APznzaYQIFhGd7 IiReqz4MyRPR9wy3cDmmlaM3q6yYd4SMUhwHkMKY8-AYK1HDpBjNFPCuXTV-VrMhijWRmtaaabouojvr6HlT6kizHe7gTl39fcRHOxT4kQfRjAlvcJ7zVAXW6n-TluxK0waJkoyFkIip Zr8fQoBzo0x6NEptmyHDj6 39muOvdVLScMLFgtGsttXJtutzvsRgPasFrlp N

INDEX
S. No Topic Page No.

Week 1
1 Introductory - Part - I 1
2 Introductory - Part - II 20
3 Introductory - Part - III 43
4 Introductory - Part - IV 63
Week 2
5 Masonry Materials and Properties Part - I 72
6 Masonry Materials and Properties Part - II 87
7 Masonry Materials and Properties Part - III 111
Week 3
8 Masonry Materials and Properties Part - IV 133
9 Masonry Materials and Properties Part - V 153
10 Masonry Materials and Properties Part - VI 173
Week 4
11 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - I 184
12 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - II 194
13 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - III 219
Week 5
14 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - IV 236
15 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - V 253
Week 6
16 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - VI 275
17 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - VII 294
18 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - VIII 312
19 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - IX 330
Week 7
20 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - X 352
21 Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - XII 374
22 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - I 389
Week 8
23 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - II 406
24 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - III 430
25 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - IV 452
Week 9
26 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - V 476
27 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - VI 496
28 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - VII 514
29 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - VIII 527
Week 10
30 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - IX 537
31 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - X 543
32 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - XI 563
Week 11
33 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Example - I 583
34 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Example - II 598
35 Design of Masonry Components and Systems Example - III 611
36 Special Topics - Confined Masonry 628
Week 12
37 Special Topics - Masonry Infill in RC Frames 653
38 Special Topics - Assessment of Existing Masonry Structures 677
39 Special Topics - Assessment of Existing Masonry Structures Part - II 705
40 Special Topics - Assessment of Existing Masonry Structures Part - III 727
Design of Masonry Structures
Prof. Arun Menon
Department of Civil Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
Module - 01
Lecture - 01
Introductory - Part - I
Welcome to our first lecture in the course on Design of Masonry Structures. This week
will be an introduction to masonry as a structural material; we will examine the use of
masonry as a structural solution from ancient times to the present. It would be useful at
this stage to look at the present-day use of masonry and the kind of standards or the codal
framework or the normative framework within which structural masonry is used in
different countries. And, the kind of normative framework that we have in our country as
far the use of masonry is concerned. And in a few days, you will start appreciating the
fact that the term “masonry” is quite loosely used.
The word “masonry” can refer to a very vast majority, a very vast spectrum of structural
construction materials and systems. So, they can vary right from sun-dried unburnt
bricks all the way to stone masonry, and in today’s context, cement blocks or modern
materials such as aerated autoclaved blocks, fly ash bricks and so on. So, you have an
entire spectrum. It could be used along with mortar, of different types, which leads to
different types of masonry. It could be used even without mortar and we refer to that as
dry-stack masonry.
And today, we have an entire class of masonry called hollow-brick construction, very
often reinforced, sometimes not reinforced. So, you already see that with the
combination of the structural units and the choice of the mortar, you can get different
types of systems which classify as masonry, ok.
Reinforce them, you get reinforce masonry, otherwise we refer to them as unreinforced
masonry. So, this entire spectrum exists and you will see that in our course we are going
to be dealing with the more formal, the more recent, modern masonry constructions,
where either cement blocks are used for construction, hollow concrete blocks are used
for construction or solid fired clay bricks are used for construction, ok.
1
So, we will also be largely focusing on reinforced masonry, where, as I would
emphasize, in the codal framework in the country today, unreinforced masonry is not
seen as a structural typology that should be used and therefore, we are moving towards
having reinforcement in masonry.
So, predominantly our course will focus on how do you design masonry structures,
particularly reinforced masonry structures, for a combination of forces acting on it, ok.
So, I begin today’s lecture by giving you a perspective on how masonry is used and how
has it been used in the past, but that clearly comes from an understanding of what is the
strength and what is the weakness of masonry.
(Refer Slide Time: 03:47)
And when I talk of masonry, I am talking of the assembly now, unit plus some mortar
acting as a composite, right. So, if one were to examine historically how masonry has
been used, this is clearly understood as a material which is good in compression, ok. You
use stone blocks. Stone can have compressive strengths as high as 200 MPa. Granite has
a range that goes all the way from about 70 MPa to over 200 MPa.
So, if you use building stone to construct an entire structure, you can be guaranteed that
the compressive strength is good. If you make it monolithic, you are going to get the
granite compressive strength.
2
If you use small blocks and have mortar, you are going to be limiting the compressive
strength and this is something you will understand in a few days from now, how the
mortar is going to be limiting the compressive strength of masonry. However, given the
fact that you are using a material which is strong in compression, you are going to have
to deal with the fact that this is a material which is strong in compression, right.
Now, evidence from history tells us that this is widely used in arches, right and most
massive constructions in the past, have been constructed on the structural typology of
arches. The use of arches is predominant/prevalent in historic masonry constructions and
that is simply because an arch is known to be good in compression. Masonry is
extensively used in the form of arches and this could be brick masonry, it could be fired
clay, it could be sun-burnt bricks, simply because of the fact that you have good
compressive strength, the structural typology of the arch ensures that the entire cross
section is in compression and you use a material which is good in compression.
So, masonry arches is something that you would see everywhere. Historical structures in
and around your city. This is formal construction in masonry (from 1890s). That is a
massive tower that you see there and a structure which is heavily relying on arches for
equilibrating gravity forces. So, arches are something that give clue to the fact that this
material really works well in compression and can be relied upon.
Bridges; extensive number of bridges in and around our country, all over the world, are
built in, are built using brick or stone masonry. These are structures, this particular
example that you see here, is a structure that is about 140-150 years old and they
continue to be in service conditions. One has to assess them structurally, but this is
putting the material to its best use, which is the strength of masonry itself. You would be
surprised to know that the Indian railways, for example, has 1,30,000 masonry arch
bridges.
And 1,00,000 of them, i.e., 1 lakh out of this number, was built in the colonial period.
So, we are talking of bridges which have been in service condition for over 100 years
easily. Of course, you need a quantitative structural assessment of such structures and
that is needless to say. But it is the predominance of the typology, is due to the strength
of masonry itself.
3
We also see a large number of towers, a large number of towers, not recent
constructions, these are constructions that are at least 800 to 1200 years old towers and if
you were to use a material to build towers that are 100 meters or taller, the material is
working well in compression. Of course, we are not yet discussing the behavior of such
structures under lateral action. That is something we will examine and we will examine
them particularly to see the stability when you have a combination of gravity forces and
lateral forces.
However, if you were to assume only gravity forces acting, which is not always the case,
you will have lateral forces. Under gravity, you have massive masonry structures
constructed in the past. You have two examples here, they are very famous examples, the
one on the left is the Brihadishwara tower; the Brihadishwara temple in Thanjavur which
is not very far from here, you can go and visit it. It is about thousand years old, it was
constructed between 1003 and 1010 AD in about 6 to 7 years.
And of course, there is the geometry of this structure, which is also responsible for its
stability, which we will examine in a few minutes. But it is a massive masonry tower, it
is a stone masonry construction. And the one on the right is a brick masonry tower. It’s
one of the tallest towers in the world. You can actually go up this tower. This is in Italy,
in a town called Cremona and as you can see it is a fairly slender structure. It is
completely in brick masonry and rises to about 120 metres in height.
4
An instructive exercise is something that you can do and I will ask you to work through
this. If I were to take just a stack of bricks, right. I am just stacking one brick above
another, right. What would be the size of one brick? Standard brick, we are not talking
about historical brick, I am just taking a standard brick size, what we use in India today.
Student: 19 x 9
19 x 9 x 9, units?
Student: (Refer Time: 10:24).
Centimeters, ok. So, if I were to take a standard nominal size of the brick and keep
stacking bricks one over the other, ok. Could you make an estimate of what height the
stack of bricks can go before it crushes? I need to make some assumptions, you can plug
in some numbers and try to look at it. If I were to assume that the density, it is only under
gravity forces, I am not assuming the presence of other actions now.
Let us assume the density of brick, density of brick to be about 1800 kg/m3. That is a
fairly good estimate, 1800 to 1900 kg/m3 as the density of brick unit itself. We are not
talking of density of masonry yet, brick unit. Only under the action of gravity forces.
You know the area of cross section now. It is 19 cm x 9 cm.
What is your estimate of the height to which you can construct this? You need to know
the compressive strength of the masonry because you can assume that it is going to fail
by crushing. What would be an estimate of the compressive strength of the masonry?
You are familiar with concrete. You talk of M20 concrete, M30 concrete or M40
concrete or so on.
Masonry units, you will you will see in the next week that we have a different
classification for their strengths, but 5 MPa or 5 N/mm2; or 10 N/mm2 is a fairly good
estimate of the strength of bricks that are predominantly available. You will see that if
you assume a nominal strength for the brick and look at a brick that is about 19 cm x 9
cm, the stack can easily go for a few kilometers. Of course, there is going to be an issue
of stability and that is the reason why these towers have stopped at 100-120 meters in
height.
5
Of course, you can improve the compressive behavior of a material by choosing the right
cross-section, integrating stronger materials in the cross section, and choosing a form
that gives you better stability. And that is the reason why the figure on the left, the
Brihadeeswarar temple with the more stable form, would have a better performance than
something that is most slender and uniform in cross section all along the height.
Of course, the tower on the on the right, in Cremona, also would have a wider cross
section of masonry at the base than at the top, although the tower in itself in geometry, is
uniform from bottom to top overall geometry. So, masonry is good in compression, but it
is always important to do a SWOT analysis on all structural systems. What we do
understand is, this is not a material that is meant for tension.
Masonry has never been put to use in situations of direct tension. It is rarely, you would
never find masonry be put to use in direct tension unless you have reinforcement built in
and that applies to reinforced concrete as well. Because concrete as a material is weak in
tension and you reinforced, you reinforce concrete so, that you have tensile resistance in
this system itself.
The same applies to brick masonry. In fact, it is notorious as a zero tensile strength
material. If you are working with existing masonry, particularly with the use of lime
mortar or mud mortar. So, historical masonry is notorious as a zero tensile strength
material. It might have some residual, it might have some finite non-zero tensile strength,
6
but it is so, non-uniform/variable that you cannot depend on it as a tensile strength of the
material.
So, it is very often we assume that masonry is a zero tensile strength material. Modern
masonry will have, particularly the masonry with cement mortar, will have some tensile
resistance and this tensile resistance can be measured and can be used in your design;
however, it is very small in comparison to the compressive strength, typically of the
order of 10 percent of the compressive strength or lesser, but again so, variable that you
cannot depend on the tensile strength of masonry.
So, in this particular slide there are two things that we can look at. Tensile stresses when
we exclude the possibility of direct tension, what leads to the formation of tensile
stresses? In structural systems under the combination of gravity and lateral forces, you
will have situations where tensile stresses can be generated. Particularly in the form of
flexural tension or in the form of shear tension. That is where you get principal tension
situation in masonry.
So, when you have that, the x crack that you see in the figure on your right, is the effect
of an earthquake on a 2 or 3 storied unreinforced masonry structure. It could, it is in
stone masonry. You can see the formation of these cracks which are called as classical
legs cracks and those cracks are actually forming along the lines of principal tension.
This demonstrates that masonry behaves as a very brittle structural system, as a very
brittle structural material and under the combination of gravity and lateral forces, you do
not have the necessary ductility, particularly under actions like earthquakes.
The figure on the left, has another story to tell you. And this is not so much about
masonry having low tensile strength, but an important aspect of existing masonry
structures, which is poor connections between the structural load bearing walls. Unless
specifically designed, these walls are not tied together or held together. In regions where
earthquakes are prevalent, the structure over several hundred years evolves in a manner
that tensile resisting elements or ties are introduced such that the structure works
together.
We will examine this more closely when we start looking at detailing for earthquake
resistance, but historically, structures were given timber bands and sometimes steel ties
to ensure that all peripheral walls and all load bearing walls act together. However, in the
7
absence of any such tying material, in steel or in timber, you would have a very low
resistance to separation between orthogonal walls and that is exactly what you see here.
The only resistance that is available against the separation of orthogonal walls is really
what is referred to as the toothing between the toothing between the two walls.
Have you seen how a mason constructs a masonry building where does he begin?
Yes.
Yes, a mason would start constructing a masonry wall or an or an assembly of walls from
the corner, and you would see that the brick courses are laid such that the alternate to
form a toothing pattern what you see here.
However, when lateral forces are significant that toothing pattern is not sufficient to hold
the two words together. The interlocking provided by the mere toothing is not
necessarily sufficient, in some cases that may be completely absent. So, the only
resistance that is there between separation, between the two orthogonal walls from
separating is the shear interlocking available between the two orthogonal walls.
Again, we are talking of a material which is not strong in tension. So, this separation
action causes tension and you can get cracks very easily formed at the junction of
orthogonal walls, orthogonally juxtaposed walls. So, be it within a wall.
So, the difference between the two slides, the two pictures that you see here, the one on
the right tells you that crack formation within a wall happens rather easily; the picture on
the left on the other hand, tells you that separation between orthogonal walls, simply
because you do not have a tensile resisting material there can happen rather easily, when
you have significant seismic forces. In fact, even moderate seismic forces.
So, this is definitely the limitation of masonry and this limitation understood at the
component level, a single wall, is the basis with which many of our historical structures
have been constructed and we will examine that in a few minutes. Similarly, in regions
8
of significant earthquake activity or heavy wind forces, in regions where heavy wind
forces are present, you have ties that basically hold all the masonry walls together.
So, you need something else, you need something else to keep the structure together, ok.
In that context it becomes interesting to examine how historical masonry constructions

were conceived and how do they survive if they have to survive several centuries. They
are definitely countering different types of actions constantly.
So, I take up this example of the Ctesiphon palace in present day Iraq. In the past, it was
the part of the Mesopotamian civilization. And we will examine the equilibrium in this
mud brick wall. So, it is a sun-dried brick wall that we are examining. As you can see
with respect to the scale there, the human scale with respect to the wall, you will
appreciate that it is a multistoried construction and we are talking of a construction that is
at least 3000 years old. And this sits in the middle of the desert. We are not examining
the vault here, that is another interesting example and we will keep it for another day, we
will examine the wall.
9
Now this wall, if you were to take the cross section of the wall, you will understand that
we are talking of a 34 meter high wall. A 34 metre high wall would be how many
storeys?
It is 10 plus, right. Assume 3 meters per storey and you have a 10 storey construction.
Now this is the palace wall, it is the remaining part of the palace wall and you see that
the cross section is definitely thicker at the base and tapers to the top, that some
optimization that has happened there. But it is interesting to examine why 5 meters, why
5 m? Could it have been 3m? could it have been 4m? could it have been 2m?
So, that is an important question. If it has survived several thousand years in the desert,
where apart from the role of carrying gravity forces, it also has to counteract.
Student: Wind.
Wind, Right? Desert storms are common. So, you are talking of significant wind forces.
So, you have a situation where gravity forces are acting along with lateral forces. So, this
is a situation where the masonry wall is not going to be only in compression, this will
definitely be subject to some amount of tension. Question is, how did it survive? What is
the story behind the stability of this construction?
