacity .
of reinforcement .:>
shear force diagram
L... _
Figure 29 Reinforcement curtailment
At a simply supported end each tension bar should be anchored as shown in Figure 30, a) orb), except when there is a principal load within 2 d of the face of the support in which case all the
tension reinforcement should continue beyond either the centreline of the support or a line ¥ from the face of the support, whichever is the shorter distance, to provide an equivalent anchorage length of twenty bar diameters, see Figure 31.
30
Reinforced brick staircase following curved diaphragm wall for a brickmaker's head office .
I .. ....
~
I
I
~ r+:
= = ..
  a) column or pier support I
where I = anchorage length d = effective depth
... _.
I
I d
2 b) wide support
Figure 30 Reinforcement anchorage, simply supported ends
principal load
Figure 31 Anchorage of reinforcement where principal loads occur.
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
31
...__3_.O ,I I DESIGN PROCEDURES
GOOD DESIGN
Good economic design of reinforced masonry is dependent upon the achievement of a balance between the limitations of form imposed by masonry unit size, and the need to minimise section size and complexity of construction. A working knowledge of masonry bonds and nominal and work sizes of units is essential in this respect. The BDA publishes a document+which lists coordinating dimensions for brick masonry units and the concrete block manufacturer's technical literature offers similar guidance.
The decision whether to use reinforced concrete clad in masonry or reinforced masonry in its own right will often be governed by nonstructural requirements (eg aesthetics). However, there will be many instances where the use of reinforced masonry for the major part of a structure or for individual elements is structurally and economically beneficial to all parties. There is no reason why reinforced masonry should not be used in association with reinforced concrete and structural steelwork where such an arrangement is advantageous either structurally or economically.
With regard to the appearance of various bonding patterns it is interesting to note that in the mid 19th Century the outer leaf of cavity walls was built using snap headers to give the appearance of Flemish or English bond because stretcher bond was considered dull and uninteresting.
As with reinforced concrete, durability is a primary design consideration which must be dealt with at an early stage in the design of reinforced masonry. Although durability is not dealt with in detail in this document, aspects are discussed atthe beginning of Section 5 .0.
3.1
DESIGN OF nEXURAL MEMBERS
The structural elements most commonly designed in reinforced masonry are probably beams and walls etc, which act in bending. Although the design principles follow those of reinforced concrete, the unit size and type and bonding pattern influence how the reinforcement is incorporated into the section. A number of design procedures are possible depending upon whether the designer is considering alternative masonry types, or alternative masonry strengths. A representative procedure is illustrated in Figure 32.
3.2
Above left: Pockettype reinforced brick retaining wall and parapet for a bridge. Above right: Deep corbel in reinforced brickwork. Below: Reinforced brick arch for an office block.
32
masonry unit type/ infill
no
excessive
calculate As, required
ok
Figure 32 Typical flexural design flow chart
or provide design shear links
provide nominal links
notes
bricks, blocks, hollow/solid mortar, concrete
.quetta bond, reinforced hollow blocks, grouted, cavity etc
based on unit size and bonding. check span/eft. depth ratio and lateral stability if required
may affect eft. depth, choice of infill and reinforcement type
bending
use charts or code equations
shear
if required provide links,
if bonding can accommodate them if not increase section size
nominal links required at discrection of designer
detail in accordance with
code, eg curtailment, anchorage
Handbook to 8S5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
33
It should be noted that it is possible, where circumstances permit, to simplify beam design by providing a section of sufficient depth that shear reinforcement may be omitted. This has the advantage that the limitations imposed on the positioning of shear reinforcement by the bonding pattern are avoided. Whatever bonding pattern is adopted, anything other than bed joint reinforcement in brick masonry is likely to require the use of half bat bricks in order to provide suitable continuous horizontal voids into which reinforcement may be introduced. Similar vertical voids may be required to accommodate links, although by careful arrangement of bonding pattern and limiting the link bar diameter, it is possible to place the links in continuous vertical joints, see Figure 33. The use of special clay bricks with cut outs to accommodate reinforcement can also minimise the need for continuous voids and the cutting of bricks.
It is common practice to provide additional secondary reinforcement of small diameter in the perpend joints of the soffit brickwork to flexural members; this reinforcement being later bent into, or over, the main reinforcement cage or infill concrete. Whilst this may be efficacious in providing additional support to the soffit brickwork, the secondary reinforcement must comply with the durability requirements of the Code and must be arranged in a manner that does not interfere with the placing and fixing of the main reinforcement. To avoid the risk of bimetallic corrosion, contact between stainless steel and mild or hightensile steel reinforcement should be avoided.
3.3
DESIGN OF COLUMNS
Column design to the Code varies depending upon whether the column is short or slender, is axially loaded, or has uniaxial or biaxical moments applied to it.
Axially loaded columns will generally only occur where stiff beams, of approximately equal spans and carrying approximately equal loads, frame into the columns on opposite sides along one or both axes giving a resultant eccentricity not exceeding 0.05 times the column dimension in the appropriate direction.
Such columns may be designed as unreinforced in accordance with BS5628: Part 1 or in accordance with the Code provision for columns subjected to a combination of vertical load and bending, the formulae being modified accordingly. With the axial load calculated, a trial section size is selected which will be governed by masonry unit size and bonding pattern. An initial check using the design axial load capacity of the masonry section alone, without taking any slenderness reduction factor into account, will indicate whether reinforcement is required or not. If reinforcement is required the slenderness ratio must then be calculated to see whether the column is defined as short or slender, ie whether the slenderness ratio is greater or less than 12. The effective height can either be obtained from frame analysis of the column and its associated beams, or more simply from Code Table 11. Where the column is short, the equation for the design axial load resistance Nd, in Code clause 23.3.1.1(b), may be simplified, the full section being in compression and the symmetrically placed reinforcement being equally stressed in compression, as follows:
Nd = _f_k bt + 0.83 fy As
'Vmm 'Vms
where As is the total area of reinforcement
This equation can then either be solved for As> having assumed a value for fb or solved for fk, having assumed an area of reinforcement. It is finally necessary to establish whether link reinforcement is required, based on percentage area of reinforcement, in accordance with Code clause 26.5.3.
Where the slenderness ratio exceeds 12, axially loaded columns must be designed for an additional moment, M,, as given in Code clause 23.3.1.3. In this case the design for axially loaded columns becomes as for short columns subjected to bending, with M, the design moment.
Design of short columns subjected to vertical loads and bending about one axis is an iterative process. After checking that design reinforcement is required to Code clause 23.3.1.1a), it is necessary to use the formulae for the design axial load resistance, Nd, and the design moment of resistance, Md, given in Code clause 23.3.1.1b). In order to use these formulae the designer is required to choose a value for the depth of masonry in compression, d., The designer also has to make a first estimate of the reinforcement area to be provided. In choosing a value for de the relative sizes of the design moment and design vertical load are helpful. Where the design vertical load is substantially more than the capacity of the unreinforced masonry section, de would be chosen either as equal to the full depth of the section, t, or close to it, bearing in mind
34
Reinforced and prestressed brickwork were used extensively in this headquarters building for a major brick company.
that the moment capacity of the column will be effectively limited to the middle term of the
equation given for Md' Conversely if the design moment is large, a value of de of ~ may be chosen to gain the maximum moment resistance from the reinforcement. This will, however, limit the vertical load capacity to less than half that of the full masonry section considered as unreinforced. By a process of adjusting de until Nd and Md exceed Nand M respectively, or by increasing the assumed area of steel if the former cannot be achieved, a satisfactory solution can be obtained. It should be remembered that the maximum bar size permitted by the Code is 25mm and it may be necessary in some cases to try more than one section size. The process is not as protracted as it may be seem as the designer will rapidly gain a feel for the relationship between the variables.
The design of slender columns subject to bending is straightforward. The additional moment for slenderness effects given in Code Clauses 23.3.1.3 is always calculated in relation to the width of the column in the plane of bending so that if the design bending moment is about the major axes so will be the additional moment, even if the column is not slender about the major axis. Thus the additional moment is added to the design moment and design proceeds as for a short column subjected to bending.
The design of short columns subjected to biaxial bending to Code clause 23.3.1 .. 2 is also fairly straightforward. Having assumed material properties, section size and area of reinforcement, the design axial load resistance of the column, Ndz, is calculated and the value of the coefficient a obtained from Code Table 12. Depending upon the relative values of the ratios of the design moments about the two axes to their respective depth of section in their directions of bending, an increased design moment M,' or My' is calculated about the critical axis. Where, for square columns, the design vertical load, N, is low in relation to Ndz> the axial load capacity of the column, the increased moment tends to the sum of the moments about the two axes. Having obtained the increased moment the procedure is as for uniaxial bending using the increased
moment. .
Link reinforcement is only required in reinforced masonry columns when the total area of the main steel exceeds 0.25% ofthe area of masonry. In practice links will usually be required. The links will in general be accommodated in the bed joints ofthe masonry and will, therefore, be limited in size to 6mm diameter. Link spacing is given as the lesser. of three criteria, namely, the minimum plan dimension of the column, fifty times the link diameter or twenty times the main bar diameter. Assuming the use of 6mm diameter links and main bar diameter not less than 16mm, fifty times the link diameter will govern to give link spacing of 300mm in most cases for brickwork, and at 200mm or 225mm depending upon block unit height, for blockwork.
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
3S
4.0 I I DESIGN CHARTS
4.1 SINGLY REINFORCED BEAMS
0.25 t,,rrr,
0.20
0.15
.x.

C\J
"0
.0

~
0.10 o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ __ ~
200 250
300
350
400
450
500
Ymm= 2.0
36
o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ __ ~
200
250
300
500
350
400
450
Ymm= 2.3
37
4.2 COLUMNS
1.6
, .... b ~,
{~]
d/t = 0.7
fy = 460N/mm2
Ymm=2.0
 Ymm= 2.3
As P
P=bf Tk
3.0 x 103
~

+' 2.5 X 103
.0
....
z
2.0 X 103
1.5x103
1.0 X 103
0.5 X 103
0
0.2 0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
38
0.1
o
M/bt2 fk
1.6~~~~~~
I~ b~
d[~]
d/t = 0.75
fy = 460N/mm2
 Ymm=2.0
 Ymm= 2.3
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.3 M/bt2 fk
0.6
Handbook to 8S5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
39
d/t = 0.8
ty = 460N/mm2 Vmm=2.0
 Vmm= 2.3
o
o
0.4
0.5
0.6
o
0.3 M/bt2 tk
0.4
0.5
0.6
41
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2 : SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
1.6
0.6
42

.0
.......
Z
d/t = 0.9
fy = 460N/mm2
 Ymm=2.0
 Ymm= 2.3
0.2
1.6r~~~b,
,..... ·1
d[~]t
d/t = 0.95
fy = 460N/mm2 Ymm=2.0
 Ymm= 2.3
o
0.1
0.3 M/bt2 f k
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
43
I:REINFORCED MASONRY DESIGN EXAMPLES
5.0
5.1
Note that in the following examples the minimum grade of infill concrete (25) permitted in the Code has been used. Careful consideration should be given to the selection of infill concrete to ensure adequate durability for the reinforcement type and exposure situation in question. The Code guidance is likely to be upgraded in a future amendment.
BEAMS
5.1.1
EXAMPLE 1, SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM
Design a simply supported reinforced brickwork beam required to span 4.Sm carrying a characteristic dead load of 20.0 kN/m (including selfweight) and a characteristic imposed load of6.0kN/m.
section
floor construction
ti .........,............rIt
reinforced~
masonry ~
4.5 m
Materials
Bricks  unit compressive strength = 35 Nzmm?
Mortar  designation (ii)
Characteristic compressive strength of masonry, fk = 9.4 N'mm? Characteristic tensile strength of reinforcement, fy = 460 N'mrrr' Infill concrete grade (BS5328) 25 Nzmm?
Partial safety factors Loads (')'f):
Design load = 1.4Gk + 1.6 Ok Materials:
Masonry compression, ')'mm = 2.3 (normal category of manufacturing control)
(Note, many manufacturers now meet the requirements of the special category of manufacturing control, enabling "[mm to be reduced to 2.0).
Masonry shear, Reinforcement to infilllmortar bond,
')'mv = 2.0
Reinforcement strength, ')'ms = 1.15
Loading
Characteristic dead load, Gk = 20.0 kN/m
Characteristic imposed load, Ok = 6.0 kN/m Design load = 1.4 x 20.0 + 1.6 x 6.0 = 37.6 kN/m
Design 37 6 4 52
Simplysupporteddesignmoment,M, = ·8 x. 95.2kNm
Designshearforce, Y, = 37.~ x 4.5 = 84.6kN
44
Assuming that there are no nonstructural beam depth re~uirements, the effective depth will be based upon the limiting span to depth ratios given in the Code, the coordinating dimensions of brickwork coursing and possibly the shear strength of the beam.
In order to suit column width make beam width, b, = 440 mm. Use bricks as soldier courses for aesthetic reasons and so that brickwork in compression is loaded normal to its bed face.
(Note that if brickwork is laid horizontally such that it is loaded in compression on its perpend or stretcher face, fk must be determined in accordance with clause 19.1.1.4 of the Code).
Try section as shown. Provision of vertical voids at 300 mm centres to accept links means shear strength is unlikely to control depth.
Beam depth = 553 mm
Assume Exposure situation E1 with grade 25 concrete cover to reinforcement = 20 mm Effective depth, d = 553103201012.5 = 407.5 mm
say 400 mm
Span/effective depth must not exceed 20,
thus, min. effective depth = 4~~ = 225 mm.
This is less than 400 and therefore satisfactory. Design moment of resistance of beam in compression
Md = 0.4 fk bd2 = 0.4 x 9.4 x 440 x 4002 = 115.1 kNm
'Ymm 2.3
This exceeds design moment, 95.2 kNm
440
553
links at 300mm crs secondary 6mm diameter links
This is higher than assumed value thus 2 TI5 bars satisfactory. This area of steel gives a reinforcement percentage of
Design moment of resistance of beam in tension
M  Asfyz d 
'Yms
Assume lever arm, z, = 0.75 d, equate Md to M and solve for area of tensile steel As.
A = 95.2x 106 X 1.15 =794 2
s 460 x 0.75 x 400 mm
Therefore use 2 no. T25 diameter bars (982 mm'')
= d r1 _ 0.5 x 794 x 460 x 2.3] = 0 78d
z ~ 440 x 400 x 9.4 x 1.15 .
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2 : SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
45
982 x 100 =0 56~ 440 x 400 . 0
The Code does not give minimum percentages of reinforcement because it is often the case that the greater depths and widths used in reinforced masonry beams, require relatively small areas
of reinforcement. .
Shear design V
Shear stress due to design loads, v, = bd
84.6 x 103 = 0 48NI 2
440 x 400· . mm
Characteristic shear strength of masonry, fv, = 0.35 + 17.5p A
where p =bci = 0.0056 (from above)
Therefore fv = 0.35 + 0.10 = 0.45 Nzmrrr'
. shearspan a
For a SImply supported beam where d " is less than 6
fv may be increased by a factor [2.50.25~)] M 95.2
a===l13m
V 84.6 .
~ = 10~: = 2.8; which is less than 6
Enhancement factor = 2.5  0.25 x 2.8 = 1.8 Therefore increased fv = 1.8 x 0.45 = 0.81 Nzmrrr'
This is less than the maximum 1.75 Nzmm? and is therefore the value to use.
Design shear strength of beam =1Y_= O2.801 = 0.4N/mm2
'Ymv .
This is less than the design shear stress and shear reinforcement is required.
Shear reinforcement
Shear reinforcement must be provided to satisfy the relationship:
Crosssectional area of reinforcement resisting shear, Asv spacing of shear reinforcement, s,
> b(v  fvl'Ymv) 'Yms 'Ym
s, is dictated by spacing of vertical voids ie 300mm centres; this is equal to 0.75 d and therefore acceptable.
Th "A . d 440(0.48  0.4) 1.15 x 300 _ 49 2
ererore sv require 250  mm
Check nominal area of shear reinforcement required from
Asv = 0.002 b,
Sv
Thus As, = 300 x 0.002 x 440 = 264 mrrr'
Use RIO links in pairs at 300mm centres (Asv = 314 mm2)
It will be noted that additional secondary stainless steel reinforcement is shown in the section to assist in the support of the masonry soffit.
Alternative design using Code Table 10 and Figure 3
In order to simplify the above iterative process, the Code includes a table and chart from which the lever arm factor, c, may be obtained directly.