10
It’s going to be examined now under two conditions; one, let us assume that the wall is
not subjected to any wind and the second case we look at equilibrium under combination
of both wind and gravity forces. I will examine a section A-A from the top, at a height of
‘y’ and we will do our equilibrium calculations on that. What is true for that, is then true
for the rest of the structure and let us see if we can deduce something out of this exercise,
ok.
So, I am looking at the first case which is the no wind case, it is purely under gravity
forces. Now for that section that is being considered, the gravity force W acting about its
centre of gravity at section A-A, we have the cross section of the masonry wall, the
resultant of the gravity forces acts at the centroid of the cross section there.
And since the resultant R acts at the centroid of the cross section defined at a distance ‘a’
from the edge, You have uniform compressive stresses in this cross section, yes? At the
inner edge and at the outer edge the cross section is going to experience uniform
compression simply because the resultant is acting at the centre of the cross section.
Now, if I were to examine the equilibrium under a combination of gravity and lateral
forces, we will make little assumptions which will not jeopardize our estimations here. I
assume that the wind forces are acting uniformly from the top to the bottom of the
structure. That is, the wind pressure is uniform from the top to the bottom of the
structure.
So, if I look at this height ‘y’ that is under examination, the resultant of the wind force
‘V’ is acting at the at mid height y/2 and you have the gravity force W acting at the
centre of gravity of this block. And now if you examine section A-A and R, cross section
at that point because of the combination of the lateral force and the gravity force there is
a tendency of the resultant now, moving towards what we refer to as the leeward side.
So, the wall is standing against wind, you have the windward side and leeward side.
Point O is on the windward side. Due to a combination of the wind force V and the
gravity force W the resultant now, is shifting towards the leeward side. Of course, now
there is an eccentricity of the resultant with respect to the cross section, where
eccentricity is e with respect to the centroid of the cross section and therefore, the point
through which the resultant is acting geometrically is defined as a+e which is r with
11
respect to this point O on the windward end of the wall itself, which is the gravity force
into a and the wind force, Vy/2.
From which, it is possible to get an expression for this geometrical quantity r which is
nothing but the point on the cross section through which the resultant is acting, right. So,
I rewrite this expression in terms of r and we have a simple expression to estimate the
point through which the resultant is acting at section A-A in terms of the centroid of the
cross section from the edge O which is a plus the wind force into y/2 divided by the
gravity force W.
So, this little expression here is going to help us write down what is r at different cross
sections. If were to take ten different cross sections A-A, B-B, C-C, D-D …. I would get
r1, r2, r3 and all r can be written down, right? Of course, you need an estimate of the wind
force and you need an estimate of the gravity forces acting here. Once I do that, I have
different points estimated r1, r2, r3 and so on are and if I were to connect all these points
you are basically doing what is called the thrust line analysis.
A combination, under the combination of gravity forces and lateral forces, you are
estimating the thrust line of the system, which is the line of action of the resultant of the
structure under a combination of lateral and gravity forces. So, what we are basically
doing is a simple hand calculation referred to as thrust line analysis for stability check,
ok.
12
So, with this background if we now examine, what might be happening to the wall under
the effect of wind and gravity. In the first situation, so, what you see here is the thrust
line that is running from the top to the bottom and the thrust line in different situation.
So, the first situation: no wind case, the stresses at the base of the structure are fully in
compression and uniformly in compression that is the compression on the windward side
and the compression on the leeward side are equal and you have uniform compression on
the cross section.
But as you start having some amount of wind force acting on the wall cross section,
under the combination of lateral and gravity forces, the resultant starts shifting slowly
towards the leeward edge and in situation of light wind under a combination of these
forces, the cross section is still fully in compression, but you have one edge which is in
lower compressive stresses the other edge which is now in higher compressive stresses.
As you move forward there is a limiting case that you will reach and that limiting case is
a very important situation where the cross section is still fully in compression, yes, but
this edge which we have designated earlier as O is now reaching a state of zero stress
which is, it is no more in compression and it has been decompressed at this point in time.
Beyond that it will going into tension. Hence that point where it has been decompressed,
that the edge fibre has been decompressed, is a limiting case for us why? Because we are
looking at a material which is weak in tension, we really do not want tension to come
into this cross section.
So, that is a limiting case for us. Under the assumption that the material is behaving in a
linear elastic manner, we can assume that the cross section is under a triangular
distribution of compressive stresses, which simply implies that the resultants now is
acting at the centroid of the triangular distribution, which is at the edge of the middle one
third of the cross section, because the centroid is at two thirds. Hence the middle, the
edge of the middle one third is where the resultant of the lateral gravity plus lateral
forces is acting.
If were to assume that the wind force is acting from the other side, that the windward and
the leeward sides were flipped, it means that the resultant in this limiting case basically
moves from this the right edge of middle third to the left edge of the middle third, but
13
always needs to remain within the middle one third, right. If it is within the middle one
third of the cross-section then there is no tension in the cross section.
If it goes beyond the middle third of the cross section, then if the material has some
tensile strength, then I can assume that it will take some tension. But if this material does
not have tensile resistance, which is typically the case with masonry, then any tension
would imply formation of a crack, right? And that is what is written there as uplift. And
that is what you would expect that a crack is formed and slowly there is uplift or the
length of contact and length across which compressive stresses are still being transferred,
starts reducing. So, the section starts becoming partial.
If you now continue increasing the wind forces, the area under compression keeps
reducing, it will reach a stage where the compressive stresses are so high, that you have
reached the crushing strength of the material and the material crushes. When it crushes,
the overturning of the system and that is how the loss of stability is going to actually
progress.
Now, I come back to the central limiting case and I said that under a combination of
lateral forces and gravity forces, the resultant has to lie within the middle one third for us
to be in the limiting case of no tension in the cross section. If it so happens that there is
going to be tension in the cross section, as a builder what could you do? as the structural
designer of that wall what would you do? But now my calculation show that resultant is
outside the middle one third what can you do?
If I were to increase the dimension the width of the cross section, width of the base itself,
the middle one third increases right. We were only talking of t/3. If t is the thickness or
the width of the cross section, t/3 is the middle one third. The game is bringing this
resultant within the middle third for the combination of gravity and lateral forces. So, if
one we are able to do that, the easiest way to do that would be to increase the width of
the wall cross section and that is possibly the rationale behind most historical masonry
constructions, to keep tension out, because they knew that this material does not work in
tension it is good in compression.
So, ensure your cross section is fully in compression. This is today understood as a
mason’s middle third rule. So, mason would make an empirical calculation of what could
14
be the lateral forces coming on to the structural wall, what is the gravity force and then
dimension the cross section such that you do not have tension in the cross section.
Now, just think back about the Ctesiphon palace wall, if it has to survive several
millennia, under a combination of gravity forces and lateral forces, there is no tension
occurring in the cross section and that is why it is 5 meters at the base. So, this gives you
an idea of how historically masonry was constructed. It is conceived as a lateral force
resisting element, but predominantly under gravity forces dimensioned to keep tension
out.
Today you and I are able to put reinforcement into masonry or have other elements that
can give tensile resistance. So, we start reducing the cross sections. Here if you reduce
the cross section it will simply overturn because of zero tensile strength available in the
masonry, ok.
Having said that here we looked at the stability under gravity and lateral forces. Within
the resistance of a wall to lateral forces, there is a certain difference that we have to
examine and this is another aspect of weakness which becomes essential to keep in mind
because it keeps coming back to us in earthquake resistant design.
So, if you were to examine a masonry structure as composed of four load bearing walls
with a roof and we have seen a picture where separation between the orthogonal walls
15
happens under the effect of lateral forces like earthquakes, right. So, we are talking of
this sort of a connection between the orthogonal walls. If you were to assume that the
connections are very poor, like we saw in the previous photograph, that under the
earthquake it just ripped apart like a piece of paper.
If the connections between walls is poor and if the connection between the roof slab and
the wall; so, we are talking of vertical to horizontal system connection and connections
in the horizontal system between elements. So, if we were to examine these two types of
connections and say both these connections are poor, then if you take a masonry
structure and subject it to lateral forces it will easily separate and then the walls are all
left by themselves to defend the lateral forces. It is no longer the whole box, it is no
longer the totality of the structure, but its individual walls which will have to fend of the
earthquake forces.
So, if you consider that sort of a situation where the walls are not connected to each other
and the roof slab is not connected well to the walls, right; two poor connections, two
types of poor connections exist in the structure and examine what happens to the wall
when subjected to lateral forces, in two different situations. When the lateral force is
acting in-plane of the wall, right; in the same plane of wall and when the lateral forces
are acting out of plane, are perpendicular to the wall that is the second case.
So, this is referred to as in-plane action and that is referred to as the out of plane action
and we are basically examining a wall component with respect to in-plane action and out
of plane action. You will agree with the me that both are looking at bending action in-
plane, bending action out of plane, right. It is subjected to shear, but there is bending in
that direction, predominant direction in plane and out of plane.
The second moment of area or moment of inertia is a good geometrical parameter, that
captures the bending strength, the bending resistance right. So, if I were to look at. So,
what would you expect between the masonry wall subjected to in-plane lateral forces and
out of plane which do you think is more resistant, intuitively?
Student: In plane.
In plane, right. The cartoon there says you can even push it with your own hand in the
out of plane direction, which of course, depends on the stability in the out of plane
16
direction, but it is very instructive to simply plug in some numbers to the strong axis and
weak axis bending strength, bending resistances and look at in-plane versus out of plane,
is their significance difference between the resistance available in masonry?
So, if I were to take the wall, put some numbers there, we will some numbers there, let
the length of the wall is L, the thickness of the wall is t and we are looking at the major
axis bending of this wall about X-X, Ixx the second moment of area would work out to be
L3t/12, rectangular cross section simple. If I were to look at out of plane bending and
estimate the second moment of area Iyy same L length and t thickness would be Lt3/12.
It is useful to plug in some numbers, let us say the wall is about 3 meters long and about
230 mm thick, which is a standard masonry wall thickness for a one brick thick wall. So,
if I were to then plug in some numbers and take the ratio of these bending resistances, I
take I x x /I y y , knowing that I x x is going to be higher, you will see that the ratio works
out to something like 170 which means if you have two walls- you have a wall which is
in the direction of the earthquake, the in-plane wall and the other wall you have the in
plane wall and you have the out of plane wall, under shaking. Let us say this is the
direction of shaking, what do you think will happen if the structure is not behaving as
one entity. It is now simply a pack of walls, some in the in-plane direction, some in the
out of plane direction and the roof that is sitting without connections on it.
And if there is shaking in this direction what would you expect given the bending
resistances that you see. You would simply expect walls that are in the out of plane
direction to fall way before the in-plane walls really start resisting and holding the
structure together because the connections are completely not there. So, even under low
to moderate earthquakes, this sort of a failure mechanism, which is referred to as an out
of plane failure mechanism is extremely predominant in masonry constructions.
Now, if tensile resisting elements were put in place, if ties were put in place to hold all
these walls together and in the cartoon its very nicely shown as some stitching that is
happening between the roof and the walls and some stitching is happening between the
walls. So, if you have good interlocking along the walls, between the walls orthogonally
and if you have good connections it could be in the form of a concrete band, it could be
the form of j bolts or whatever, if the connections positive connections are good, then
17
under a similar action of lateral forces acting on this wall what would you think will
happen?
The out of plane wall is still the out of plane wall the in-plane wall is still the in-plane
wall, only the connections have been improved. The out of plane walls still has lower
bending resistance, but it would try to fail, but when it tries to fail, it is held at its ends to
the in-plane wall. So, it starts transferring those lateral forces to the in-plane wall; the in-
plane wall has 100 times more bending resistance and starts protecting the structure.
So, that is an important lesson in the way masonry structures will respond to lateral
forces and that is the reason why the emphasis is always on connections. So, if you
improve connections, you get what is referred loosely as ‘box action’, which is good for
earthquake resistance and this is really nothing, but the out of plane behavior is the
weakest link in the chain and the strength of a system is regulated by the strength of the
weakest link and if you fix the weakest link which is the out of plane behavior, you get
better behavior of the overall structure.
With that I would like to conclude today’s lecture looking at masonry statistics in our
country, ok. We have this interesting numbers that we can examine. I am looking at the
housing census from 2001 and the housing census from 2011, ok. And this is information
that is been pulled out of the building census, from the census of India in which the
building census is a component. If you were to look at total number of households, you
18
can examine the percentages, you do not have to get awed by the numbers we are
running to into millions of built residential units.
So, total number of households by predominant wall material and the predominant wall
materials examined here are mud or unburnt bricks, which is not fired, sun burnt bricks,
stone and finally, burnt clay bricks, the three categories that I am examining. You have
total, you have rural and you have urban. The rural plus urban will give you the total, let
us examine the percentages.
Now, if you were to examine the percentages out of a 100 percent of these, if you add up
the percentages of unburnt brick stone and burnt brick for the 2001 census, we get a total
of 84.7 percent; meaning 84.7 percent of the bill stock of this country running to
millions, we are talking of the total of 249 million houses, these are, these are houses
housing families of 4 to 5 people, that is how the calculation is.
Now, if you were to look at the 2011 census, 10 years later, look at those numbers they
add to 85.3. Essentially we have not changed, we have we continued to build almost in
the same pattern; however, if you examine the individual numbers from 29.6 mud brick
it has come down to 23, which is good news, we are building less kuccha constructions.
But it has simply moved into the burnt clay brick or stone. So, from 10 percent it goes up
to 12 to 14 percent and 44.9 percent of burnt brick increases toward 47.5 percent. So,
essentially if you look at the build stock in this country, we are still talking of
predominantly masonry constructions. No engineer has built all these structures, mostly
they are mason constructed constructions. Majority of these constructions, if you look at
a country like India, 60 to 70 percent of our land mass is sitting in seismic zones III, IV
and V- moderate to high seismic zones.
If you look at these structures, most of them will not have any seismic resistant feature in
terms of what we are talking of these ties, these connections which have to be good and
so on. So, in a country like ours, earthquake protection or risk reduction in earthquakes,
of predominant majority of the population living in such constructions is a big challenge.
So, we stop here and we continue our lecture on the introductory aspects to masonry
construction in our next lecture.
19
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 01
Lecture - 02
Introductory - Part - II
Good afternoon. So, to continue with what we were looking at in the last lecture; let me
just quickly summarize the key takeaways from the last class.
So, we saw that as a structural typology, masonry is one that is efficient under compression
and that is utilized quite a bit. We saw the arches and even tall structures are possible
because of this good compressive strength of the material itself. So, that is definitely
something that you should give due consideration to; however, it is weak under tension
and it is not direct tension that we are talking about it, but tension that is caused by
eccentricity; eccentricity either of the load itself or eccentricity of the resultant due to a
combination of lateral forces and gravity forces.
So, this is a significant weakness and the modern day solution is to go for reinforced
masonry, but in the past this was not countered by reinforcing masonry, but rather by
dimensioning walls in a way that you have the thrust line due to the combination of the
lateral forces and the gravity forces required to stay within the middle third of the cross
20
section. We saw by simple equilibrium that was shown and this middle third is also
referred to as the kern of the cross section. So, as long as resultant is within the kern, it is
pure compression in the cross section. So, this is, this is a concept that we did see in the
previous class.
We also saw that, when you have lateral actions, when you have earthquake induced
lateral forces or you have wind action which is a lateral force, then the masonry is more
resistant in terms of its in-plane response. The masonry wall is more resistant in terms of
in-plane response rather than out of plane response. So, this is weakness that needs to be
kept in mind as far as the wall is concerned.
And when you then move on to the system level, if you want integral action of the masonry
building system under lateral forces, this can be ensured if connections are taken care of.
The connections become critical and if you take care of connections wall to wall
connections and wall to floor connections, then you can harness the in-plane, the good
in-plane resistance that masonry walls have. So, that is the gist of what we had seen in
yesterday’s lecture.