Thus writing M, in terms of Obd? and rearranging
46
Q = 95.2 x 1(1) = 1.35
440 x 4002
_§_ = 9.4 = 4.09
"(mm 2.3
Therefore, from Code Table 10 or Figure 3, c = 0.78andz = 0.78 x 400 A fz
and from Md = sv y
"(ms
A =95.2X 106 X 1.15=763 2
s 460 x 0.78 x 400 mm
Thus 2 no. T25mm diameter bars are satisfactory (As = 982mm2) Alternative design using design charts
From the singly reinforced beam design chart with
"(ms = 2.3, given in Section 4.0, the area oftension reinforcement may be obtained directly as follows:
95.2 X 106
0.144
440 X 4002 x 9.4
A
from chart for fy = 460 Nzmrrr' p = _s = 4.4 X 104 x fk
bd
Thus As required = 4.6 x 104 x 440 x 400 x 9.4 = 761 mrrr'
As before 2 no T25mm diameter bars are satisfactory.
5.1.2
EXAMPLE 2, CANTILEVER BEAM
Design a reinforced brickwork cantilever beam to carry a canopy structure using Code Table 10. The characteristic dead load is 10 kN/m, including beam self weight, and the characteristic imposed load 3.6 kN/m, uniformly distributed, with a characteristic dead point load at the end of the 2.4 m span of6.0 kN. Calculate the deflection at the end of the beam.
Gk: 10.0kN/m Ok!: 3.6kN/m
canopy
327mm brick pier
~~I~~ 2_.4_m ~
2.4m
Materials and partial safety factors as for Example 1. Design
Make width 327 mm to suit pier width
Make section depth 553 mm, as shown.
d = 553  20  8 10 = 515 mm (cover 20 mm)
Effective span = 2400 + 515/2 = 2657.5 mm say 2660 mm Cantilever span/effective depth ratio = 7.0
Therefore, minimum effective depth d = 2660/7 = 380 mm This is less than 515 and therefore satisfactory.
Note, to ensure lateral stability the clear distance from the end of the cantilever to the face of the
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECfION 2: Reinforced Masonry
47
support must not exceed 25bc or IOOb/ld whichever is less. 25bc = 25 x 327 = 8175 mm
100b/ = 100 x 3272= 20763 mm
d 515
Both exceed 2400 mm, therefore, the beam is laterally stable.
515
553
327
secondary reinforcement
Design moment, Md,
2.662
= (1.4 x 10.0 + 1.6 x 3.6)2 + 1.4 x 6.0 x 2.66 = 92.3 kNm
Design shearforce = (1.4 x 10.0 + 1.6 x 3.6) 2.4 + 1.4 x 6.0 = 55.8 kN Using Code Table 10 or Figure 3
Q = 92.3 X 106 = 1.06
327 x 5152
~=9.4=409
'Ymm 2.3 .
Therefore c = 0.85 and Z = 0.85 x 515
Rearranging Code equation M, = As fyz and solving for As 'Yms
A _ 92.3 X 106 X 1.15 _ 2
s  460 x 0.85 x 515  528 mm
Use 2 no. TIO diameter bars (628 mm")
Shear design
Shear stress due to design loads, v, = b~
55.8 X 103 327 x 515
0.33N/mm2
fv = 0.35 + 17.5 p = 0.35 + 17.5 32;~8 515 = 0.41 Nzmrrr'
No shear strength enhancement is possible because Code Clause 19.1.3; 1. 2 permits enhancement for simply supported beams and cantilever retaining walls only.
Design shear strength of beam =~ = 0.41 = 0.21 Nzmrrr'
'Ymv 2.0
This is less than the design shear stress and shear reinforcement is, therefore, required.
48
Shear reinforcement
Assuming voids at 150 centres (giving link spacing less than 0.75 d)
A > 327 (0.33  0.21) 1.15 x 150 = 28 2
sv 250 mm
Check nominal area of shear reinforcement required Asv = 150 x 0.OQ2 x 327 = 98 mm2
R8 diameter links are satisfactory (Asv = 100 mnr') Deflection
Calculation of deflection of members in bending is not generally necessary providing the span to effective depth ratios given in the Code are complied with. However, the Code suggests that as an alternative, the designer may calculate deflection and gives some guidance in Appendix C.
Use elastic deflection coefficients for cantilever:
For uniformly distributed load, w, deflection of cantilever
wl" = 8EmI
For point load, W, deflection of cantilever = 3~~; Partial safety factors (serviceability limit state) Dead and imposed load
Design load = 1.0 Gk + 1.0 Ok
Consider long term deflection.
From Appendix C, Em = 0.45 fk = 0.45 x 9.4 = 4.23 kN/mm2
1= bdx3 = 327 X 5533 = 4.61 X 109 mm"
12 12
where dx is the overall depth of the section. Design load
UO load = 1.0 x 10.0 + 1.0 x 3.6 = 13.6 kN/m
Point load = 1.0 x 6.0
= 6.0kN
. 13.6 X 2.664 x 1012 6.0 X 2.663 X 1012
Long term deflectIon = 8 x 4.23 x 4.61 x 1012 + 3 x 4.23 x 4.61 x 1012
= 4.36 + 1.93 = 6.29 mm
Maximum permitted deflection = lengthl125 = 21i~ = 19.2 mm Calculated long term deflection well within permitted deflection and, therefore, satisfactory.
5.2 5.2.1
COLUMNS
EXAMPLE 3, AXIALLY LOADED SHORT COLUMNN (see Appendix A for proposed Code amendment)
Design a 3.0 m high reinforced brickwork column to carry an axial design load of 1100 kN, using 20 N/mm2 bricks in mortar designation (li),
Try a column section 553 mm square
Materials
fk = 6.4 Nzmm? for 20 Nzrnrn? bricks in mortar designation (ii)
fs = 0.83 fy = 0.83 x 460 = 381 Nzrnm? (using high tensile reinforcement) Partial safety factors (materials)
Masonry compression, "Vmm = 2.3 (normal category of manufacturing control)
Reinforcement strength, "Vms = 1.15
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
49
Slenderness ratio
Assume top and bottom of column have lateral supports restricting movement in both directions.
Therefore hef = 3000 mm
tet = actual thickness = 553 mm
Slenderness ratio = 35~ = 5.42
This is less than 12 therefore the column is short. Design
To allow for reinforcement use method given in Code Clause 23.
Nd = ____§_ b de + fsl AsI fs2 As2
'Ymm 'Yms 'Yms
As there is no moment applied to the column, the reinforcement in both faces of the column will be in compression and, assuming symmetrical reinforcement, will be equally stressed, thus de = t
Thus equation becomes
Nd = fk b de + fs (Asl + As2)
'Ymm 'Yms
Design load
Nd = ll00kN
Reinforcement required
Rearranging equation from Code Clause 23 with As = As! + As2
A = (N _ __&_ bd) 'Yms
s d 'Ymm C fs
Therefore As = (1100 X 103 _ ~:~ x 5532) 13!i = 752 mrrr' Use 4 no. T16 mm diameter bars. (As = 804 mrrr')
Check if links are required (ie ifO.25%Am<As)
at 0.25 5532 2
0.25/'0 Am = 100 x = 764 mm
This is less than As provided, therefore links required. Use R6links (maximum diameter permitted in bed joints) maximum spacing = lesser of:
a) least column dimension = 553 mm
b) 50 x link diameter
=300mm
so
5.2.2
c) 20 x main bar diameter = 320 mm Therefore use link spacing = 300 mm
EXAMPLE 4, AXIALLY LOADED SLENDER COLUMN (see Appendix A for proposed Code amendment)
Design a reinforced brickwork column 6.0 m high carrying an axial design load of 850 kN. Use 27 .5N/mm2 bricks in mortar designation (ii) and grade 25 intill concrete.
Try a column section 440 mm square.
Materials
fk = 7.9 Nzrnrn? for 27.5 Nzmrrr' bricks in mortar designation (ii)
fs = 0.83 fy in compression and fy in tension.
Partial safety factors (materials)
Masonry compression, 'Vmm = 2.3 (normal category of manufacturing control)
Reinforcement strength, 'Vms = 1.15
Slenderness ratio
Assume top and bottom of column have lateral support restricting movement in both directions.
Therefore hcf = 6000 mm
tcf = actual thickness = 440 mm
. 6000
Slenderness ratio = 440 = 13.64
This is greater than 12 therefore the column is slender. Design
The column must be designed to resist the axial load and an additional moment, M,,, due to slenderness effects
N = 850kN
M = N(hec)2 = 850 x 6.02 = 348 kN
a 2000t 2000 x 0.44 . m
Consider whether minimum reinforcement only will be required
R I .. Ma 34.8 0 04
esu tant eccentricity = N = 850 =. m
Column capacity with minimum reinforcement
This is less than 850 kN and therefore more than minimum reinforcement is required. Reinforcement required
Try 4 no. T25 bars, so that As! = 982 mrn", As2 = 982 mrrr'
As design moment is small in comparison with design axial load
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
51
assume de = t and fs2 = 0 Check axial load capacity
F N = fk bd + fs1 As1 _ fs2As2
rom d  e  
~mm ~ms ~ms
Nd =i~j X 4402 + 0.83 X 46~.~5982  0 = 993. X 103N = 991 kN
This is greater than 850 kN therefore satisfactory Check moinent capacity
From M, = 0.5fk bd, (tde) + 0.83fy As1 (0.5td1) + ~ As2 (0.5td2)
~mm 'Vms 'Vms
0.83 X 460
M, = 0 + 1.15 X 982(0.5 X 440  150) + 0 = 22.8kNm
This is less than design moment of 34.8 kNm and modification of assumed stress distribution is required.