So, what we will look at today, is with this understanding, how do modern masonry
constructions differ from ancient masonry constructions. And we will also look at how we
can classify masonry, right from masonry units to walls, different elements like walls,
columns, pillars, beams, floors and then a classification of masonry systems. So, that is
21
what we will look at today. As far as ancient building systems are concerned, we examined
this concept of the thrust line.
So, in most traditional constructions it is thick walls, thick peripheral walls that actually
provided the resistance, even to lateral forces. Under gravity, yes, you have massive
cross-sections, but the massiveness of the cross section becomes clearer, once you
understand that this is what is actually providing lateral resistance as well, ok.
And in many cases if the lateral thrust is insufficient, walls were also buttressed. So, you
will have buttresses at regular intervals. This is a way in which the geometry is altered to
take care of lateral forces coming on to a system. Typically, if you look at ancient
constructions, you will see that the plans have open floor spaces, massive peripheral walls
and in the interior, you might have columns and these maybe timber columns, timber
posts, stone columns that are additionally present to support the floor.
Now, these do not really provide any lateral support like we would expect in a moment
resisting frame in steel or reinforced concrete. These are primarily to support the roof and
are present in the interior and are connected in some way, probably just resting onto the
peripheral walls, but they do not provide any lateral restraint. So, the work of providing
lateral restraint to such constructions again comes back to these massive peripheral walls.
So, that is how they were conceived and if you have long buildings, if you have long
buildings, of course, the end walls which are referred to as the return walls in the
orthogonal direction, these need not necessarily provide lateral resistance for the entire
length of the long walls. They may be able to provide resistance at the ends, but as you
come towards the mid span of the long walls, you do not have any effect of restraint in the
lateral direction by these end walls. So, you really have very poor out of plane response of
long walls.
So, that is how typically these open floor traditional constructions were conceived and
therefore, the wall had to actually, I mean the system actually had to depend on the
resistance that the massive peripheral wall will provide and the thrust line is an explanation
that you can use to understand how these systems actually performed.
22
Now, if we were to examine modern constructions in this context of response to lateral

forces. The big difference is that we are not looking at massive walls, we are looking at
walls that are becoming more and more slender and we have other systems that take care of
the lateral resistance, that this lateral resistance that the building is required to provide.
So, this is the overturning effect that lateral forces subject a structure to, is contracted by
walls both facing the lateral force, right, the walls that are perpendicular to the force which
are what we refer to as out of plane walls and walls which are parallel to the direction of
the lateral force wind force or the earthquake force. So, you have, you have both working
together ,you have the in-plane walls and the out of plane walls now working together in
this sort of a system
Therefore immediately, the focus is on connections, because you need the in-plane walls
and out of plane walls to work together, now that is something that we examined earlier
and if these connections are poor, the tendency is for these walls to act independently and
which is undesirable. If you have good connections in positive connections wall to wall
connections and wall to floor or wall to roof connections, then you get integral action. So,
the dependence now is on both cross walls and the wall that is face loaded or out of plane.
So, it is a combination of these two that is going to be resisting the lateral forces.
That is how the modern constructions are conceived today and the direct impact of this is
that, the peripheral walls or the main load bearing walls, do not have to be massive in cross
23
section, you can start optimizing the cross sections and that is why you get higher
slenderness ratios in modern constructions, there is economy in material that is generated
as an effect, ok.
So, if you were to look at single storied, modern single storied load bearing buildings, how
do they, how are they conceived and how is the load resistance-both gravity and lateral
load in such constructions. So, we really talking of walls which are freestanding walls, free
standing simply because you could have a situation where you have a rigid diaphragm
which is sitting on the top as the roof, but you could also have a situation where you do not
have a heavy rigid diaphragm that is the roof system itself.
The lateral stability is achieved through the end walls. So, you have the end walls which
provide lateral resistance to the long walls and you have enough number of cross walls. So,
a combination of the cross walls, also referred to as bracing walls because there bracing
against the lateral forces and the end walls provide the required lateral resistance. But you
also have an entire network of connecting elements which are the bond beams and the
lintel beams.
So, at the lintel level you will have connections between all the walls and at the floor level,
at the roof or the floor level, you again have these beams which are referred to as bond
beams simply because they are trying to bond the orthogonal walls together, different
elements of the structure are kept together using this sort of a, this sort of an element.
24
The roof diaphragm, whatever be the roof diaphragm, it could be a steel truss roof, it could
be a reinforced concrete floor system, whatever be the roof diaphragm; the roof diaphragm
also has a role to play as long as there is well connected to the walls as well. So, in this
scenario, when the roof diaphragm starts playing a significant role in the integral action of
the masonry building, the stiffness of the diaphragm, what we are referring to is the
in-plane stiffness of the diaphragm matters and matter significantly.
So, you have the lateral stability in such systems coming from one the end walls and the
bracing; bracing walls or the cross walls; you also have these continuous beams, these
bond beams that will run through the entire construction. So, if you actually look at, that
would be the bond beam which is running at the lintel level and as you see, it is running
throughout all the load bearing walls, that is the important thing.
So, a single lintel right, it is at the lintel levels. So, a single lintel which we typically
provide above an opening, will not qualify as a bond beam, will not qualify as something
that is actually connecting all the orthogonal walls together. So, we are really talking of a
tensile resisting element that is continuous and holding all the walls together, that is the
second element which is the bond and the lintel beam, it could be at the lintel level, it could
be at the, it is provided at the plinth level, the lintel level, the roof level and if you have
floor above, you also provide at the sill level.
So, you have this which is actually contributing to the lateral stability of the system and
finally, the roof diaphragm and this room diaphragm, if it has to significantly contribute to
lateral load resistance in the structure, then the in-plane stiffness or what we refer to as
diaphragm action becomes important.
How stiff is it in-plane, if it is flexible in its plane, then due to lateral action there will be
in-plane deformations in the diaphragm, but if it is rigid in-plane, when there is lateral
action there would not be any relative displacements in the diaphragm. So, diaphragm has
a very important role to play, particularly the stiffness of the diaphragm and its
connections with the rest of the walls. So, your question is about the, in which direction we
are talking about in terms of the in-plane stiffness. So, this is the horizontal plane. So, let
us say you have a reinforced concrete diaphragm, reinforced concrete slab, right.
This reinforced concrete slab, we are interested in what is its in plane stiffness, what is its
in-plane deformability. If you have let us say a timber thrust roof or a steel thrust roof, but
25
if these are not braced against in-plane deformations, you will have a flexible system, you
will have a very flexible system because there are deformations in the plane.
If the deformations in-plane are reduced, curtailed, you get a rigid diaphragm, that is the
definition of a rigid diaphragm and the classification of rigid diaphragm versus a flexible
diaphragm is primarily on the basis of how much relative displacement do you get within
the diaphragm itself in the in-plane direction, in its plane, right, ok. So, this is what is the
crux of a lateral load resisting, single storied structure in masonry, in load bearing
masonry.
If we were to examine multistoried load bearing masonry constructions and when we say
load bearing we are talking of all walls being load bearing walls. Rarely you would have
walls which are meant to be partition walls, but the point is, if a wall is actually running
from a floor to the roof, it is going to be part of the load resisting system. So, if you have
partition walls in load bearing construction, typically this partition walls are not taken to
full height, unlike in a, in a frame system, you can still have rather slender partition wall or
an infill panel.
So, in a load bearing multistoried masonry building, it is the series of orthogonal walls, end
walls, long walls, and cross walls together which form the network that is going to provide
the lateral load resistance along with the floor diaphragms and the roof diaphragms.
26
Of course, because gravity forces are going to be higher at the base at the lower stories
versus the upper stories, you are going to have thick walls at the lower stories, it will
reduce, it will taper as it goes up, the downside is often if it is a if several stories you would
have a lower carpet area on the ground story, higher carpet area on the upper stories and
heavy foundations depending on the number of stories such structures go to. So, you
basically have if you look at one system if you look at one system constituting of the main
wall and the cross wall.
This is the system which works as shear walls in the direction parallel to the lateral forces
and in the direction perpendicular to the lateral forces acts as an out of plane wall. Of
course, in such constructions it is today inconceivable that we would be providing flexible
diaphragms, we use reinforced concrete quite a lot and in such constructions typically you
have reinforced concrete a floor slabs and roof slabs and they constitute what is referred to
as diaphragm and provide diaphragm action.
So, it is this system of walls perpendicular and walls parallel to the direction of lateral
action as shear walls and the floor diaphragm, plus a system of bond beams you also have
the plinth beam, the lintel beam and roof beams which are actually working together for
integral action of the structure in the event of lateral forces.
You have another category of systems where masonry is used, it is not load bearing, it is
meant as partitions and these are typically within moment resisting frames. So, this is
really not load bearing masonry, in the stricter sense, these infill panels are typically used
within reinforced concrete moment resisting frames or steel moment resisting frames and
are conceived as functional partitions, these are not conceived the structural elements in
the first place.
However, since brick masonry wall panels are stiff in the in-plane direction, these tend to
behave as shear walls themselves once they start interacting with the framing elements.
So, when we have the framing elements which are the beams and columns and you have
the partition walls, there is very rarely a gap that is designed and left between these, the
panel and the frame. When there is lateral action, due to deformation of the frame, you will
have interaction between the panel, the infill panel which is conceived as a non structural
element and the moment resisting frame which is conceived as the lateral load resisting
element.
27
And this interaction can become problematic and in the section on infill panel, we will
look at what is the relevance of this interaction and how do you design against the
undesirable effects of this sort of a, this sort of an interaction. So, the frame-infill
interaction is an area that definitely receives enough research focus today, ok.
So, with that you now should have an understanding of what constitutes global behavior,
desirable global behavior in a load bearing masonry building. At this stage, I think it is the
right time to examine classification of masonry, right from its constituents all the way to
different types of systems you have in masonry.
So, to start examining units, of course, masonry units, we have seen some historical
constructions in the previous lecture, has been around for millennia. So, you I would rather
classify these as ancient masonry units, construction units and modern masonry
construction units in the first place. So, random rubble blocks is something that is been
around for a very long time, is also used today, we still use random rubble constructions
typically for foundations, for retaining structures; however, there are issues with the
integrity of random rubble construction which can be overcome with specific elements of
features like through stones and so on.
So, random rubble construction is a type of construction where the unit that we are
referring to, is a random block It is not sized, it is not shaped and it is often only the outer
surface is worked on. So, that we have a cut surface on the exterior, but along the interior,
28
no one is really concerned what is the shape of this sort of a construction. The downside
would be that you would have large voids to be filled up with mortar or smaller units and
there is an informality to the entire construction using random rubble blocks.
If you are looking at building stone formerly being used for construction, you will have to
cut this, they are square cut or rectangular in shape of sizes that can be handled for
transportation at the labor at the site of labor and they may be semi dressed or heavily
dressed stones, particularly the outer surfaces. So, they could be rough hewn to give the
finish that stone would have or even cut and well dressed to give an artificial finish to stone
as well.
Sun dried bricks were the first category of units, these where modular, that is the units had
a proportion between the length, the width and the thickness of the units. Modularity is
clearly seen in several ancient civilizations; however, they were nearly sun-dried. So, it
was mud combined with materials, but sun-dried.
The advent of fired-clay bricks was after the prevalence of sun-dried bricks for a, for a
rather long time, fired-clay bricks are something that we use to date, of course, there is a
problem with fired-clay bricks from an environmental perspective. We use topsoil, which
is environmentally, degradation in the environment which is today not acceptable and they
are fired at very high temperatures which means that the embodied energy in
manufacturing these bricks is rather high.
So, environmentally speaking, fired-clay bricks, though you see them today we are on a
tract, where over the years we will see lesser and lesser of fired-clay bricks, we might be
using fired-clay bricks only for repair works in existing buildings, but not necessarily
construct new buildings with fired-clay bricks.
But fired-clay bricks can be categorized into two, into two types-wire cut bricks, which are
basically extruded, the mould is the stiff clay after it is kneaded, is extruded and they are
cut. So, you get very stable geometrical configurations; however, you will not have the
frog, which is the depression that is typically present on the top surface which helps in
creating an interlocking layer along with the mortar construction.
So, wire cut bricks have the downside of not having the interlocking created by the
embossed depression at the top of the unit itself. This is in contrast to the moulded bricks,
29
the moulded bricks are typically poorer in quality, both in terms of strength and durability
in comparison to wire cut bricks; however, you can, in the moulding process itself create
the frog which is something that provides good interlocking.
There is also difference between the wire cut bricks and the moulded bricks in terms of
water absorption, typically the moulded bricks absorb much more water in the order of 10
to 15 to even 20 percent by its weight whereas, the wire cut bricks typically absorb far
lesser and this can create problems in terms of the adhesion with the mortar and that
something we will examine, when we start looking at masonry strength and parameters
that affect the masonry strength.
A point that I want to make at this juncture is, we are also we have also been examining
some traditional masonry construction types; however, there are lot of constructions called
earth constructions which is completely out of earth- adobe constructions, wattle and daub
constructions, where it is earth and structural timber, that is that is used.
These do not qualify as masonry constructions, the word ‘masonry’, I think it is important
to appreciate the fact that we are talking of units that are built up to create structural
component and the structural system. So, masonry, though masonry uses mud blocks,
these are again blocks that are put together to create a wall, but earth constructions would
not qualify under the classification of masonry structures.
30
Continuing with masonry units, but modern masonry units, you have cement concrete
blocks being extensively used today, you can, you can control, design strengths that you
require, that uniformity in strengths you do not get with fired-clay bricks, you should be
able to achieve it, but there is a physical challenge in achieving uniformity. The cement
concrete blocks can give you that if the design I,s well if the mix is well-designed and
quality control in the execution phase is there.
We use hollow concrete blocks as well and hollow concrete blocks are extremely useful
when you want to reinforce masonry or when you want to reinforce masonry either in the
form of walls or in the form of lintel beams, floors, reinforced floors or beams themselves.
So, hollow concrete blocks are again a category that is extensively used today, both for
non-structural applications like the partition walls and for structural applications. So, if
someone is procuring hollow blocks, you should be sure what it is been made for, because
if it is manufactured for non-structural purposes, the strength of these blocks will be much
lower whereas, if it is manufactured for structural purposes you will have a compressive
strength of the order of 7 MPa or higher, typically for hollow concrete blocks used for
structural purposes.
You have another category called the aerated autoclaved blocks, AAC concrete blocks,
now these are large sized blocks, but they are or they are cured by an autoclaving process
in the autoclave and this imparts a certain lightness to the entire block because fine pores
are generated because of the process of curing and these are normally used for
non-structural purposes, these are used for infill walls, partition walls and infill walls. Fly
ash bricks are popular, in fact, there is a ministry of environmental and, environment and
forest regulation, issued in India that if you are constructing a building within hundred
kilometer radius of a thermal plant, you have to use fly ash bricks instead of fired-clay
bricks for construction. So, vast majority of the expansions that have happened in IIT
Madras have consciously used fly ash bricks in the hostels and in all other construction.
So, fly ash units are available, again you have to be careful about whether it is for
non-structural use or structural use, because achieving strength using in fly ash units is
again challenging, unless fly ash is a replacement for cement concrete itself. So, you could
do a replacement in the cement concrete with some amount of fly ash to gain strength, but
if it is significantly fly ash, strength is compromised.
31
As far as fired clay units are concerned, you have what are referred to as perforated clay
units and this perforated clay units, you see those perforations. So, if you look at the
percentage of openings in this sort of a block versus a hollow block, the percentage of
openings of the order of 25 to 30 percent, that is the difference between a hollow block and
a perforated block.
These perforations are useful either for providing thermal insulation or for providing
reinforcements, but these are perforations and they should not be confused with hollow
block constructions. Both hollow clay brick, fired-clay brick and perforated fired-clay
brick can be useful structural purposes, again the designation has to be checked whether it
is structural or non-structural. The hollow fired-clay blocks are preferred as reinforced
masonry construction units.
Mortar of course, this is again big spectrum, we have people who works specifically only
on mortars in understanding their strength and durability characteristics. Mud mortar was
predominant in the construction in the historic constructions, this is of composition that
can vary from place to place and constituents that can vary from place to place. So, this is
very non-uniform across the world and depends on traditional knowledge that region had
in terms of the additives in the mortar itself.
The other variety is lime, mortar that is made with lime and this is of course, very minimal
in use today all the lime goes to the cement industry, I am sure you will know clinker forms
32
very important proportion of the cement manufacturing process and we do not use lime
today for construction of new buildings.
Also because of the challenge of longer setting and hardening times that lime mortar
requires as against cement which is a fast setting, fast hardening material. So, lime mortar
most of your existing buildings, if you are going to be doing in assessment, you should
know that might have been made with mud mortar or lime mortar or a combination of the
two in many cases, where the mud acts as a pozzolanic additive to the mortar itself.
Cement mortar is what we use in a, in a very standard form today for masonry
constructions. We will touch upon an important aspect that is something that we have to
face today and that is the non-availability of, non-availability of weak cement. May sound
like a paradox, why would you need weak cement?
Few decades ago, we had 33 grade cement, then we moved on to 43 grade, today you
might only get 53 grade cement and the problem is the mortar that you make out of it, it
could be a one in three mortar, one in four mortar proportion, one in five, one in six, but the
big challenge that we have today is keeping the mortar strength lower than the unit
strength, because most often in the market you get units which are of strength of the order
of 5 MPa to about 15-20 MPa.
Chances are that your mortar may be stronger than the unit itself and this combination of
strong mortar-weak unit can be a problem in the behavior under gravity itself and under
lateral forces. So, that is something we will examine in our study on strength that the
masonry assembly level itself due to this combination of weak mortar, strong mortar-weak
unit and vice versa.
33
I have classified this under mortars, but we have to accept the fact that some constructions
would not use mortar at all, they referred to as dry stack constructions, they do not happen
in brick masonry constructions. They happen only in stone masonry constructions and
where the informality in terms of the sizes of the units, gives you the possibility of
wedging all gaps and either wedging all gaps or having stone blocks cut so well that you
can place them one over the other and have a paper thin joint that is formed because in any
way you cannot allow moisture to just percolate through such walls. So, if it is a, if it is a
structure that is being used. So, dry stack construction is basically mortarless construction.
Today we also have high strength mortars and high strength mortars made primarily
because you might have to introduce reinforcement in the bed joints and you need
corrosion protection for the reinforcement. So, if you were to go by the standard thinking
of the need to provide cover concrete for the reinforcement, you will have mortar
thicknesses which are comparable to unit thicknesses. This will compromise the strength
of the masonry that something that we will be examining that thicker the mortar joint low
will be the strength of the masonry assembly.
So, to achieve good strength of masonry, one of the first things that need to be done is to
minimize the thickness of joints and in this case, you have the twin problem of having to
put steel reinforcement in the joint and to protect it from moisture. So, entire family of
thin, ultra thin strong mortars are being prepared today particularly to take care of this twin
34
requirement of keeping joints thin but giving adequate protection to the steel
reinforcement.
If I now move on from course, from units, masonry units and mortar which is the
constituents to assembly, assemblage of masonry. Uncoursed masonry has been used in
many of the existing masonry constructions. Random rubble construction is one of the
uncoursed masonry constructions wall constructions where both in elevation and in cross
section you would not see a pattern, it is totally free of regular courses and as I said, has a
certain randomness to the entire construction.
It is a challenging typology, strictly speaking, when you have significant lateral forces. As
I said, random rubble masonry construction, where the joints are wedged with smaller
units you can see the small units that are sitting here, the small pieces that are sitting here
they have been wedged in between, these constructions require, possibly required a lot of
patience to make them.
But the wedging actually provides stability to the entire wall and this is another popular
historical construction typology itself and then of course, even in dry stack constructions
you will see how there is, it is typically free of courses because the dry stacking itself with
different sized blocks can create interlocking.
35
You do not have mortar to hold with all together. So, you can see a unit like that or unit like
this is actually providing interlocking in the, in the whole system. So, it is, it is like a
jigsaw puzzle and it is held together.
Your question was whether random rubble construction or random rubble with the wedge
smaller stones is with or without, with or without mortar. You get all varieties, you get all
varieties, strictly speaking, but you could have a random rubble construction mortar less
with wedging, you could get it also with mortar.
If you come to modern constructions the whole concept of coursed masonry and having a
pattern is something that you would have definitely learnt in your earlier classes in
materials. But the most important aspect is, to be able to create a vertical stagger in the
masonry joints and this vertical stagger is essential for interlocking right.
So, that is really what necessitated different bond patterns. You are aware of several bonds
the Flemish bond, the English bond and so on, even the Rat-trap bond which allows for
cavity into which you could put reinforcement or leave it as a void, is a category which
tries to ensure that the vertical stagger is achieved.
So, if we actually look at any of these, the most important aspect that you will notice is this
is zigzag stagger that is achieved, which is providing additional shear interfaces, providing
36
resistance for lateral action. So, the whole idea of going in for bond patterns is to be able to
create vertical stagger across the joints.
You have single-leaf constructions, what we saw earlier in terms of the Flemish bond and
the English bond, are single-leaf constructions. Now, these single-leaf constructions can
be with or without facing stones and when you have facing stones also referred to as
veneering, it is a veneer, it is a thin, it is thinner than the load bearing construction, the load
bearing cross section.
The veneer is really not the is not a load bearing part, it is only a decorative element. You
could have different types of veneering, you could have veneer fixed by an adhesive, often
you will have, if you want a stone finish you will have stone slabs which are stuck with
high strength adhesive on to the brick masonry wall.
But sometimes, if the veneer is heavy if the veneer starts becoming heavy or the veneer is
significantly wide in cross section and adhesive might not be sufficient it actually can
become a falling hazard if it is a, if a building is tall, it can actually fall and kill people. So,
it is a, it is a, it is an important problem. So, you have what is call tied veneering, you will
have metal ties that run along the length and along the height at regular intervals, which
you design and estimate how many ties are required per unit length of construction itself.
37
And of course, in cases where you have an interior wood finish, you might have a, what is
called an entire frame that is attached, a frame on to which the brick work is attached for a
brick finish on the exterior or vice versa if you have a timber work on the interior on a load
bearing brick masonry wall, you would have a timber frame inside on to which timber
sheathing or timber finish is provided.
So, you would, you can have a similar tied veneering, but you have studs now which are
then a part of the member that transfers load between, basically holds the veneer on to the
load bearing element.
While examining all these typologies, I think it is important to point out two typologies
that you will come across in existing buildings. We do not design them like this today there
is a there is a serious problem as far as lateral load resistance of these construction are
concerned, you see two-leaf constructions and multi-leaf constructions. These two-leaf
constructions, you can also conceive them as two leaves with an air cavity in between
created for insulation, but two-leaf is also an interpretation from another perspective which
will see in a moment.
Now, if you have random rubble construction right, if you have random rubble
construction and the elevation looks something like that- you have the front surface of
those blocks that are dressed, well dressed, cut and dressed, but if you were to look at the
cross section, if you look at the plan at any level, you do not see a regularity in the cross
38
section and here, this is what is being referred to as the two-leaf masonry, because I can
actually see that these two can separate.
When there is heavy gravity forces themselves or under lateral shaking, these not intended
as two leaves, but can become two leaves is a problem, that is why today when random
rubble masonry construction is being adopted for foundations or any structural use there is
a requirement that through stones be given that you have to have a bond stone or a through
stone across the cross section, across the entire thickness of the cross section.
So, this is a typology that can throw up a problem, right, but is very prevalent in existing
masonry constructions. The problem is when you have this sort of a discontinuity under
lateral actions or even under gravity over time, you can have bulging of one leaf of the wall
and vulnerability to collapse particularly when there is even slight shaking, ground
shaking.
Now, the problem is if you were to look at the cross section of the masonry and the cross
section of the masonry, the load bearing wall you will appreciate that in the cross section
you must have the stagger of the joints. If the stagger of the joints is not available the
resistance to splitting this into a two-leaf system is far easier in this case, in this particular
case, as against a case which has coursing which ensures stagger.
So, the texture when we say, when we talk of texture, the word ‘texture’ here, the word
texture here is basically the quality of the geometry of joints. How is the, how are the joints
laid out, how are the joints formed, are you thinking about how these joints are or are you
not thinking about how these joints are. So, that determines what is the texture of the
masonry and this actually determines the path of least resistance or the path of crack
propagation and loss of integrity in cross sections in masonry.
The other animal to be considering is what is referred to as multi-leaf construction and this
is typically three leaf construction where this particular image that you see here referred to
as a sack wall is a typology which is used in massive masonry constructions, you can look
at fort walls, you can look at temple gopura, the entrance towers most of them all the
historical massive historical constructions are constructed like this using the concept of a
sack wall, where the outer two leaves, the outer two leaves are thin, they would be about
one-tenth of the cross section or more, slightly more.
39
They are raised to a certain height, poorer material- random rubble, broken bricks
everything under the sun, the idea was to have a larger cross section, but it was
uneconomical to use the same material throughout the entire cross section, they would
have exterior and interior facing with good quality material like marble or any other good
material granite or whatever, whereas, the inner core is infilled with poor material.
So, this acts as, when you constructed it of course, acts as one cross sections, but there is a
propensity to separation of these layers unless interlocking has been provided or unless
some through stones have actually been provided.
But if it is a very massive wall cross section, through stones cannot be provided you might
not get so many long blocks. In such situations, the interlocking might help where the
courses of the exterior leaf actually have zigzag arrangement, are coursed to have a zigzag
arrangement, the picture that you see on the right is a temple precinct wall, an outer temple
precinct wall constructed during the Chola period. So, we are talking about at least a
thousand years ago, you can actually see that is that is stone masonry, that is stone
masonry. So, that is the outer two leaves and in between you see all sorts of lime and
broken aggregate and broken bricks, broken pieces of stone and so on.
So, three leaf masonry the problem is, this can be examined as a system that is subjected to
even under gravity forces, different deformability across the cross section. So, if you take
this cross section, the outer leaves are made out of stronger stiffer material, yes you would
agree with me, like stone core stone whereas, the inner core is made out of softer material
because you got lot of mortar and you got probably mud and everything that you can think
of. So, the stiffness and strength of the core is far lesser than the stiffness and strength of
the outer leaves.
When this is subjected to gravity forces this is like an indeterminate problem where the
inner core because of lower stiffness is subjected to lower stresses in comparison to the
outer leaves which are subjected to higher stresses because of higher stiffness models of
elasticity. So, you have non-uniform loading that will come on to such cross sections and
the problem is the inner core over time deteriorates and load may finally, be carried only
by the exterior leaves.
So, if the exterior leaves are carrying all the load that the entire cross section was originally
meant to carry, you have a slender wall system that is carrying very heavy compressive
40
forces you can have sudden brittle failures in such systems. So, this is a typology to be
considered carefully.
In terms of different structural components of course, masonry load bearing walls is a first
element that you should be aware of.
You also have columns and pilasters; the difference between columns and pilasters is the
column is a single freestanding element of course, connected to the rest of the structural
system. A pilaster is where you have a thickening of the wall like a small buttress and is
41
basically meant to provide a provide additional lateral resistance to a wall lateral stiffness
to a wall.
So, columns and pilasters load bearing columns and pilasters are the other elements that
you should be aware of as part of the load bearing system.
Beams and lintels in masonry can be constructed, but since beams and lintels are going to
be dominated by flexure you have tension in them so you cannot construct them if they are
flat, you cannot construct them using unreinforced masonry you have to reinforce them.
So, when you reinforce them there either solid with reinforcement in the bed joints or in
cavities between the masonry or in a pocket that is created by leading a void or hollow
units are used you can see that units which have aligned in such a way that you get a
continuity you can grout and place reinforcements is available.
You can also look at situations where U shaped blocks are used, U shaped blocks are used
because then you can place reinforcement and grout the reinforcement, I mean grout the
location of the reinforcement give protection to the reinforcement that would be the beams
and lintels.
42
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 01
Lecture - 03
Introductory - Part - III
Floor diaphragms, brick floors, various configurations of brick floors are available. As
existing masonry structures, you would be able to see brick floors which are composite,
primarily made of brick masonry, but has a behavior that, to an extent is analogous to the
systems that we are aware of or the system that we are familiar within the current context
of modern constructions. Particularly, reinforced masonry, reinforced brick or reinforced
concrete floors themselves.
So, this first category of brick floors that I am looking at, is referred to as, quite
popularly as the Madras terrace floor. This is something that was predominant, prevalent
in the Madras presidency and that is why it gets the name the Madras terrace floor slab.
So, if you look at the configuration of the madras terrace floor slab, it is constituted by
closely spaced rafters. There are timber rafters and these timber rafters are the main
supporting system of the brick floor.
43
These rafters may be rolled steel joists in some situations and if you have larger spans
that have to be spanned with the brick floor, you would actually have rolled steel joists in
one direction and in the orthogonal direction, timber rafters or smaller steel sections. So,
the main supporting system is a tension resisting system, tension resisting material. The
timber being good in tension, if it is going to be steel, that also is a material that is good
in resisting tension.
The compression strength providing element to the cross section is the brick layer that is
supported by these joists. So, these are closely spaced rafters that you would normally
see. The brick laying is typically brick on edge. The edge of the brick is what is sitting
on the plane on which the floor is being constructed and this layer of bricks, the brick
masonry layer is topped by concrete, it could be lime concrete, it would be even cement
concrete.
Basically, we refer to this as brick jelly lime concrete, where broken pieces of bricks are
used as brickbats and in lime mortar you get a composition called Brick Jelly Lime
Concrete referred to as BJLC, typically in specifications brick jelly lime concrete is the
topping layer. And, then if it is the last floor, you would have the weathering coat and
probably tiles or if it is an interior floor you would have some tiles which are meant for
tiling, finishing the floor itself.
Interestingly, this is a system that is of course, not very prevalent today, but a few
decades ago it still had constructions been made using this sort of a system. If you
examine the system, the composite system you will appreciate that the cross section is
made up of the tensile resisting element at the bottom and the compression resisting
element of the top.
So, if you look at regular bending, sagging moments on the cross section, it is very
similar to what a reinforce concrete cross section would be. So, you have actually an IS
code that details the construction of these floors called Madras terrace type floor
construction and you must pay attention to the way the brick is laid on edge. And the
way it is constructed, it is a unique process in which this floor is constructed.
Once the timber rafters are placed, the brick on edge is laid diagonally, in a diagonal
fashion starting from one corner of the room that is been spanned across to the other end
and this is typically carried out without the use of any props or scaffolding to hold up the
44
floor system. The way it is executed is layer; the first layer of brick is placed, there is
mortar that is applied to the larger surface, because a brick is placed on edge and the next
brick is placed within a few minutes. And, in the matter of a minute, it will develop the
bond with the mortar, and that bond is sufficient to hold it in place, it does not require a
prop, it does not require any additional support system.