The masonry section is therefore required to contribute a design moment resistance of 12.0kNm. Try reducing de to 400 mm, fs2 remains equal toO, see Figure 21,
0.5fk bde(t  de) = 0.5 X 7.9 X 440 X 400(440  400) = 12.1 kNm
~mm 2.3
Thus moment resistance increases to 34.9 kNm, which is greater than design moment and therefore satisfactory.
Check axial load capacity
Nd = i~j X 440 X 400 + 0.8~.~5460 X 982  0 = 930.5 X 103 N = 930.5 kN
This exceeds the design axial load of 850 kN and the section is therefore satisfactory. Link reinforcement
As = 4 X 491 = 1964mm2
O 2501_ f . 0.25 X 4402 484 2
. ,0 0 seetion = 100 = mm
Therefore links required; as for Example 3, use R6links at 300 mm centres.
5.2.3
EXAMPLE 5, SHORT COLUMN AND SLENDER COLUMN SUBJECTED TO SINGLE AXIS BENDING
Design a 2. 7m high reinforced brickwork column to carry a vertical design load of 800 kN and a design bending moment of85 kNm. If the height of the column is increased to 6.0m what effect does this have on the column section chosen.
Try column section 665 mm by 440 mm
M
~
665
52
Materials
Bricksunit compressive strength = 27.5 Nzmm?
Mortardesignation (ii). Therefore fk = 7.9 N'mm? Infill concretegrade 25 Nzmrn?
Partial safety factors (materials)
Masonry compression, "fmm = 2.3 (normal category of manufacturing control)
Reinforcement strength, "fms = 1.15
Slenderness ratio
Assume top and bottom of column have lateral supports restricting movement in both directions
Therefore het = 2700 mm
tef = minimum thickness = 440 mm
. 2700
Slenderness ratio = 440 = 6.14
This is less than 12, therefore column is short. Design
Check whether only minimum reinforcement required from
Nd=~ b(t2ex)
"fmm
Resultant eccentricity, ex = 8~~ = 0.106
Therefore N, = i·.~440(665  212) 1~3= 684.6kN
This is less than design vertical load N, therefore more than minimum reinforcement is required.
Reinforcement required
Consider stress distribution across section
Assume de = t  d2 and fs2 = 0 Try 2 no. T25 bars each face
fk bd fsl A fs2 A
FromNd=  c+  s l ?"  s2
"fmm "fms "fms
N = 7.9 440 X 510 + 0.83 x 460 X 982  0
d 2.3 x 1.15
= 770.8 x 103 + 326.0 X 103
= 1096.8 X 103 N = 1096.8 kN
From M, = 0.5fk bd, (t  de) + 0.83fy AsI (0.5t  d.) + k_As2 (0.5t  d2)
"fmm "fms "fms
M, = 0.52~ 7.9 x 440 x 510(665  510) +
0.8i.~5460 x 982(0.5 X 665 155) + 0
=59.7 X 106+57.9 X 106= 117.6 x 106Nmm= 117.6kNm
Thus both Nd and M, exceed Nand M respectively and the section is satisfactory. Consider whether reinforcement area may be reduced.
Try 2 no T20 bars each face ASl = As2 = 628 mrn?
Na = 770.8 X 103 + 0.83 X 1~~~ x 628  0 = 979.3 X 103 N
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
53
= 979.3kN
Md = 59.7 X 106 + 0.8;~:60 X 628(0.5 X 665 155) + 0 = 96.7 X 106Nmm = 96.7 kNm
Both Nd and M, exceed Nand M respectively and therefore 4 no TIO bars are satisfactory. Link reinforcement
As = 4 X 314 = 1256 mm?
. 0.25 X 440 x 665
0.25% of section = 100 = 731.5 mrrr'
Therefore links required, as for Example 3, use R6links at 300 crs. If effective height of column is increased to 6.0 m
.. 6000
Slenderness ratio becomes 440 = 13.6 and column becomes
slender (S.R. exceeds 12).
An additional moment, Ma, must therefore be allowed for
M = N(heff
a 2000t
800 X 62
M, = 2000 X 0.665 = 21.7 kNm
Design moment, M, becomes 85 + 21.7 = 106.7kNm
From above it will be seen that using 4 no. TI5 bars, both Nd and Md exceed the Nand M (including M, respectively. Thus in this case the effect of increasing the column height so that it becomes slender is to require an increase in reinforcement from 4 no. TIO bars to 4 no. TI5 bars.
EXAMPLE 6, SHORT COLUMN SUBJECTED TO BIAXIAL BENDING
A single storey building with a rc roof slab is supported on reinforced brickwork columns which are 3.0m high. Design a corner column to carry a vertical design load of 200 kN and a design bending moment about both axes of 35 kNm.
Try column section 440 mm square.
5.2.4
Materials
Masonry  clay bricks  unit compressive strength 27.5 Nzmm? Mortardesignation (ii)
Infill concrete  grade 25 Nzmrrr'
Reinforcement  yield stress, fy = 460 Nzrnm?
Characteristic compressive strength of masonry, fk = 7.9 N/mm2
Partial safety factors, (materials)
Masonry compression, "Imm = 2.0 (special category of manufacturing control)
Reinforcement strength, "Ims = 1.15
54
Slenderness ratio
Assume top and bottom of columns have lateral supports restricting movement in both directions
Therefore hef = 3000 mm tef= 440mm
Slenderness ratio = 3~g = 6.82
Design Load
Design vertical load, N = 200 kN
Design moments about both axes M" and My = 35 kNm
Design
Try 4 no. T20 bars giving As = 1257 mm?
The design axial load resistance ofthe column ignoring bending, Ndz, is given by fk Am Am = 4402 = 193.6 X 103 mrrr'
Thus Ndz = 7.9 X 193.6 = 1529kN
N 200
Ndz = 1529 = 0.13
Therefore from Code Table 12, a = 0.85 (see Appendix A) As M" = My, increased moment to be designed for is given by
p q
M,,' = M" + a [~] My
440 .
Therefore M,,' = 35 + 0.85 X 440 X 35 = 64.8 kNm
Design column as bending about a single axis with N = 200 kN and M,,' = 64.8 kNm
Assume de = ~ and fs2 = fy, see Figure 21
F N  fk bd + fsI Asl _ fs2 As2 rom d e  
"Vmm
"Vms
"Vms
Na = 7.9 X 440 X 220+ 0.83 X 460 X 628 _ 460 X 628
2.0 1.15 1.15
= (382.4 + 208.5  251.2) 103 = 339.7 X 103N = 339.7kN
From M, = 0.5fk bd, (t  de) + 0.83 fy Asl (0.5td]) +~A.2 (0.5tdz)
"fmm "fms "fm.
Md = 0.52~ 7.9 X 440 X 220(440220) + 0.8i.:5460 628(0.5 X 440155)
460
+ 1.15 X 628 (0.5 X 440  155)
= (42.1 + 13.6 + 16.3) 106 = 72.0 X 106Nmm = 72.0kNm Both Na and M, exceed Nand M,' respectively
and the section is therefore satisfactory
Handbook to 8S5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
55
Link reinforcement
0.25 X 4402
0.25% of area of masonry = 100 = 484mm2
As exceeds 484 mrrr' and links are required.
Use 6 mm diameter links (maximum diameter permitted in bed joints) maximum spacing = lesser of:
a) least column dimension = 440 mm
b) 50 x link diameter = 300 mm
c) 20 x main bar diameter = 400 mm Therefore link spacing = 300 mm
5.3 5.3.1
RETAINING WALLS
EXAMPLE 7, GROUTED CAVITY RETAINING WALL
Design a reinforced brickwork grouted cavity retaining wall to support a 3.0m height of cohesionless soil of 1600 kglm3 density and an angle of internal friction of 30°.