So, this construction proceeds without any support system and the diagonal alignment is
also to make use of the link that you would get between, the maximum link that you
would get between two rafters or the edge of the wall itself. So, this is a unique system
where it is a pleasure to see the person who actually making this sort of a roof. It depends
a lot on the skill of the workmen who is executing this sort of a floor. It is useful to
understand the existence of such a system, because in many existing structures, masonry
existing structures, if you are intervening you might encounter this sort of a floor system.
Another brick floor system that is again not a system that is prevalent today but can be
found very well distributed in many colonial buildings across the country is referred to as
a jack arch roof system. And in a jack arch roof system, in a way analogous to the
previous typology that you have seen, you have a tension resisting part of the
composition and you have a compression resisting part of the composition. In this
particular case what is done is, you have a brick arch which is what you see exposed
45
here, the plaster layer has fallen off and so you are able to see the brick construction and
this is in the form of an arch, that spans between the two support that you see.
The supports are typically in steel, rolled steel joists are used. The arch is of low rise, it is
not a typical semicircular or segmental arch, it is a very low rise arch or a segmental arch
with a very large span to rise ratio and then over this entire composition you have
concrete layer as a topping and then finished of depending on whether it is an internal
floor or the roof itself. Again, there is an IS code that regulates the way this is
constructed, a code of practice for the jack arch construction. And you can actually see
how the arch itself is sitting between the rolled steel joist.
So, you have the I section here, what you see here is an I section. The I section spans
across the room and then the I section itself is used for seating the arch and construction
of the arch. What is of a challenge in the sort of a construction is protection of the steel
elements from corrosion, and hence you can see that the rolled steel joist here in cross
section is itself encased in concrete, but often the base flange is not encased.
You would find some situations where that is encased, but very often it is not encased
and you can actually see the bottom flange exposed and often corroding, in various
stages of corrosion, primarily because brick being rather porous can hold moisture and
here you have steel rolled steel joist which needs to be protected against corrosion.
So, this is a rather challenging, it is a good flooring system; however, from a

rehabilitation point of view it is a very challenging floor system. So, this is something
that is prevalent in Madras, in Chennai, you can go around and see this sort of a
construction in several colonial buildings across the length and breadth of the country
itself. So, that is the second variety of brick flooring that you can see commonly.
46
Of course, in the modern context we are more used to reinforced concrete floors. And
this reinforced concrete floors in brick masonry buildings is a very common structural
typology. The reinforced concrete floors act as rigid diaphragms and is a very common
and useful typology in terms of even the lateral load resistance of a masonry building.
The diaphragm being rigid in plane has a positive role to play in the lateral load
resistance of a masonry building. It acts as an element that ties the entire structure
together if provided with bond beams along with the reinforced concrete slab; however,
reinforced brick slabs are also not uncommon. In fact, reinforced brick slabs what you
see in the slide here, this is reproduced from an early manual by the PWD and this is a
detailed report which is on reinforced brickwork, reinforced brickwork and in this case,
we are talking of solid units. We are not talking of hollow brick work, hollow block
construction, but solid brick work.
Reinforced brick work for beams and reinforced brick work for slabs was something that
was in use in the early 1900s, in this country in the Indian subcontinent and gained
prominence primarily after poor performance of masonry buildings in some devastating
earthquakes across the subcontinent. This gained prevalence as method for reinforcing
walls in places like Quetta in Balochistan, where even the Quetta bond, which is a wall
construction system with a void created to hold the masonry, is a development from the
zone after earthquake effects on masonry structures.
47
So, if you look at the detail here, you actually have brick laid with reinforcement that is
running between the brick work and this reinforced brick slab construction is something
that is found in buildings that are early 1900 buildings in the country. But today this is
again a typology that has a significant problem from corrosion perspective. Once the
steel that is present in the brick slab starts corroding, the brick work starts spalling.
Unlike concrete that spalls and you can repair concrete in a reinforced concrete slab that
is effected by corrosion, with spalling and other effects on the concrete, repair of a brick
slab is very challenging, because replacement of parts as a patch repair is not something
that is simple. So, in situations of excessive corrosion damage, replacement of the slab is
the only option that you would have. However, considering these difficulties and
considering the fact that you have hollow blocks which are a good solution for reducing
the weight of floor slabs or weight of any construction, Hollow blocks used as a part of a
hybrid reinforced floor system is common.
This is again a typology that is not so prevalent in India yet, but in countries in Europe
and New Zealand and Australia you would have these constructions, and if you actually
examine this picture here, it give, it will give you a very good idea of what a reinforced
brickwork cum concrete slab would entail. If you look at the cross section, you have got
the main resisting elements which are really these joists, these latticed joists, they are
basically reinforced concrete ribs.
They have steel reinforcement, they would run, span across the dimension required and
we supported on walls or be connected to beams in the in the masonry wall or a masonry
wall. These are referred to as lattice joists, because we are actually looking at different
configurations of a steel lattice that is embedded in the concrete.
You have a base tray in which this is seated and that is what holds the lattice and that is
the space that is finally concreted as you can see here. There is in situ concreting to
create these reinforced concrete joists and the spacing of these joists would depend on; of
course, the span and the kind of loads coming onto the floor slab itself.
Between these joists, you actually have hollow clay blocks which are good in
compression. They are hollow. So, the weight is reduced in the slab construction, acting
to give, could shear transfer to the entire system and the compressive strength that is
required for the cross section of the slab in bending itself.
48
Finally, this entire construction is stopped with a concrete screed and forms the
composite cross section that we are talking of. So, this sort of a reinforced brick concrete
slab is something that is becoming prevalent in several modern constructions across the
world.
It also has another advantage that you can actually have precast elements assembled and
the screed concrete alone done in situ that will have all the other elements that are
brought in assembled, they are precast, prefabricated, brought to the site and assembled
and the screed concrete alone is the one that is executed at the site.
So, this is definitely becoming a popular system for construction. The other advantage is
that when you have these hollow slabs, functionally, they may be used for some ducting
as well. So, you have an interesting structural coum functional solution in the form of
modern brick concrete floors.
So far, we have been looking at the different types of masonry elements. We examined
walls; different types of walls possible. We then examined beams and lentils, and these
are, these have to be reinforced and then different types of brick floors between
traditional and modern reinforced brick floors.
Finally, to look at systems, masonry structural systems and the classification of masonry
based on their structural configuration, we will examine different categories. The first
49
one is unreinforced masonry, where the word unreinforced is something that we are
introducing, because we have started looking at reinforced masonry. Earlier this would
just be referred to as ordinary masonry, because it is without reinforcement. The
unreinforced masonry as we have seen earlier when we were examining the nature of
masonry, it relies purely on the strength of masonry in compression, even in tension, in
flexural tension.
So, if bed joint mortar has a finite, but small flexural tensile strength, it depends on the
flexural tensile strength that the masonry will have to resist a combination of lateral and
gravity forces. Similarly, it will depend on the unreinforced masonry wall to resists the
shear forces. So, it is the wall, the strength of the masonry that is actually taking care of
lateral, of lateral cum gravity or gravity loads alone. We have examined the thrust line as
an understanding of how the resistance of a cross section and the component develops.
From that perspective, if you actually look at unreinforced masonry walls, the thickness
of the wall is an important aspect that cannot be overlooked and if examined why walls
have to be of a certain thickness, this is to ensure that there is no tension, net tension in
the cross section; however, we tend to optimize, we tend to optimize these cross sections
if you are building unreinforced masonry constructions.
Today we might want to look at thinner walls, but the fact remains that if the resultant of
the combination of loads crosses the middle third, then you will get cracking in the cross
section. You will get tension in the cross section and if the material is of poor tensile
strength then you will get cracking. If there is finite flexural tensile strength, the wall
need not necessarily crack the moment you have tension.
But definitely, the thickness of the wall matters and slenderness ratios are stipulated by
codes to ensure that you do not get into a situation where masonry cracks under
combination lateral loads and gravity forces. So, this is definitely the first category. This
category, because of its notoriously poor performance under earthquakes, has been
almost outlawed in a few countries.
Countries such as New Zealand for example, introduced legislation that required that no
new constructions be executed with unreinforced masonry, because when your land is
highly seismic, you cannot have a construction that has extremely poor performance.
50
If it does not have positive features like good connections between walls that we have
discussed earlier. So, unreinforced masonry is predominant today, in today’s context
mostly in regions where seismicity is low.
However, even if seismicity is low, we cannot classify any zone as being completely
aseismic, meaning, if we do that then in case of an accidental loading even due to a low
magnitude earthquake or low level of ground shaking, these structures can get into the
inelastic range, which is not desirable and hence the direction in which most countries
are moving, is to have codal stipulation that requires minimum earthquake resistance
built in into these constructions.
Even if you are looking at constructing, the structures in the lowest seismic zone in a
country, which is the direction even a country like India has adopted recently. So,
unreinforced masonry as a typology in the future you would find only in existing
buildings and those existing buildings if they are public buildings, it is mandatory that
they are actually retrofitted against earthquakes. So, you should, you should see a
shrinking stock of unreinforced masonry buildings. This as a typology is something that
overtime will reduce.
So, if you cannot construct an unreinforced masonry what options do you have; and
among the options the three options that we will examine, of course, two of them-
reinforced masonry and confined masonry are possibly the most feasible, practical, and
efficient as lateral load resisting load bearing masonry constructions. There is also a third
category which we will examine, which is called Prestressed Masonry. However, that is
not a very successful typology due to issues that we will examine in a moment; however,
is a concept that works rather well for existing masonry structures.
51
So, the second category is reinforced masonry and when you look at reinforced masonry
it is, it is actually paradoxical that structural system like reinforced masonry was
developed partly in India as well. And it is only in 2016 when the national building code
introduced a section on reinforced masonry, that we formally adopted this as a structural
system, almost a 100 years later. So, in the previous slides when I showed you the PWD
technical note on reinforced brick masonry that was 19 late 1910s 1920s, but it is only in
2016 that we have formally introduce reinforced masonry into our codes as a structural
design solution.
However, this has been a prevalent typology in a several countries which are seismically
very active. United States, California, California district, Japan as you know, reinforced
masonry and New Zealand, reinforced masonry is a highly a prevalent typology for
construction of low to mid rise constructions. So, residential buildings, small office
complexes and commercial complexes, all small scale in comparison to moment resisting
frames like steel and concrete moment resistant flames.
So, you need to reinforce the masonry and so there is a certain difficulty if you are going
to be working with solid blocks. So, the use of hollow block construction is conducive to
the need to reinforce masonry, you basically have to be placing reinforcement in pockets
and you need vertical continuity. So, going back to the discussion on stagger to avoid
vertical joints and the need to have vertical continuity for you to put steel reinforcement,
is something that needs to be examined carefully, because you still should not have
vertical joints, stack bonding with vertical joints is not desirable.
52
But you must have continuous vertical cavities and hence bonds that allow for the
formation of vertical channels into which we can have reinforcement is definitely a
challenge which has to be tackled. So, if you have a reinforced masonry wall subjected to
lateral forces, you have the masonry part of the wall and then you have the reinforcement
sitting within the wall.
This reinforcement starts acting when the brick masonry starts cracking or the masonry
starts cracking right. Now there are different possible mechanisms for cracking under a
combination of gravity and lateral forces and hence depending on the geometrical
configuration, are we looking at walls of an aspect ratio less than 1 or an aspect ratio
larger than 1, masonry walls to resist in-plane shear, would have to be designed with
reinforcement that matches the kind of mechanisms that you want to avoid at ultimate, at
failure. So, shear and tension, flexural tension and shear caused due to a combination of
gravity and lateral forces is what you would need the reinforcement for. This
reinforcement of course, provides additional strength resistance to the wall.
So, strength improves, but more importantly we are concerned about the deformation
capacity. So, the deformation capacity improves, because of the reinforcement you have
distribution of cracks and additional lateral displacement capacity or deformation
capacity that the reinforcement should be able to provide.
So, considering concepts that come from reinforced concrete, distributing the steel is a
good practice. So, you should be able to look at configurations where steel is being
distributed across the masonry walls. So, that distribution of cracking is achievable and if
you distribute cracks you get better deformation capacity, because your steel can then
possibly start yielding as the crack propagation progresses.
So, conceptually the way reinforced masonry systems work, is very similar to how
reinforced concrete systems will work from a design and analysis perspective. So, if you
take a reinforced or if you take a masonry wall that subjected to both gravity forces and
lateral forces, the distribution of resultant compression is non-uniform, you would have
lesser compression on one end of the wall, higher compression on the other, under the
action of lateral forces which actually will be cyclic.
So, initially when the level of lateral loads are low, you will probably have a situation
where the entire wall is still in compression, but this may not be the case. The design
53
loads might themselves take the wall into cracking because of tension. The masonry wall
might have some finite tensile strength and if the case is so, the masonry need not crack.
You have the entire cross section still active for gravity and for lateral forces. This again,
need not be the case with increasing lateral loads you would have cracking in the cross
section and partial sections which will be available to you for equilibrium under gravity
forces.
When you have cracking in a cross section, if the cross section is reinforced, you have
the possibility of using the tensile resistance available from the reinforcement that is
sitting there. So, tension is equilibrated in the cracked portion of the cross section by the
rods that you are provided, the steel reinforcement that you have provided. And
compression by the part of the masonry wall that is in compression.
So, that is how we would approach analysis in design of a cross section. Very similar to
how we would approach the same in reinforced concrete and at ultimate, the stress
distribution would be such that your masonry, the remaining part of the masonry in the
cross section is now reaching its ultimate capacity in compression plastifies and your
steel has yielded.
So, the tensile force that this cross section will equilibrate is equal to the sum of the area
of cross section of all the bars, all the bars should have yielded into the yield strength of
the bars, equilibrated by the compressive strength. Principles that we adopt in analysis of
cross sections, in reinforced concrete are adopted in masonry with a conscious effort to
understand how the masonry block and the grout which is within the masonry block, may
work differently if they are of dissimilar materials.
If you take for example, a hollow clay brick block with concrete grout in the cavity, then
the compression properties of the grout will be different from that of the hollow brick
itself. So, the zone in compression may not necessarily be one single material, could be
two different materials and you might you will also have steel reinforcement there.
Typically, we would provide symmetrical reinforcement. So, this zone in compression

that you see, would actually, in the in the case of a hollow brick, hollow clay brick
construction have the hollow clay brick in compression, the grout in compression and the
steel reinforcement in compression. On the other cracked side, we will actually have only
the steel reinforcement which is resisting. So, the cross section properties will change
54
and you will have to consider the behavior of possibly three materials, in concrete we
consider two materials and we are happy to go ahead with the analysis of the cross
sections. That is the fundamental difference that might arise, other than that all concepts
as far as ultimate strength limit state design is concerned can be adopted for reinforced
masonry.
How do you place this reinforcement, the hollow block construction is not necessarily
the only possibility that you have. There are different configurations different options
available, like you saw the reinforced brick slab, it is also possible to place the
reinforcement in joints.
Of course, if we place reinforcement in joints, the joints will become thicker and
particularly when they are in the bed joints as you see here, if you place reinforcement in
the bed joints, the reinforcement plus the mortar that is required for the joint, is going to
be significant enough in comparison to the height of the brick work layer itself and this is
a problem in terms of achieving good compressive strength of the masonry itself.
So, that is the challenge when you want to place the reinforcement in the joints. You
cannot even reduce the mortar thickness in the joint, simply because you need corrosion
protection for the steel that you are providing and mind you, if it is brick work then you
are looking at a material which is rather porous and has high water absorption as its
characteristic. So, something that absorbs water significantly placed close to steel is
55
definitely not something that you, a situation that you want to create and hence you need
a mortar joint that protects the steel from reinforcement. So, while this is possible, there
are practical difficulties that one has to face are in terms of long term durability of such
constructions. You can construct cavity walls and have the cavity the space in which the
matrix of reinforcement is placed.