Materials
Bricks  try clay bricks with unit compressive strength 35 Nzmm",
Mortardesignation (ii)
Characteristic compressive strength of masonry, fk = 9.4 Nzrnnr' Characteristic tensile strength of reinforcement, fy = 460 Nzmm" Infill concrete grade (BS5328) 25 Nzmrrr'
u ~
1\
1\
1\ Ps ~ 1600kg/m3
1\ (/J ~ 30·
1\
r'\
,r 1\
~I I 3.0m
Partial safety factors (materials)
Masonry compression, ')'mm = 2.3 (normal category of manufacturing control).
Masonry shear, ')'mv = 2.0
Reinforcement strength, ')'ms = 1.15
Lateral loading
From CP24 for <I> = 30° I) = 0 KA = 0.33
Lateral load, En = KA Ps g H x H/2
= 0.33 x 1600 x 9.81 X ~ = 23.3 kN/m
1000 2
Stem design
Load case a) clause 20.2.1
Design load = ')'f En = 1.4 X 23.3 = 32.6 kN/m Design moment, M = 32.6 X 1.0 = 32.6 kNm/m From Code Table 8 minimum effective depth
56
3000
d=18= 166.7 mm
tryd=265mm> 166.7 mm
From clause 22.4.2, lever arm, Z = d ft _ 0.5 As fy'Ymm] l bdfk'Yms
Try T12 reinforcement at 250mm centres, As = 452 mm2/m
r 0.5 x 452 X 460 x 2.3 ] Therefore, Z =265 L1 1000 x 265 x 9.4 x 1.15
= 265 x 0.917 = 243mm
F I 22 4 2 M  As fy Z _ 452 x 460 x 243 rom cause .. , d    
'Ymm 1.15 x 1(1i
43.9kNm/m
This exceeds the design moment and is therefore satisfactory.
To ensure that the section is underreinforced check that the design moment of resistance based on brickwork compression exceeds the design moment of resistance of the reinforcement.
Md = 0.4fkbi = 0.4 x 9.4 x 1000 x 2652 = 114.8 kNm/m
'Ymm 2.3 X 106
This is greater that 43.9 kNm/m and is therefore satisfactory.
No minimum area of main reinforcement is specified in BS5628: Part 2 but a minimum of 0.15% bd seems sensible in this situation,
0.15bd = 0.15 x 1000 x 265 = 398 2
100 100 mm
T12 bars at 250 mm centres = 452 mm", this is greater than 398 mm", therefore satisfactory. Code Table 10 or Figure 3 may be used to avoid the need for a trial estimate of reinforcement. Md = Q bd? this must be greater than M
32.6 x 106 Therefore Q ~ 1000 X 2652 = 0.46
___&_ =M=41
'Ymm 2.3 .
From Code Figure 3 lever arm factor, c, = 0.94 Thereforez = 0.94 x 265 = 249 mm
. 6
dA = 32.6 x 1.15 X 10 = 328 21
an s 460 x 249 mm m
but from above provide minimum area of reinforcement = 398 mm2/m Therefore use T12 at 250mm centres.
Shear clauses 19.1.3.1.2 and 22.5.1
Design shear force, V = 32.6 kN/m
Th & h d desi I d 32.6x103 0 12NI 2
ererore, s earstress ue to esign oa s = 1000 x 265 . mm
From clause 19.1. 3 .1.2 characteristic shear strength of masonry,
fv = 0.35 + 17.5 [1~~ 265]= 0.38N/mm2 M 32.6
Shear span of wall, a, = V = 32.6 = LOrn
Therefore~= 0~2~5 = 3.77
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECfION 2: Reinforced Masonry
57
and fv may be increased by a factor (2.5  0.25 x 3.77) = 1.55 therefore f, = 0.38 x 1.55 = 0.59 Nrmrrr'
Design shear resistance of wall = ~
'Ymv
= ~~~ = 0.29 Nrmrrr', this is greater than 0.12 Nzmrrr', therefore satisfactory, no shear reinforcement required.
Secondary reinforcement clause 26.3
Minimum area of secondary reinforcement = 0.05%bd
= 0.05 x 1000 x 265 = 133 mm2/m
100
Therefore provide T10 bars at 500 mm centres (As = 157 mm2/m) Overall stability
The overall stability of a reinforced masonry retaining wall should be assessed in accordance with standard soil mechanics methods, using partial safety factors equal to 1.0 and providing overall factors of safety against sliding and overturning. Bearing pressure should be assessed in the same manner and compared with the safe bearing capacity of the soil.
Base design
Flexural design of the reinforced concrete base should be carried out in accordance with BS8110, using the pressure diagram, derived with the appropriate partial safety factors, to calculate the bending moments. Typical calculations are given in the BDA handbook "Brickwork Retaining Walls,,7.
5.3.2
EXAMPLE 8, QUETTA BOND RETAINING WALL
Design a Quetta bond reinforced brickwork retaining wall, 1.5m high to resist a design overturning moment of 3.9 kNmlm and a design shear force of7.8 kN/m. What is the maximum height of soil a wall of this section may retain, assuming the soil to have the same properties as those given in Example 7 above?
168
r
~~ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L....
• • • • • •
11 IL...
1 1500
d = 164
Materials
Assume a brick of 50 N/mm2 compressive strength is used in a mortar designation (ii).
Characteristic compressive strength of masonry, fk = 12.2 Nzmrrr'
Characteristic tensile strength of reinforcement, fy = 460 Nzmrrr' Note austenitic stainless steel reinforcement required for durability. Pockets are infilled with mortar designation (ii).
Partial safety factors (materials)
Masonry compression, 'Ymm = 2.3 (normal category of manufacturing control).
Masonry shear, 'Ymv = 2.0
58
Reinforcement strength, "fms = 1.15 Bond strength, "fmb = 1.5
Stem design  using Code Figure 3 Design moment, M = 3.9 kNm/m
M 3.9 x 106
Thereforebd2 = 1000 x 1642 = 0.145
fk 12 12
 =·=5.3 Nzmm?
"fmm 2.3
From Code Figure 3, c > 0.95, therefore use c = 0.95 Therefore lever arm, z.= 0.95 x 164 = 155 mm
dA _3.9X1.15xl06 63 21
an s  460 x 155  mm m
Check that Md in compression exceeds M
M = 0.4 x 12.2 x 1000 x 1642 = 57.1 kNrnlm > M
d 2.3 X 106
Use say 0.15% area of reinforcement = 246 mmvm
T12 bars at 336 mm centres (2 x pocket spacing) gives 337 mm2/m. Secondary reinforcement clause 26.3
Minimum area = 0.05%
= 0.05 x 1000 x 164 = 82 mm2/m 100
Use 6mm dia. bars at 300 mm centres, (every 4th bed joint) = 94 mmvm. Shear clauses 19.1.3.1.1 and 22.5.1
Shear force due to design loads, V = 7 .8k N/m
Therefore shear stress due to design loads,v = 1~ X}~~4 = 0.05 Nzmrrr' Characteristic shear strength of reinforced brickwork, fv = 0.35 Nzrnrn? (where reinforcement is surrounded with mortar).
Therefore design shear resistance of wall = ~ = O2.305 = 0.17 N/mm2
"fmv .
This exceeds 0.05 Nzrnrrr' and is therefore satisfactory.
Consider the maximum height a wall ofthis section may retain Design moment of resistance based on brickwork in compression
= 57.1 kNm/m as before.
Using Code Figure 3 for Q = M 2 = 57.1 x 106 = 2.12 and
bd 1000 x 1642
fk
=5.3 N/mm2,c=0.72 "fmm
Th f A 57.1 x 1.15 x 106 1209 21
ere ore s = 460 x 0.72 x 164 mm m
Therefore use T16 bars at 168 mm centres (1196 mmvrn), M, = 56.5 kNm/m
D . _ 1.4 x 0.33 x 1600 x 9.81 x H3
esign moment  6 x 1000
h f  3 56.5 X 10:1 x 6 _ 3 ~  3
T ere ore H  1.4 x 0.33 x 1600 x 9.81  J 46.75  .6 m
Handbook to 8S5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
S9
Check shear
Lateral loads, En = KA Psg H2/2
= 0.33 X 1600 X 9.81 3.62 = 33 6 kNI
1000 x2 . m
Shear force due to design loads, V = 1.4 X 33.6 = 47.0 kN/m
Shear stress due to design loads, v = ~60~ : ~~4 = 0.29 Nzmrrr'
This exceeds design shear resistance of wall = ~ = O2.305 = 0.17 Nzmm?
'Ymv .
Therefore shear is critical and H must be reduced
M· V 0.17xlO00x164 279kNI
aximum = =. m
103
d . H 33.6 X 1000 X 2 = 3.0 m
an maximum = l.4x 0.33 X 1600 X 9.81
5.3.3
The area of reinforcement, As, may be reduced to suit.