The vertical and horizontal reinforcement bars can be placed in the cavity and the cavity
is grouted. So, this is a convenient way of construction. However, in this case the two
leaves which are on either sides of the reinforced cavity have to be held together with use
of metal ties again and these metal ties would actually go into the joints of the brick
masonry or concrete blocks if you are using and these metal ties are again susceptible to
corrosion.
The other possibility is to create pockets, create voids, we saw the example of rat trap
bond, the Quetta bond is another possibility that by bond configuration you create a
vertical cavity, vertically aligned cavity and horizontally aligned cavity; so that you run
horizontal and vertical reinforcement.
Challenge of introducing vertical stagger and being able to get a continuous vertical void
is the basic geometrical challenge that one would have in these typologies of reinforced
masonry and finally, the hollow block construction where, with the combination of
hollow block are as you see here and U shaped blocks you can get the network of
horizontal and vertical reinforcement placed in the walls.
56
Again, when we talk of reinforced masonry it is a combination of both horizontal and

vertical steel reinforcement because you need reinforcement to provide flexural
resistance and provide shear resistance to the reinforced masonry wall. When you look at
a wall subjected to in-plane lateral forces, the vertical steel, what is referred to as a
longitudinal steel for a wall, a shear wall or a flexural wall, actually carries shear by
dowel action.
So, with the formation of a diagonal crack, the steel reinforcement is spanning across
these cracks and the resistance in shear is by the formation of dowel action in the steel
reinforcement. Where as, if you look at the same wall the cracked wall with the presence
of horizontal steel, the horizontal steel is in direct tension, is at different layers actually
resisting the lateral forces by tension. It is established both experimentally and from an
understanding of the behavior of reinforced masonry, that the horizontal steel is the one
that makes the vertical steel work more effectively under the reaction of lateral forces.
Which means if you have a wall that is constructed reinforced only with vertical steel
and a wall which has both vertical steel and horizontal steel, the wall with the horizontal
steel can resist lateral forces almost three times as well as a wall without horizontal steel.
So, the horizontal steel has a very critical role to play in providing the lateral resisting
capacity to the masonry a wall.
57
Confined masonry is the other typology. This is an alternative which has been
developing over the last few decades, 5 to 6 decades, and quite predominant in many
highly seismic developing countries. In fact, large areas of Latin-America have confined
masonry constructions.
Confined masonry today is again a typology that the code has recognized and the 2016
version of the code actually has confined masonry as a structural possibility and is also a
increasing in terms of numbers in our country as a construction typology. So, the
interesting aspect of confined masonry is that, it is really a combination of a load bearing
masonry system and a moment resisting frame. However, the reinforced concrete
elements in this sort of a construction, are really not meant to behave as it would in a
moment resisting frame. These are meant to behave as tension resisting elements as ties i
in the vertical direction and the horizontal direction.
So, the reinforced concrete elements are acting as ties and they are not acting as flexure
resisting elements as in a moment resisting frame. So, that is the fundamental difference
between reinforced concrete moment resisting frame and confined masonry construction
with RC horizontal and vertical ties. Another important aspect is the fact that the
reinforced concrete elements, the vertical reinforced concrete elements do not have a
foundation of their own. The load bearing construction is the masonry construction, that
58
is all, which means the vertical bars, the reinforced concrete vertical elements come and
are embedded in the plinth beam which is the reinforced concrete plinth beam.
So, you do not have, like you would have in moment resisting frame a separate footing
for the columns. You would not have that in a confined masonry construction, that the
masonry load bearing construction has running foundation over which a reinforced
country plinth beam is provided and the vertical RC elements are actually embedded in
the plinth beam itself. So, the vertical load carrying function is by the brick masonry.
The lateral load resistance is also by the brick masonry. However, the RC tie elements
improve the deformation capacity and allow for lateral resistance and good earthquake
performance of these constructions.
In fact, the IIT Gandhinagar campus has almost all the residential buildings, 3 is to 2 and
3 storied residential buildings, hostels and faculty blocks and staff housing, constructed
using confined masonry and we will be examining confined masonry as a typology for
structural design and detailing.
Another way in which you can achieve confinement, here it is referred to as confined
masonry because you intend to provide confinement to the masonry wall. If you do not
provide confinement to the masonry wall it is brittle under the action of lateral forces. It
would not have the deformation capacity for good lateral load resistance. It will crack
and fail with very low ductility.
59
The confining elements confine the masonry wall and provide the deformation capacity,
the confining elements themselves go into tension and that is why we are talking of RC
ties as beams and RC tie columns. Now you can construct confined masonry systems by
having a space designated for the RC tie elements, the beams and the columns. You
could also construct confined masonry systems by creating pockets and embedding
reinforcement in those pockets in the masonry and this. I am touching upon this
typology, because IS 4326, which is the code for earthquake resistant design and
detailing of buildings in India, revised in 2013, actually provides detailing for solid brick
masonry construction with these RC horizontal and vertical tie elements, where what you
really need to do is create pockets by cutting brick, layer by layer, and then constructing
the wall so that the vertical pocket is available, steel is placed and is grouted.
However, this construction is quite challenging because if you look at the drawing; if you
look at the drawing, the shape of the brick that you require is rather difficult to achieve
unless you are going to be manufacturing the brick in that shape. But it is actually
uneconomical to manufacture brick in that shape, numbers will be low and time taken
and the cost for some bricks would be more than the rest of the bricks.
So, it is, it does not make sense to create bricks like that. You can again see that you
have different sizes of bricks that will be required and this creates a lot of difficulty in
the field to actually cut the brick to that size; there are lot of wastage and the
workmanship is also affected due to this sort of a sort of an exercise.
So, you need to cut bricks into half and quarter queen closers for a given coarse to ensure
that the vertical stagger is not there. We use half quarter bricks and that is called the
closer and here if you use his closers, you are actually going to a have to break these
bricks and you also have to break them in the shape that is shown in one of the courses
and the alternate course here.
If you can actually use something like the Rat-trap bond or the Quetta bond, you can
actually can you can create a cavity without having to break these bricks into funny
patterns like the one that you see here. So, that is definitely going to be a challenge. To
make the confinement effective and to ensure that the vertical steel that you are
providing also works well to provide deformation capacity, it is useful to provide bed
joint reinforcement as you see in see in this picture. Here you see that there is bed joint
60
reinforcement in the form of a truss, that is placed and that goes around the vertical steel
itself.
The final typology is Prestressed Masonry and basically in reinforced masonry you
require that the masonry cracks and that is when the reinforcement starts working, but in
prestressed masonry you do not wait for the masonry to crack, you are tensioning the
bars such that you introduce the precompression and the pre compressed masonry works
to counteract lateral forces and gravity forces together. So, the main difference between
reinforced masonry and prestressed masonry is that here you do not have to wait for the
wall to crack for the system to be effective.
So, this is again with the use of hollow blocks, you put in your reinforcement, you put in
the cables and the cables are tensioned to create the prestressed system itself. Beams also
can be created using such a system; however, this particular typology has not taken off
because of several challenges. The fundamental notion here is you have pre-compression
due to the tensioning in the steel.
When you get bending forces due to lateral action you get tension in the cross sections.
But, because you already have a precompressed wall the net tension is no longer present
in the cross section, you have the full section which is in compression.
61
However, there are different challenges, particularly the losses of prestressed because of
the end anchorage, because of creep in masonry, this has become a typology that is not
so efficient owing to the losses that can come into the construction and the effectiveness
of the prestress can be lost.
So, it is a very cumbersome process of construction and then finally, because of these
issues you lose the prestress faster than you would do in reinforced concrete you do not
have a very efficient system. So, as a new construction this is really not taken off, but for
improving the performance of existing systems, the prestressed masonry is a useful
system, ok. I will stop here.
62
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 01
Lecture - 04
Introductory Part - IV
To wrap up the introductory lecture, we should touch up on what are the typical methods
of design that are prevalent as far as structural masonry is concerned. And in that
context, also examine the typical codes that become essential, particularly under the
Indian Standards.
So, as all of you would be aware, working stress method has been the method of design
for several decades and for several systems. Of course, today in our country, reinforced
concrete design and steel design have migrated to limit state methods, but masonry
continues to be operated under the working stress method.
So, it is useful to examine the different design methods; primarily, because different
codes across the world, for the same structural typology might have different approaches
as far as design is concerned. So, if you are comparing the outcomes of the design, which
should be the structural system using different codes, you have to be clear of the
63
philosophy that is adopted as far as the structural design is concerned, from one country
to another.
So, the working stress method of course, assumes that the material continues to behave
in a linear elastic manner within the range of interest as far as the design is concerned,
that is the fundamental assumption of the working stress method, otherwise referred to as
the allowable stresses method itself. So, under the working stress approach, the idea is
that we achieve safety by limiting the stresses that are induced in the material due to the
loads referred to as working loads or the service loads of the structure itself. So, this is
the fundamental concept, that is a limit is put on the stresses that the structural material
should experience under the working loads.
So, we work with a factor of safety that comes from these stresses referred to as the
permissible stresses or the allowable stresses and we keep them significantly below the
material strengths. So, in your steel design courses and concrete design courses it has
become practice not to go back to the working stress method as far as the teaching of the
course is concerned.
Here, this may be a new method of design for few of you and hence it is essential that
you understand that we work on this concept of permissible stresses or allowable stresses
which are kept far below the material strength and we work on those ratios.
So, if you take the stress strain curve of the material in interest, this is the stress-strain
curve let us say, of the masonry assembly itself. We know what the material strength is
or assume that you can establish what the material strength is, analytically or
experimentally. With the material strength known, we impose the permissible stress that
the structure is going to be allowed to experience.
And, this permissible stress level is kept rather low and expected to keep the structure
within the linear elastic range and that is an important aspect of the working stress
method itself. So, the factor of safety in this case is defined as the material strength
divided by the permissible stress; the ratio of the material strength to the permissible
stress.
Material strength
Factor of safety =
Permissible stress
64
Now, if you take masonry design as an example, you would see that this value is, goes
from a minimum of 4 and above for masonry design and we will in a few days establish
how those numbers pan out as far as masonry is concerned. But what is important to
recognize as far as working stress method is concerned, is that there is an unused
strength.
However, it is not said that the stresses cannot go into the inelastic range and you might
have situations where the stresses take the material into the inelastic range. But once that
happens, we know that the structural system has a way of redistributing stresses, but this
sort of a method does not account for the occurrence of this sort of a phenomenon at all.
So, it completely neglects the possibility of redistribution of stresses. And, the other
important limitation of working stress approach is, it does not differentiate between loads
acting on the structure. This concept of limiting the stresses in terms of the permissible
stresses is, does not recognize the differences between the loads that can occur.
This is actually a drawback and if you see the evolution of methods as you move from
the working stress method to the strength design methods which gained popularity in the
60s and 70s. The ultimate strength design started looking at these ratios not from the
stresses point of view, but from the forces point of view and started differentiating
between the different forces, different types of actions on the system itself. So,
differentiation based on load started occurring.
So, as far as an example for the working stress method, which is alive and active, are the
Indian Standard, IS 1905 which deals with unreinforced masonry and the national
building code (NBC 2016) where reinforced masonry design is addressed.
65
The ultimate strength design, which is a development after the working stress approach,
is also referred to as the load factor method. In this load factor method, there is an
implicit understanding that the stress strain curve of the material, in reality, is non-linear
and in design we adopt a non-linear stress strain curve. So, there is a recognition of the
fact that is in the behavior goes beyond the linear elastic range itself.
And, for different loads we establish the load factor. So, the load factor in the ultimate
strength design can be defined as the ratio of the ultimate load to a working load.
Ultimate load
Load factor =
Working load
You get, when you adopt this sort of a design methodology, you do get satisfactory
performance at the ultimate loads, you get satisfactory strength behavior, strength
performance at the ultimate loads. However, the drawback of this approach, the ultimate
strength design, is primarily the fact that at service conditions you are really not able to
establish whether you have safety or not.
So, this was a transitory phase in reality, the ultimate strength design. Part of the ultimate
strength design approach goes into the next phase which is the limit state design and
transitory codes for example, the 1984 version of New Zealand standard for design of
masonry moved into the ultimate strength design itself. However, I reiterate that this was
66
a transitory phase. There were issues with serviceability conditions while at the strength
ultimate conditions you were considering the non-linear behavior of the material;
structural material and take care of the safety at ultimate conditions.
So, the whole concept revolves around the idea of a limit state, and a limit state is really
a state of impending failure. Now, you can define different limit states; it can be at the
ultimate conditions, it can be at any other preliminary conditions that you want to define
the limit state. And, in this particular approach, it is possible to define different safety
factors; a set of safety factors and today a probabilistic basis is adopted for the definition
of the safety factors bringing in reliability into the design itself.
So, you have the ultimate limit state where you are working on the safety at the ultimate
loads and since the previous methods did not specifically look at the serviceability
conditions; the working stress approach focusing only on service loads, and the ultimate
strength design focusing only on the ultimate loads, you had drawbacks in both of them.
So, the limit state design actually defines the safety factors both at the limit state, at the
ultimate limit state and at the serviceability limit state.
So, if you were to examine what is happening within this probabilistic framework, the
idea is to ensure that the resistances of the structural material and the distribution of the
loads are significantly kept apart. So, if you were to look at this probability density
function of the strength of the material that you are using, the resistance of the material
67
and of the loads, you have a normal distribution that can define the materials strengths
and define the expected loads on the system itself.
Now, you can define what is a nominal strength of the material, which is the value Rn,
denoted here as Rn, this is the nominal resistance of the material and a nominal expected
definition of the load. And, we use factors on the nominal load; the nominal load effect
because we are looking at bending moments, we are looking at axial forces or shear
forces and the factored resistance and compare the factored load and the factored
resistance to ensure safety. In this case we are really looking at the ultimate condition.
So, factors are used, a load factor is used; a resistance factor is used, and then as you see
we are ensuring that there is a sufficient gap as required by the design between the
factored load and the factored resistance. And, the design therefore, becomes way of
ensuring that the design resistance is greater than or equal to the design load effect. That
is the basis of the design at the ultimate limit state and this is achieved by the use of
partial safety factors. You apply partial safety factors to both the structural material and
to the load.
So, the load is pumped up to ensure safety, the strengths are reduced to ensure that you
have sufficient safety and a margin between the design resistance and the design load
effect is ensured. Of course, the serviceability limit state is the other aspect that needs to
be considered and this in this sort of a situation what we really looking at serviceability
conditions is displacements, for example. So, the allowable displacements at the
serviceability condition kept to a level such that you satisfy functional conditions,
deflections, for example, can be taken care of, within this parameter check that we do at
the serviceability levels.
As I said, there are few codes across the world as far as masonry is concerned that have
moved into limit state design. The codes defined by the masonry standards in the United
States TMS 402, the Canadian standards, the Eurocode (EN-6) (EN is the European
norms, the number 6 stands for 1996) and the New Zealand code 4230 are standards
which have moved into limit state design approach for masonry itself.
So, this is the overall framework as far the analysis and design is concerned. It will be
instructive for us to look at some of the limit state design approaches as we examine the
working stress design approach with respect to the Indian codes.
68
As far as the masonry standards in India is concerned what is presented here in front of
you is not an exhaustive list, there are many more smaller codes that are of interest.
However, I classify three different baskets of codes. The first one which deals with
structural design and the two important codes and the code commentary that deals with
structural design, the first one is the national building code.