EXAMPLE 9, POCKET RETAINING WALL
Design a reinforced brickwork cantilever pocket wall to an industrial building which is required to retain a 4.0 m height of gravel of 2000 kglm3 density.
Assume angle of internal friction of gravel = 35° Therefore K, 1  sin 35 = 0 27
1 + sin 35 .
Lateral load on stem P = K, Psg H x Hl2
= 0.27 x 2000 x 9.81 4.02 = 42 4 kN
1000 x 2 . m
Design lateral force, 'YfP = 1.4 x 42.4 = 59.4 kN per pocket
and design moment, M = 59.4 x 4~ = 79.2 kNm per pocket
Try a wall width of 440 mm with pockets spaced at 1.0m to avoid the need to design the brickwork as spanning between pockets (clause 22.4.3.1).
Materials
Assume crushing strength of bricks is 35 Nzmm? and use of mortar designation (ii), iefrom Code Table 3 (A), fk = 9.4 Nzmrrr'
Reinforcement, fy = 460 Nzmrrr' (deformed type 2)
60
Infill concrete grade (BS 5328) 30 Nzmrrr'
Partial safety factors (materials)
Masonry compression, 'Ymm = 2.3 (normal category of manufacturing control)
Masonry shear, 'Ymv = 2.0
Reinforcement strength, 'Yms = 1.15
Bond strength, 'Ymb = 1.5
Stem design
Assume exposure situation E3.
From Code Table 14 minimum cover = 40 mm
Therefore maximum bar diameter = 112.5  40  40 = 32.5 mrn As maximum bar diameter permitted by Code clause 26.2 = 32 mm d = 440 4016 = 384 mmsay380 mm.
Design wall as flanged beam, try pocket width of235 mm Flange depth = d/2 = 190 mm
From Code clause 22.4.3.1 width of flange is least of:
a) 235 + 12 x 190 = 2515 mm,
b) 1000 mm,
c) 4000/3 = 1333 mm.
therefore flange width = 1000 mm
From Code Figure 3 for fk/'Ymm = ~.': = 4.1 andQ=.M_ 79.2x106 0.55 c=0.93
bd2 1000 x 3802 '
therefore Z = 0.93 x 380 = 353.4 mm
z exceeds the minimum permitted and is therefore satisfactory As = M'Yms 79.2 x lQ6 x 1.15 = 560 mrrr'
fyz 460 x 353.4
use 2 no. TIO diameter bars per pocket (628 mm")
Check that Md based on brickwork in compression is not exceeded
Md = __!t_ btf(d  0.5tf)
'Ymm
Md = 2.~·~ 106 X 1000 x 190 (380  0.5 x 190) = 221.3 kNm
This is greater than 79.2 kNm and the section is satisfactory. Shear clauses 19.1.3.1.2and22.5.1
Shear force due to design loads, V = 59.4 kN/m
Shear stress due to design loads, v = i~ : ~~~ = 0.16 Nzmnr'
&_ 628 _
bd  1000 x 380  0.0017
Handbook to B55628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
61
Characteristic shear strength of section, fv, = 0.35 + 17.5 X 0.0017 = 0.38 N/mm2 fv may be increased by the factor (2.5  0.25~)
a = 79.2 X 106 = 1333
59.4 x 103
1333 2
Therefore f, = 0.38 (2.5  0.25 380) = 0.62 N/mm
and _h_ = 0.62 = 0.31 Nzmm"
'Ymv 2.0
This exceeds 0.16 Nzmrrr' and no shear reinforcement is required.
NB. In this case it was unnecessary to enhance]; because °i8 = 0.19 Nlmni' > 0.16 Nlmmi .
Curtailment
In order to avoid 4m lengths of reinforcement projecting from the foundation, the T20 bars may be curtailed at a suitable height and smaller bars lapped on.
Assume T16 bars are used. In order to curtail the T20s in the tension zone, Code Clause 26. 9a, b or c must bel satisfied. In this case 26. 9c is appropriate. Therefore the design moment capacity of the T16s must be at least twice the design moment.
Design Md of2 no. T16 bars, As = 402mm2, assume c = 0.95
M = 402 x 460 x 0.95 x 380 = 58.0 kNm
d 1.15 x 106
Md 58.0 X 106
Q = bd2 = 1000 X 3802 = 0.4, and for fk/'Ymm = 4.1
c = 0.95 is the correct assumption.
!
ilT16
'T20 .~
,T16 1200
,
r: ._ '~1
I I
I I
'  f
r T20
Thus T20s may beterrninated where the design moment, M = 29.0 kNm
This moment occurs where H = 3 29.0 x 6 x 1000
0.27 x 2000 x 9.81 x 1.4
= 3j23.5 = 2.86 m from top of wall.
Check that T20s will extend at least an effective depth or 12 diameters beyond the point where they are no longer needed. The T16s will resist a momentof58 kNm. From above, this occurs at H = 3/2 x 23.5 = 3.6 m.
An effective depth above this level = 3.22 m, therefore curtailment ofT20s at 2.86 m below top of wall is satisfactory.
12 diameters above this level = 3.36 m therefore curtailment ofT20s at 2.86 m below top of wall is satisfactory.
62
5.4
5.4.1
Check lap length for T16.
Characteristic bond strength, fb = 2.5 Nzrnm", clause 19.1.6
Therefore length required to develop full anchorage bond
fy x 'Ymb x As
=''
'Yms x fb X 'IT X bar diameter
460 x 1.5 x 201 = 960 mm 1.15x2.5x'ITxI6
This is greater than 25 x bar diameter + 150 (= 550) and therefore governs.
Thus curtail T20s 1.2m above foundation and for simplicity continue T16 down to just above foundation level.
Foundation design will be to BS811 0 and using standard soil mechanics procedures for bearing pressure and stability calculations.
LATERALLY LOADED MASONRY WALLS CONTAINING BED JOINT REINFORCEMENT
EXAMPLE 10, LATERALLY LOADED WALL
Design a 4.5 m high by 4.5 m long cavity wall with a brick outer and a 100 mm thick blockwork inner leaf. The wall is reinforced with bed joint reinforcement to resist a characteristic wind load of 0.6 kN/m2• The wall is discontinuous at its top edge and both ends, but is connected to the structure along these edges. A sheet dpc is provided at the base of the wall. Exposure situation E2.
Appendix A to BS5628: Part 2 contains four alternative design methods.
For comparative purposes the wall will be designed by each of these methods.
In order to provide the maximum freedom of choice of facing brick it will be assumed that the clay brick used has a unit compressive strength of 20 Nzmm? and a water absorption greater than 12%. A mortar designation (iii) is assumed. The inner leafisof2.8 Nzmm", concrete
blockwork in mortar designation (iv).
Edge conditions
It is assumed that the supporting structure is sufficiently rigid to provide simple support to the top and sides of the panel and that, because of the dpc, the bottom edge is also simply supported.
Limiting panel dimensions
Clause 23.2.4, effective thickness of the wall
2
= 3' x (102.5 + 100) = 135 mm
Clause A.2.3 (b) (2)
height x length = 4500 x 4500 = 20.3 x 106 mm2
2400 x tcl = 2400 x 1352 = 44 X 106 mm? > 20.3 x 106 rnm ' therefore panel size satisfactory
Maximum dimension = 60 tcc = 60 x 135 = 8100 mm > 4500 mm therefore panel dimensions satisfactory.
Durability
Clause 32.2.4 requires that where clay bricks with a water absorption greater than 10% are used the reinforcement protection should be that appropriate to the next more severe exposure situation. Therefore, from Table 13, for exposure situation E3, (instead of E2) austenitic stainless steel reinforcement, or carbon steel coated with stainless steel, is required.
15 mm cover is required to bed joint reinforcement.
In each design method it is necessary to establish the strength ofthe panel in accordance with BS5628: Part 1 as if it was unreinforced.
Capacity of unreinforced wall
BS5628 : Part 1 Clause 36.4
Outer leaf
fkxperpendicular = 0.9 Nzmm", fkxparallel = 0.3 N/mm2, 'Ym = 3.5, »s= 0.90r 1.2,
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
63
bd2
Z = 6""" = 1.75 X 106 mm3/m
Self weight stress at mid height = 2.~~.251~21~0 X "If X "1m = 0.04 X 0.9 X 3.5
= 0.14 N/mm2 X .
Th f 0.3+0.14 049
ere ore u== o.q =.