There is a segment which deals with structural design of masonry in volume 1, Part 6 –
Section 4, deals with Structural Design specifically of masonry and this is the one which
has introduced a section on reinforced masonry. So, this is really an introduction to
reinforced masonry design, because we do not have a code that specifically deals with
reinforced masonry design. So, this is something that we should be seeing in the near
future.
However, the other code that has been in existence and regulates the design of
unreinforced masonry for structural purposes is IS 1905. So, this as I said, will have
aspects that are now in conflict with the national building code which requires that in
India you should be designing with minimum steel reinforcement. There is a Handbook
on Masonry Design and Construction SP 20, a special publication, which gives the
commentary on how unreinforced masonry can be used for structural purposes. So, SP
20 is a handbook on IS 1905.
69
As far as the masonry materials are concerned, you have an entire spectrum of codes,
the different types of units are covered and then you have different mortars that have to
be addressed. So, I am giving you a few codes only as a flavor to the type of codes that
you have for masonry materials.
As you can see there are codes for Stone Masonry; the code of practice for stone
masonry, rubble stone Masonry, ashlar masonry which is a more formal stone masonry,
hollow concrete block masonry, hollow and solid concrete block masonry, construction
methods that is a, newer version of the previous code Autoclaved cellular concrete
blocks and lightweight concrete blocks. So, there are many more in this category.
The third category that I would like to look at is earthquake resistant design and
construction codes that regulate earthquake resistant design and construction for
masonry. So, here of course, the fundamental code which defines the loads themselves
under the earthquake actions IS 1893 Part 1-2016, where you have the general provisions
for the design, earthquake resistant design of structures.
You will have to define the loads and overall approach to design, seismic design from
this code. As far as the design is concerned; actual design and construction is concerned,
you will have to look at IS 4326 version 2013, for the specific details in executing such
constructions.
70
So, with that, we conclude the introductory part on structural masonry in ancient and
modern times and the codal framework which exists today as far as masonry is
concerned.
71
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 02
Lecture - 05
Masonry Materials and Properties Part - I
So, the second module starts examining masonry, particularly its constituents and
understands what properties of the constituents contribute to the overall strength and
performance of masonry as a structural typology. So, we will be examining the specific
aspects, engineering properties of the constituents of masonry. And then understand,
when you look at an assemblage, which is the masonry unit and mortar put together,
bonded together; how is the behavior of this sort of a system affected under different
actions, compression, bending; so, flexural compression, flexural tension, shear and a
combination of shear and compression. So, this segment basically tries to understand,
how the constituents determine the overall mechanical behavior of masonry.
We have been examining over the last week, the different types of constituents, you have
a brief summary on this slide. We are talking of different types of units that are possible,
you can have fired clay units, you can have concrete units and these are the ones that are
widely used as far as structural masonry is concerned. Of course, you have other types
72
and the list is not exhaustive; other types of masonry units- you could have stone
masonry units, you could have sun dried compressed stabilized earth blocks, there is an
entire spectrum and we have seen few of them in the earlier classes.
So, as far as the design of masonry in this course is concerned, we will focus on the use
of fire clay bricks- hollow or solid and concrete blocks; typically, hollow concrete blocks
with the possibility of introducing reinforcement in them. Of course, you need a binder,
you need the mortar as the bed joint mortar that we are referring to, we are not looking at
mortar as a render element which is plaster, but more so, as a material that is used as the
bed joint mortar or the head joint mortar.
So, here it is a combination of sand, a binder; lime as I said is something that has been
used in the past, but our focus is primarily on cement as the binder. And of course, sand
cement and water together gives you the cement mortar, which is another structural
material that goes into composing masonry. And then you have the two other elements
that are introduced particularly when you are dealing with confined masonry or
reinforced masonry which is the reinforcement itself and we have seen that you can have
vertical reinforcement, you can a horizontal reinforcement, you can have the two in
isolation or you can have the two together.
So, the reinforcement itself and the properties of the reinforcement needs to be known,
but when you have reinforcement you need protection to the reinforcement and you need
a method of shear transfer from the reinforcement to the structural masonry. And
therefore, this is typically embedded in grouts also providing the necessary corrosion
protection to the steel reinforcement.
So, you need to understand what is the property of the grout? And now you have the
grout which is one material, within which the reinforcement is sitting and then you have
the brick along with the, the brick unit or the concrete unit along with the mortar which
is another material. So, it is really an assembly of the masonry unit and mortar, the steel
reinforcement and the grout which are three different materials as far as masonry, as a
structural material is concerned, ok.
73
Very briefly it is useful to examine the manufacturing process, it is an industry that has a
very large number of people who are employed, it is not a sector that is very well
organized, particularly in our country. But we will focus on very few aspects that may
give us an idea of how strength and durability may be affected in the use of structural,
use of masonry as a structural material itself. So, raw materials as you know, clay is what
is the material that would compose, clay brick units, very often we use surface clays.
Now, for refractory purposes, which is the regular use of fired clay bricks is for
construction; is for construction of regular buildings, but when you are using these
materials within furnaces, because of excellent refractory qualities you use fired clay
bricks even for furnaces, as lining for furnaces. And for this, you need to basically take
clay that comes from deeper deposits with fewer impurities, very often the surface clay
would have larger proportion of impurities whereas, for refractory purposes you use what
is called fire clay and they are typically mined at deeper depths.
The chemical composition, it is soil, it is derived from soil. So, it is primarily made out
of silica and alumina compounds, you also have a significant distribution of oxides,
different metallic oxides, but these are seen as impurities and you know that when you
have these impurities, these impurities typically act as flux. So, when the firing process is
happening, when the clay bricks are being fired the presence of these metallic oxides is
useful as a flux and helps to create a stronger final product, And of course, depending on
74
the proportions of these impurities the color of brick also can vary, but typically we are
talking of calcium, magnesium, potassium as the impurities in the oxide forms.
The manufacturing processes, there are different manufacturing processes, but typically
the processes differ in the clay content, the moisture content present in the clay itself.
They are broadly classified into processes which recognize the amount of moisture
present in the clay itself as you prepare it for the firing process. The workflow as far as
creating these clay masonry units, you need to grind clay, you take you need to grind the
raw materials, you take it through a pug mill to do that; typically it is not one single
source of clay that is used, there is a tendency to mix clays.
So, you have different sources and then you mix it to get good proportion and good
outputs. So, you have a mixer, which mixes these clays well and then, once it is made
into a mixture with water, then have to give a form to it and extrusion is one method,
another method is moulding.
So, you have these extruders which will create strips as the clay comes out or you mould
them and fire them. So, as they come out from an extruder, you either cut and use these
as wire cut bricks or you fire these bricks and when you fire these bricks typical firing
temperatures are above 900 degree centigrade to about 1200-1300 centigrade.
75
So, as I said, depending on the moisture content in the clay along with the kneaded,
along with water you have different processes. The stiff mud process as you can see the
word ‘stiff’ meaning moisture content is on the lower side; the stiff-mud process it
typically uses extrusion method to manufacture the bricks, the moisture content is
typically of the order of 12 to 15 percent of the dry weight of the material itself.
So, it is taken into a vacuum chamber and of course, the kneading process of the clay
introduces entrapped air. This entrapped air is removed, that is what also helps in
formation of pores in the brick units and then these are also put into a rectangular die and
under high pressure the material is densified. And if necessary, there are perforations
created or you have; if you want to create divisions, particularly when you have hollow
fired clay bricks, you can have bridges which can create partitions in the blocks and so
on. So, all that is done within the die itself, these are then sliced and once you have the
extruded wet clay with the necessary coarse or divisions, it is then is ready for the firing
process itself.
Yes, your question is whether this is the process that is typically adopted within an
industrial setup or in the unorganized sector. This sort of a process where you have
extrusion as the process for creating the bricks and then cutting them, wire cut bricks are
typically industrialized. The unorganized sector uses moulds and casts bricks. So, this
would be more within an industrial setup rather than in the unorganized sector.
76
The soft mud process, again the reference is with is to the moisture content present. So,
with about 20 to 30 percent of moisture content with respect to the dry weight of the
material, you cannot use the extrusion process anymore. Because you have a softer clay
and it can deform if you use the extrusion process and hence pressed bricks what are
preferred when you use this level of moisture in the bricks. And this is where we are
talking of moulded; these are hand moulded, the clays packed into a mould and then you
get the brick which is ready for drying under the sun and then firing. So, this is typically
what the unorganized sector would use to prepare the bricks themselves.
In situations where the moisture content is far lower than the two previous processes,
particularly in areas where availability of water is the problem, you could have processes
which are refered to as dry-press process. And these are very stiff clays and here we
talking of less than 10 percent of the dry weight of material as the moisture content.
And so, these two processes, as against the first one that we were looking at, the first one
uses the process of extrusion, the bricks are extruded and cut. So, you get wire cut bricks
whereas, these two processes are processes where you have to mould the bricks. So,
these are based on the use of moulds and they are actually pressed bricks.
So, we saw this type of brick that you can get, one with the frog which can be embossed
as you manufacture it with the mould itself, the wire cut bricks are typically devoid of
this sort of a frog. So, again you see that it is the moisture content in the clay that
determines the kind of manufacturing process itself of the brick. So, once; in all the three
cases, once the brick is ready, the wet brick is ready, you go and fire the brick.
77
And in the firing phase and this is what imparts the strength to masonry-brick masonry,
the firing process; before putting it into the oven right away you let it dry and this is sun
dried. So, where it loses the excess moisture that is present. So, this excess moisture
actually needs to leave the clay otherwise, if you put it right into the oven that is going to
become steam and create problems for you in the strength gain of the brick itself.
So, this is sun dried and then you take it to the kiln and as I said we are talking of
temperatures higher than 900 degree centigrade. And of course, depending on the
different types of clays, the temperatures are regulated between 900 degrees to 1300
degrees centigrade.
However, the most important aspect is when you take the clay to a temperature of this
order it undergoes a process called vitrification, ok. And that process of vitrification, it is
a ceramic fusion process, this is what imparts the strength and durability to the masonry.
Now, the word vitrification comes from vitro which is glass, which means because of the
presence of silicas and the presence of metallic oxides, there is a fusion process of the
silica compounds, and it is like formation of glass and that is really what gives strength
to clay, to the clay bricks.
Now, if vitrification process is not uniformly occurring you can have poor quality bricks,
might have bricks that are a very brittle or have non-uniform strengths, and that is why it
is so important to have uniform firing of the bricks. Have you seen bricks which do not
78
have a uniform colour, black on one side and reddish brown on the other; That is simply,
because of non-uniform firing. And therefore, the whole process of ensuring that the that
all the bricks within the kiln are exposed to same range of temperatures, for the same
amount of time is a very important part of the process.
Particularly when you have kilns that are, kilns in the rural areas and kilns which are not
part of a thorough industrial process, you have firing that is done in a very informal
manner. And wind during the firing process is sufficient to ensure that part of the bricks
get fired properly, part get fired more than necessary and part less than necessary.
So, the variability comes one from the type of clay that is being used, two from the firing
process. So, it is not only a problem of strength, but it is also going to be a problem
durability, because water absorption properties are affected if the firing is not adequate.
Once the firing is completed you cannot use it immediately, these are coming out of
furnace, they are left to cool down naturally; they are left to cool down naturally, they
come out of the kiln in a bone dry condition which means there is no moisture left in it, it
is inside the kiln for hours together. It comes out now bone dry condition, but there is
moisture in the atmosphere. So, the bricks start absorbing moisture from the atmosphere.
Therefore, you should let the brick do that, if you immediately use the brick you are
going to have problems in your construction. So, this phenomenon is referred to as
‘moisture expansion’, that when you expose it to humidity in the atmosphere, it will
absorb moisture and expand to a certain extent. So, moisture expansion is an essential
phenomenon and has to, you have to give time for this to occur, ok.
79
Now, in terms of the properties of masonry, we are going to be examining of few

properties, but it is important to understand that aspects such as the overall form,
particularly the overall form and dimensional tolerances are key to good quality
construction. When we talk about of dimensional tolerances, if these bricks are coming
out of a thorough industrialized process, you can expect a certain uniformity to the
product.
But if these are coming from handmade moulding processes, you will have significant
differences between the products of this moulding process itself. And there are limits that
codes typically allow on how much variation is allowed from one brick to another within
a lot. So, dimensional tolerances are important if you have warped bricks, if bricks have
significant differences in their shapes, you are going to be using different quantities of
mortar in different locations, which is not good, because more the mortar weaker is the
masonry construction going to be and that uniformity is lost.
Of course, the engineering properties of interest vary from compressive strength to the
flexural strength, flexural tensile strength, the modulus elasticity so, the deformability
characteristics of masonry. And other aspects which affect durability; like the moisture
content in the brick, the water absorption properties, changes in volume, efflorescence,
other durability aspects, abrasion resistance for example, if you are using it for paving,
80
fire resistance and acoustic properties. So, we will examine a few of them to understand
how the unit contributes to the strength of masonry itself.
Fundamental aspect to be considered is the role of geometry. So, here we have examined
that the unit could be a solid unit, it could be a unit with some cores. These are called
cored units, some amount of perforations and it could be hollow brick construction; it
could be hollow brick as the unit itself. How would do these differ as far as the structural
mechanics of the wall that you are constructing is concerned.
By definition, if the unit has more than 75 percent solid cross section that is the
perforation that you are creating are 25 percent or lesser, you refer to them typically as
solid units, that might look like a paradox, solid unit is a solid unit, hundred percent
solid. Why is that I am calling a unit which has a 25 percent voids as a solid unit?
It is interesting to examine the rationale behind this, and the rational behind does not
directly come if you were to look at the area of cross section. So, if you were to examine,
let us take the perforated units. These perforated units if the percentage of voids is less
than 25 percent, I would still classify that as a solid unit. And if I were to classify that as
a solid unit then you have a certain way in which you will make your calculations as far
as area of cross section is concerned for structural design.
81
So, take that brick that we have been looking at, it is a perforated unit and you can see
that it’s cored, right. So, if you were to look at the area of cross section and examine the
net area to the gross area, in this case it would be of the order of 80 percent, so it is about
80 percent solid. So, percentage solid is defined as the ratio of net area to gross area.
Now where would this affect, the stresses under compression would vary, because the
net area is lesser than the gross area, and 80 percent to 100 percent there is a difference,
it is not insignificant right, you would agree with me.
However, if you were to examine bending properties; if you were to examine bending
properties of this sort of a brick unit; if I were to examine the second moment of area as a
geometrical parameter that defines the bending property, it is very instructive to note that
this unit which has about 25 percent void is not very different from a solid unit.
So, if one way to examine the second moment of area and you take the net section to the
gross section, you can calculate the second moment of area of the net section, the second
moment of area of the gross section; the ratio is close to 100, which means these units
really behave very similar, because of the geometry being comparable, overall geometry
being comparable to a solid unit.
So, it is with this rationale that if the voids are less than 25 percent you can still classify
them as solid units. For area of cross section, you would use net area for compression
compressive stresses, but for bending you have literally no change in the way you
account for the geometry. So, this is an important aspect that one must remember;
however, when you are dealing with hollow blocks, it would changed significantly and
you should be able to account for how much of your wall cross section is filled, how
much of your cross section is left unfilled, ok.
82
The compressive strength of the unit, what does the compressive strength tell us? how
does it affect the compressive strength of masonry itself? Durability of the masonry
construction, serviceability aspects of the masonry construction and the overall strength
of the unit is linked to this parameter, compressive strength.
So, if you measure the compressive strength of the unit or if you know the compressive
strength of the unit, it is that one parameter that is linked to all other qualities of the
material; it is linked to the its durability for better the compressive strength, better will be
the durability, better the compressive strength, better will it perform during serviceability
conditions, better is a compressive strength, better is the overall strength meaning your
tension strength will increase, your flexural tension strength will be higher, your shear
strength of the units will be higher.