Inner leaf
fkxperpendicular = 0.4N/mm2, fkxparallel = 0.2N/mm2, "1m = 3.5, "If = 0.90r 1.2
Z = 1.67 X 106 mm3/m
. h id h . h 0.8 X 2.25 X 1000 0018 09 35
Self weig t stress at mr erg t = 1000 X 100 X "If X "1m =. X. X .
=0.06N/mm2
Th f 0.2+0.06 065
ere are JJ. = 0.4 =.
Design moment of resistance outer leaf 0.9 1.75 X 106
= 3.5 X 106 = 0.45 kNmlm (1)
Design moment of resistance inner leaf
0.4 1.67 X 106
= 3.5 X 106 = 0.19 kNmlm (2)
From Table 9 E, a (outer leaf) = 0.057 and a (inner leaf) = 0.051
If characteristic load on outer leaf = W 0 and characteristic load on inner leaf = WI then, design moment outer leaf
= 0.057 X Wo X 1.2 X 4.52 = 1.39WokNm/m (3)
Design moment inner leaf
= 0.051 X WI X 1.2 X 4.52 = 1.24 WI kNm/m (4)
Equating (1) & (3) and solving for Wo Equating (2) & (4) and solving for WI
Therefore characteristic load capacity for unreinforced wall
Wo=0.32 kN/m2 W1= 0.15kN/m2 = 0.47kN/m2
Therefore unreinforced wall is inadequate.
BS5628 : PART 2, APPENDIX A DESIGN METHODS A~3 Method One
Assume only brick leaf reinforced
Maximum permitted enhancement of load capacity over that for the unreinforced wall panel = 50%.
Reinforce outer leaf with prefabricated stainless steel parallel wire lattice reinforcement.
64
bed joint reinforcement
~))
t
"
lap
d =75
provide reinforcement with laps staggered as shown
stainless steel, fy = 485 Nzmm? length of reinforcement = 3.0 m
1.2 x 0.6 x 4.52 = 1.82 kNm/m 8
D . "YfWkL2 eSlgn moment = ....:..::....:
8
Q =.M... = 1.82 X 106 = 0.32 bd2 1000 x 752
fk from Table 2 (a), BS5628: Part 1, = 5.8N/mm2
(N B: Partl must be used to obtain fk values for masonry built with mortar designation (iii)). fk 58
Therefore = 3'5 = 1.66 bmfrom BS5628: Part 1).
"Ym •
Therefore, from Figure 3, BS5628 : Part 2, c = 0.89 andz = 0.89 x 75 = 66.7 mm
Therefore area of reinforcement required, A = 1.82 X 106 x 1.15 65 mmvm
s 485 x 66.7
Try reinforcement every second course
42 x 1T 1000
A =  x  = 84 mmvrn > 65 mmvrn
s 4 2 x 75
therefore satisfactory
Minimum area of reinforcement, Clause A.2.4, = 14 mnr' at not greater than 450mm centres = 31 mrnvm, therefore As is satisfactory
Check that compressive strength of brick is adequate. Clause 22.4.2.1.
0.4 x 5.8 x 1000 x 752 •
Md = 6 = 3.7 kNm/m therefore satisfactory
3.5 x 10
In order to avoid excessive deflection or cracking (i.e. serviceability failure) in the wall panel, the enhancement of lateral load resistance over the equivalent unreinforced wall panel is limited to 50%. Because, in this example, only the outer leaf is reinforced, the enhanced resistance is compared with the resistance of the unreinforced outer leaf alone:
rein~orced resis~ance = 0.6 = 1.88 i.e. 88% unreinforced resistance 0.32
As this is greater than 50%, either both leaves must be reinforced or a serviceability check can be carried out on the outer leaf, although such a check is not referred to in the Code. It is however considered to be a reasonable approach. The Appendix A design methods are based on the premise, given in A.2.1, that the crack load for a bed joint reinforced, laterally loaded, wall is comparable with the ultimate load for the equivalent unreinforced wall. From page 64 the characteristic load (Ultimate Limit State) for the unreinforced outer leaf is 0.32 kN/m2•
65
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
Therefore the ultimate load (ie failure strength), with 'Yf = 1.0 and 'Ym = 1.0, of the outer leaf  0 32 1.2 3.5  1 34 kNI 2
. X 1.0 X 1.0 . m .
As this is at least as great as the cracking load for the equivalent reinforced leaf, the serviceability design load capacity of the reinforced leaf
 1. 34 _ 1. 34 _ 0 9 kNI 2 ( f 20 3 2)
  1 5 . m 'Ymm rom .. .
'Ymm .
This exceeds the serviceability design load on the wall of 'Yf X 0.6 = 1.0 X 0.6 = 0.6 kN/m2 and cracking will not occur. The serviceability limit state of deflection should also be considered and this will be as discussed in A.6 Method Four on page 67.
It can be seen that the enhancement limit given in the Code can be exceeded, provided that a Serviceability Limit State design check is carried out.
A.4 Method 'Two
Assume only brick leaf reinforced.
This method is similar to Method One except that the reinforced section is only required to resist the excess load above that carried by the unreinforced masonry. It is, therefore, less conservative than Method One and the enhancement is limited to 30%.
Load capacity of unreinforced leaf = 0.32 kN/m2, see page 64.
Excess load = 0.6  0.32 = 0.28 kN/m2 > 0.3 X 0.32
Therefore, either both leaves must be reinforced or a serviceability check carried out on the outer leaf as for Method One.
Use same type of reinforcement as in Method One, d = 75 mm
we
Design moment 'Yf k
8
1.2 X 0.28 X 4.52 = 0.85 kNm/m 8
M 0.85 X 106
Q = bd2 = 1000 X 752  0.15
fk
 = 1.66 as for Method One 'Ym
Therefore, from Figure 3, BS5628: Part 2, c = 0.95 (maximum) andz = 0.95 X 75 = 71.2 mm
A = 0.85 X 106 X 1.15 = 283 2/
s 485 X 71.2 . mm m
Minimum area of reinforcement = 31 mmvrn (as for Method One) Therefore, provide reinforcement every 4th course (300 mm) As=41 mrrrvm
Stagger laps as for Method One. Serviceability check
As the serviceability design load capacity of the reinforced leaf is considered to be independent of the area of reinforcement for commonly used percentages of bed joint reinforcement, clause A.2.1, the serviceability check required here is the same as for Method One.
A.S Method Three
Assume only brick leaf reinforced. Because of the differences in load/deflection behaviour between the reinforced and unreinforced leaves, where only one leaf is reinforced, the reinforced leaf should be designed to resist the full load .
Therefore, required design capacity of outer leaf
= 0.6 x 1.2 == 0.72 kN/m2
Try reinforcement every second course
66
Therefore As = 84 mm2/m
Assuming lever arm factor, c = 0.95, givesz = 71.2 mm
d M 84 x 485 x 71.2 2 52 kNmJ f b di b h . I .
an d = 1.15 X 106 =. m or en mg a outt e vertica axis,
Md, for bending about the horizontal axis (unreinforced),
= (0.3 + 0.14) x 1.75 x 106 = 0.22 kNmJm
3.5 x 106
Therefore, orthogonal ratio, IJ.. = ~:;~ = 0.09
From Table 9, BS5628: Part 1 value of o for minimum IJ.. = 0.3isO.068, however, where the horizontal span strength is much greater than the vertical span strength, the value of a will tend toO.125. Use this value.
Therefore, design moment, M = a'Yf W kL 2 = 0.125 x 1.2 x 0.6 x 4.52 = 1.82 kNmJm
This is less than 2.52 kNm/m and, therefore, satisfactory.
Stagger laps as for Method One and check that bond stress at lap position is satisfactory. Using yield line theory to calculate the value of a, an orthogonal ratio of 0.09 gives (X = 0.088 and thus a smaller design moment.
However this is outside the range of usual orthogonal ratios and has no empirical justification and the use of o = 0.125 is therefore considered appropriate.
The Code does not, at present, limit the load capacity enhancement over the equivalent unreinforced wall. This is somewhat illogical since in other respects the design is similar to Method One and, therefore, a maximum enhancement of 50% may be considered appropriate.
A.6 Method Four
In this approach the failure strength of the unreinforced wall is taken to be the cracking strength of the reinforced wall.
Considering both leaves, the characteristic load capacity of the unreinforced wall = 0.47 kN/m2, see page 64, calculated using "1m = 3.5 and "If = 1.2
Therefore with "If =1.0 and "1m = 1.0, ultimate load (ie failure strength)
3.5 1.2 197kN·I 2
= 0.47 x 1.0 x 1.0 =. m
Thus the serviceability design load capacity (cracking)
= 1.97 = 11.957 = 1.31 kN/m2 ("(mm from 20.3.2)
'Ymm .
This, therefore, is the design wind load capacity for the serviceability limit state of cracking (ie "If = 1.0). It exceeds 0.6 kN/m2 and is therefore satisfactory.
Using Method Four, the wall is capable of resisting a greater wind load than using Methods One, Two and Three when the enhancement limits are applied. However the wall must be reinforced to ensure that in resisting the design serviceability load, the ultimate limit state is not reached.
To achieve its full serviceability design load capacity the wall would have to be reinforced to resist an excess ultimate design load of:
1.2 (1.31  0.47) = 1.01 kN/m2in accordance with Method Two (assuming that both leaves are reinforced).
However, for the situation in the example, the wall has only to resist a characteristic wind load of 0.6 kN/m2. As the reinforced wall is to be designed in accordance with Method Two. it can be seen from page 66 that reinforcement in every fourth bed joint (300 mm) of the outer leaf will provide the necessary design resistance. As only one leaf is reinforced the serviceab:ility checks must be carried out on that leaf alone; again this is as for Method Two (page 66).
BS5628: Part 2 recommends that with this design method the serviceability limit state of
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2 : SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
67
deflection should be checked. This is not straightforward. It is recommended that elastic plate theory, assuming that the masonry is unreinforced and using the values for short term elastic moduli given in Appendix C to the Code. In this case for simplicity, the panel will be considered to span horizontally. If the design load (serviceability) is considered to be carried by the outer leaf:
. 5 0.6 X 4.54 x 1012
deflectton = 384 x 900 x 5.8 x 8.97 x 107 = 6.8mm
This is less than the limit of span 1250 (= 18mm) recommended in clause 16.2.2.1 and therefore satisfactory. If the risk of damage to finishes was critical and a lower deflection limit set, it would be necessary to carry out a more rigorous analysis ego using elastic plate theory.
If both leaves are reinforced it will be necessary to carry out a serviceability check on both leaves. It is suggested that, in order to do this, the load is apportioned between the leaves on the assumption that both leaves deflect equally. This apportionment can be done by equating the deflection equations for each leaf and solving for the individual leaf loads from knowledge of the total design serviceability load on the wall. These individualleafloads can then be compared with their serviceability load capacities as in Method Two on page 66. Each leaf can then be reinforced (using Method Two) to resist theirrespective Ultimate Limit State design loads.
It can be seen that Method Four is effectively the same as Method Two when the proposed serviceability design checks are carried out in the latter. As has also been seen, because ofthe suggested limitations of the extrapolation of bending moment coefficients for low orthogonal ratios, Methods One and Three often effectively become the same. Methods One and Three are more conservative than Two and Four, since the latter make allowance for the load capacity of the unreinforced masonry. There is, thus, scope for the clarification of these design methods, and it is likely that this will be dealt with in a future amendment to BS 5628: Part 2.
6.0 I I REFERENCES I
1. British Standards Institution. Use of Masonry •
Part 1. Structural use of unrein forced masonry. BS 5628: Part 1: 1978 (1985).
Part 2. Structural use of reinforced and prestressed masonry. BS 5628: Part 2: 1985. Part 3. Materials and components, design and workmanship. BS 5628:Part 3: 1985.
2. British Standards Institution. Structural Use of Concrete. Part 1. Code of Practice for Design and Construction. BS8110: Part 1 : 1985.
3. British Standards Institution. The Structural Use of Concrete. CPII0 : 1972 (now superseded byBS8110)
4. Civil Engineering Code of Practice No.2 (1951). Earth Retaining Structures.
5. Terzaghi and Peck, Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, Wiley International Edition.
6. Brickwork Dimensions Tables, BDA Design Note 3 July 1979.
7. Haseltine and Tutt, Brickwork Retaining Walls, BD A Design Guide No.2, 1991.
68
I APPENDIXA I
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO BSS628: PART 2
A number of errors or anomalies in BS5628: Part 2 have been referred to in the text of this Handbook. The most significant of these are included in a draft revision to the Code at present being prepared for publication. The major revisions are noted below.
CLAUSE 19.1.4, TABLE 4
In line with revisions to other related British Standards, Table 4 will be amended as shown below:
TABLE 4. CHARACTERISTIC TENSILE STRENGTH OF REINFORCING STEEL, fy
_;__:_ __ '
Deslgnadon
Grade
Nominal Characteristic
size ten sUe strength fy
All 250
All 460
Up to and 460
including 12 mm
All 250
All 460 Hot rolled plain steel bars complying with BS4449
250
Hot rolled and cold worked deformed bars complying with BS4449
460
Cold reduced steel wire complying with BS 4482 used in steel fabic in accordance with BS 4483
Types 304 and 316 plain stainless steel bars
complying with BS 6744 .
250
Types 304 and 316 deformed stainless steel bars complying with BS 6744
460
CLAUSES 23 AND 24
These clauses make numerous references to 'axial' loads, where eccentric vertical loading is being referred to. In order to clarify the meaning it is proposed that the word 'vertical' will be substituted for the word 'axial'.
In subclause 23.3.1.2 in the expression for My the term (Q) should be inverted to read (g_). The
expression for Ndz is also incorrect, it should be: q p
Ndz = fk Am, where the meaning ofthe terms is unchanged.
Associated with both of the above expressions is Table 12 which gives values for the coefficient o , It is proposed to alter this table slightly, as shown below:
TABLE 12 V ALVES OF THE COEFFICIENT (X
ValueofNlNdz Valueofoe
0 1.00
0.1 0.88
0.2 0.77
0.3 0.65
0.4 0.53
0.5 0.42
;;'0.6 0.30 Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
69
APPENDIX.
CO~ONBONDPATTERNSFORREnwORCED~ONRY
<.
alternate courses
.>
:. ':';.
....
~ •. :: .
variation on queHa bond
reinforcement
queHa bond wall
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I }F,.S: I I I I I I aa
•
•
I I I I I I .t1J .. I I I I I
,:' ,'.<',~:':.> ~~.
_J.. + ..L + ..!.. + I·' + ..L + J.... + ...1_
I I I .:' ,..::: .. " .:~ I I I
bb I:'OCk:1 pocket wall
english bond alternate courses dotted
wall ties to BS5628 part 2, Appendix 3 groutp.d cavity wall
70
•
•
These titles and the full publications listing are available from BDA's Publications Sales Department.
THE BDA DESIGN GUIDE SERIES
The BDA Design Guide series of publications provides a range of titles covering many aspects of both unreinforced and reinforced structural use of brickwork masonry. Other publications in the series relevant to reinforced brickwork design are:
• The Design of Brickwork Retaining Walls; Design Guide 2
• Designing in Reinforced Brickwork; Design Guide 14
• Handbook to BS 5628: Part 2: Section 1: Reinforced Masonry; Design Guide 17
• Design of Post Tensioned Brickwork; Design Guide 20
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Front cover: Photography  Frank Walter. Architects  Porter Wright. Structural engineers  David Goodwin Associates. Inside front cover:
Photography  John Adams. Architects and structural engineers  Oxfordshire County Surveyor & Engineer in collaboration with Bradshaw Buckton &Tange, and the British Ceramic Association. Page 4: Photography BDA. Architects Green Lloyd. Structural engineersFothergill & Co. Page 6: Photography  Graham Jennings. Architects  The Salvation Army International Headquarters. Structural engineers  Curtins. Page 9: Photography  Frank Walter. Architects  Covell Matthews Wheatley. Structural engineers  Deakin Callard & Partners. Page 22: Photography John Adams. Architect  F. R. Walters, District Architect at Mansfield District Council. Consulting engineersCurtins. Photographs on pages 7,15,24,27,31,32,35 and 72 were provided by Stuart Bell DipArch, RIBA, MICeram, Technical Director, Marshalls Clay Products Ltd.
© The Brick Development Association, Woodside House, Winkfield, Windsor, Berks SL4 2DX. Tel: 0344 885651
The contents of this publication are intended for general guidance only and any person intending to use these contents for the purposes of design, construction or repair of brickwork or any related project should first consult a Professional Advisor.
The Brick Development Association, its servants and any persons who contributed to or who are in anyway connected with this publication accept no liability arising from negligence or otherwise howsoever caused for any injury or damage to any property as a result of any or reliance on any method product instruction, or other contents of this publication.
Designed and produced for the Brick Development Association, Woodside House, Winkfield, WINDSOR Berkshire SL4 2DX. Telephone Winkfield Row (0344) 885651 by David Goad MSTD. Technical illustration: John James. Printed: Prima Print.
Handbook to BS5628: Part 2: SECTION 2: Reinforced Masonry
71