So, one parameter that can easily be correlated to every quality is compressive strength.
Keep this in mind both are the unit level and at the level of the masonry assembly. And
this is an important information, primarily because when you doing assessment of
existing buildings, if you can get this one information, you are better placed than having
no information for an existing building. We will come back we will revisit that point;
however, the compressive strength of the unit is an important aspect.
How do you test the compressive strength of the unit? It is tested flat-wise. Now what is
flat wise? It is the way the brick is actually used in construction- flat, so the largest
83
surface is placed facing down, so you test it flat-wise; however, a word of caution! If by
design you are going to be placing the bricks on edge, you cannot use the flat wise
strength of bricks.
So, you will have to devise, you will have to estimate the compressive strength of the
brick unit, though it might not be significantly different from the flat-wise strength; it is
essential that if you are, if you know that you are using the bricks flat wise in
construction use the compressive strength define flat wise. If you using the bricks on
edge or on end you will estimate the compressive strength in that format definitely, and
that is in fact, the question of end restrains is definitely a cause for concern and there is a
significant body of research that has looked into the problems that can arise because of
end restrains, but that is something that you will have to deal with, because you know
that the end restraints, because of the proximity of the loading head to the structural
material along the height is a problem.
However, the research on this has shown that depending on the type of capping that you
use, that is exactly the next point; depending on the type of capping material that is used
on the top and bottom of the brick unit when you are testing it flat -ise, you can have
different orders of effect due to confining, end confinement itself, but you cannot do
away with it.
So, when you test these bricks flat-wise in a universal testing machine you will have, if
you do not an intermediate material, you will have direct contact of the steelhead, the
platen head on the brick material itself. So, that can cause confinement effect to the
lateral bulging that occurs at ultimate loads, the load at which failure by crushing is
actually happening in the brick unit.
So, this effect of confining platen has been examined and you can see the kind of
conclusion that has been drawn, you can either use a hard capping or you can use a soft
capping. Now the reason why we use capping, is the brick surface, the top or the bottom
need not necessarily be completely flat. It is important that its flat, but the manufacturing
process may result in undulations in the top and bottom surface. So, use a material that
ensures uniform transfer of load from the steel platen to the brick unit itself.
You can use a hard capping or you can go for soft capping, we use cement plaster,
cement mortar or sulfur, molten sulfur is being extensively used today or you use
84
gypsum plaster, you wait for it to harden and then test it. But, you could also use a soft
capping like plywood and you see a significant difference between the use of soft
capping versus hard capping.
So, this figure here shows you for different sizes of units, you can see that it is 150 mm,
200 mm and 200 mm unit, different types of units, when you use a soft capping versus a
hard capping, the soft capping consistently gives you lower compressive strengths. A
hard capping can actually interfere with the actual strength of the material and contribute
to increasing the compressive strength or contribute more to the confining effects of the
end platen.
So, this use of plywood something that is typically adopted, but if you have undulations
you use a softer material; like gypsum plaster, plaster of Paris rather than cement mortar
which can actually be rather hard with respect to the brick unit itself.
So, a typical test is shown here; a brick is placed in the universal testing machine flat-
wise with plywood soft platens, soft end plates as the ones that are helping in uniform
transfer of load and as you seen you use the net area of cross section when you are
estimating the failure strength of the brick under compression. So, if you have
perforations then you will estimate the failure stress with respect to the net area and not
the gross area.
85
P
Compressive strength of unit , fb =
A net
P = Axial load at failure of the unit in compression (N)
A net = Net area of cross-section of the unit (mm 2 )
And the typical failure mode under compression, you have lateral bulging and you have
splitting of the bricks into small pieces, small columns and that is when it crushes. So,
axial compression leading to lateral bulging, because of the poison’s effect is the way
you would see the failure in these bricks themselves. As far as the designation of the
strength of the brick, it typically follows the compressive strength. So, as you are very
familiar, for concrete you have M20, M30, M35 and so on, where the characteristic
compressive strength of concrete is used to designate the strength of concrete, the class
of concrete.
Similarly, as far as masonry is concerned, the designation comes from the average
compressive strength of masonry, and as far as the IS codes, Indian Standards are
concerned, we typically have the strength of masonry going all the way from 3.5 which
is the average compressive strength, 3.5 MPa to as high as 35 MPa. So, you see this
entire range 3.5, 5, 7.5, 10, all the way up to 35 MPa.
I would like to point out at this stage that while the code for use of masonry as
unreinforced structural typology permits this entire range; as far as reinforced masonry is
concerned, a limit is introduced, requiring that the brick unit strength be least 7 MPa if
the masonry is going to be reinforced. I will stop here.
86
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 02
Lecture - 06
Masonry Materials and Properties Part - II
Morning. So, we will continue looking at the properties of the constituents. We

examined the behaviour of the masonry unit; we are focussing now on the clay masonry
unit, the compressive strength of clay masonry unit as one single property that can be
related to the strength of masonry, the durability of masonry.
So, it is one of those unit properties of significance and as you will appreciate towards
the end of this component, masonry compressive strength; compressive strength of the
assembly is again such a parameter which gives good correlation with every other
strength property like tensile strength, shear strength and also correlation with durability.
So, we continue looking at the properties of masonry unit and then examine the
properties of mortar.
So, when we look at compressive strength; the behaviour under compression of the
masonry unit is a property of importance, we are talking of the modulus of elasticity
87
under compression behaviour, of course. So, this as far as a property, comes directly
from the stress-strain behaviour or the stress-strain relationship of the brick unit. Now, as
far as the property of modulus of elasticity is concerned, while the modulus of elasticity
of masonry assembly, the composite masonry, is a property of significance as far as
design is concerned, we are interested in understanding the deformability of masonry and
so, modulus of elasticity of the composite is a useful property as far as design is
concerned. However, modulus of elasticity of the brick itself is not a parameter that we
use so much within the design context. It is more from a research perspective that you
would want to get the stress-strain relationship of the brick unit and then pull out the
modulus of elasticity of the brick unit. So, this particular property is more a property that
you might want to use when you are working in masonry research.
However, the modulus of elasticity is estimated through a compressive strength test and
we were talking about a flat wise compressive strength test that is carried out on brick
units. So, as you conduct the test, you would get a stress-strain curve for the behaviour in
compression and if you are carrying out a strain controlled test, where the application of
load is controlled in terms of strains, displacement controlled test setup, then you would
be able to get the complete stress-strain curve from initial loading to peak to post-peak
behaviour when the descending curve of the structural response can be captured.
So, assuming that you have the stress-strain curve of the behaviour of the masonry unit
under compression, the secant modulus is what is used to establish the modulus of
elasticity of the material. And for the secant modulus, the prescription is that you take
one-third of the compressive strength of the masonry unit.
So, if you know the compressive strength of the masonry unit as fc, then 33 percent or
one third of the compressive strength is the point that you designate to be able to
establish the slope of the line from 0 to 0.33 times fc and you get the secant modulus,
which would give you the modulus of elasticity of the material of the brick unit itself.
You know that the brick the material of brick is fragile and brittle. However, it does
have a post peak response and that can be captured using a strain controlled test and even
in the pre-peak zone, in this particular zone, you do see that there is some non-linearity
in the pre-peak and a very minimal amount of ductility post-peak. So, it is a non-linear
88
stress-strain curve and a non-linear softening branch that you would observe as far as this
material is concerned.
Moving on, tensile strength of the brick unit is another property that determines how the
masonry is going to respond under different actions and combination of actions. So,
whether we will be able to do a direct tensile strength test or not, we will examine.
However, the flexural tensile strength test is something that is of significance in bending
behaviour of masonry. And, based on our previous discussions you will agree that very
rarely would you put masonry into completely a tension kind of a situation, pure tension.
So, the tensile strength of masonry from a direct tensile strength test is not really
required, we can depend on the flexural tensile strength of masonry. So, it has a direct
correlation with the compressive strength, better the compressive strength of the brick
unit, better is going to be the tensile strength of the brick unit.
As I said, the way in which the masonry assembly composite, is going to respond to a
combination of loads- lateral and compressive gravity axial, will depend on the tensile
strength of the brick unit. So, the mechanism formation in the assembly particularly at
failure is determined by what is the tensile strength of the unit.
If you subject the brick unit to compressive load, uniaxial compression, then you know
that due to Poisson’s effect there is going to be lateral bulging in the material and you
89
will have cracking forming in the brick unit and these cracks are parallel to the direction
of load, that is how they would fail. We call that the crushing stage of the brick unit;
however, the failure initiates by the formation of tensile cracks which are actually
parallel to the direction of loading.
If you were subjecting the brick unit to bending about a vertical axis, take the brick unit
and it is subjected to bending about a vertical axis, then the tensile strength of the brick
unit is what matters in determining whether the crack in the masonry wall is going to
split the brick unit or is it going to pass through the joint or the head joints itself right.
So, you have a wall panel and when you subject the wall panel to bending about the
vertical axis, we have referred to that as horizontal bending when that happens whether
this crack is actually going to split the brick or not split the brick because of a high
tensile strength of the unit and follow the path of the joints is actually determined by how
strong the brick is in tension.
So, under compression, it is the lateral bulging, the Poisson’s effect which will cause
those cracks and split the brick. So, the tensile strength of the brick matters even under
axial compression. Under bending, it matters whether the crack in the wall is going to
follow the joint pattern, the head joints, or is it going to split the brick itself.
So, the direct tension test is prescribed to get the actual tensile strength of the brick unit.
However, there are challenges in carrying out this sort of a test, you might have a test
specimen, but you know that brick units can be of different sizes- you can have the
height of the brick varying if they are not a particular modular size. So, apart from that
gripping the unit when it is subjected to direct tension is a challenge.
So, you have practical difficulties in performing this sort of a test. Very often, ensuring
that the alignment is right, ensuring that under the gripping ends of this tension testing
machine you do not have stress concentration and crushing locally of the bricks itself are
problems that you will have when you are trying to carry out a direct tension test with
brick units. Hence a direct tension test is not something that is usually adopted and we
make do with the flexural tensile strength test.
90
So, how do you measure the flexural tensile strength of masonry? The simplest test that
can help us measure the flexural tensile strength is a modulus of rupture test and in a
modulus of rupture test, it follows simple elastic theory. You are subjecting the unit to
bending, you are assuming that the bending moment in the unit due to this external load
is actually linear elastic. Failure occurs when the tensile strength in flexure of the edge
fibres are reached and you get failure under flexural tension of the unit itself.
So, what we really do is a three-point bending test; you have two support points and one
loading point right at the centre of the brick unit, it is again placed flat wise and tested.
So, the bending moment in this case will ensure that the mid span has the maximum
bending moment and that is where you should expect at the bottom, the bottom fibres to
crack. So, it is a very straight forward test. The stress gradient that is applied will ensure
failure occurs at the bottom fibre mid-span.
This modulus of rupture that you can estimate, from consideration of the moment
divided by the section modulus of the cross section, is going to give you the flexural
tensile strength of the masonry unit. The modulus of rupture or flexural tensile strength
of the brick unit is given by,
91
1.5PL
Modulus of rupture, f r =
bt 2
P = axial load at failure of unit in flexure (N)
L = span (mm)
B = breadth of brick unit (mm)
t = thickness of brick unit (mm)
What is observed based on statistically relevant numbers of these tests is that the flexural
tensile strength always turns out to be higher than the direct tension strength and this is
primarily because of the fact that in a direct tension test the entire cross section is
subjected to a uniform state of tension, equal along the entire cross section; whereas in a
flexural tensile test it is the extreme fibres that are subjected to the maximum tensile
stress.
So, the stress gradient is what is allowing for the further strength in the system, though
you are interested in capturing what is the tensile strength of masonry. So, it is observed
that you will, if you do this test, the tensile strength that you get of masonry is going to
be consistently higher. Typically, if you take a ratio of the modulus of rupture by this test
to the compressive strength of the unit, you would get ratio somewhere between 10 to 30
percent and that is a typical range for your use if you do not have data; a conservative
estimate of 10 percent being the tensile strength of the brick unit if you know the
compressive strength is a good value to begin with.
If you have actually got a values coming out of an experimental test, well and good; if
you do not a lower bound value is 10 percent, which as you are aware even for a material
like concrete we assume that the tensile strength is about 10 percent of the compressive
strength. So, fairly all materials, all these construction materials which are weak in
tension would have a tensile strength of the order of 10 to 20 percent or slightly higher.
ok.
92
The flexural tensile strength test that is carried out by the three-point bending test is not
the only way of estimating the tensile strength of masonry unit. You have the direct
tension test, you have the three-point bending test and you also have another test called
the split tension test.
The split tension test again is a test that is adopted in finding out the tensile strength of
concrete. In concrete, we make use of cylinders to do the split tension test it is otherwise
referred to as a modified Brazilian test. You can get, you are subjecting the cross section
to compression; however, you will get the tensile strength because the compression load
acting on a plane will split the cross section.
So, the split tensile strength test is carried out where you have, in this case you do not
work with the cylinder you are actually working with the brick unit as it is. So, you place
the brick unit and now you have to ensure that your loading plane and reaction plane are
along the same line, along the same plane and you are subjecting it to compression.
So, you have the reaction plane, you have the load line and you are subjecting the plane
what is referred to as a splitting plane in the figure to compression and this ensures that
the entire splitting plane is subjected to uniform tension. So, under this test you will have
the unit subjected to pure tension in that plane and will give you an estimate of what the
tensile strength of the unit is.
Of course, you cannot take the, in this case because of the complexity in this stress
distribution in that plane, dictated by the mechanics of the problem, the tensile strength is
93
not going to be P divided by b t, but needs to be modified and from theory of elasticity
you get the split tensile strength of the brick unit given here as:
2PL
ft =
bt
So, the problem with this test is, it is time consuming, you have to carry it out very
carefully, you cannot have the load line and the reaction line deviating, controlling this
test is difficult and therefore, it is time consuming and what is typically observed is that
there is a large variability in the test results. So, you will have average values with
significant scatter in the test results. So, this is again giving you a measure of the tensile
strength and the two line loads ensure constant tension in the splitting plane.
Again, the average strength that you would get from a split tension test is closer to the
direct tension test because of the fact that the plane is being subjected to uniform tension
and does not have a stress gradient like in the flexural tensile strength test or the three-
point bending test. However, the split tension test give values that are slightly higher
than the direct tension test. It is quite interesting to observe that consistently with the
flexure test with the three-point bending test you will get values higher if you are
estimating the tensile strength of the brick unit.
So, this is a graph where you see the compressive strength on the x-axis with the ratio of
tension strength to compression strength on the y-axis and you can see two sets of points;
you have the points coming from the three-point bending test and the points coming from
the split tension test. You can see that consistently at all compressive strengths you have.
So, you are using different types of units of different compressive strengths, you can see
that the split tension test is going to give you a much more accurate estimate of the
tensile strength of the unit, the flexural strength because of the mechanics of the cross
section and the strength gradient will be slightly higher. And, on an average we are
talking of 20 to 50 percent higher than the values obtained from a direct tension or a split
tension test.
So, the in this information is something that you really need to keep in mind because if
you are using the modulus of rupture value for masonry which is not in flexural tension,
then you should know that the flexural tensile strength is going to be higher and probably
94
reduce the value in a way that you account for this difference between the mechanisms in
which cracking of the unit is happening, ok.
So, we examined the compressive strength and the tensile strength, water absorption
properties of the unit is probably one very critical property of masonry units. It can foul
the way in which the masonry gains strength, If due attention is not given during the
construction phase or due attention is not given to understand what is the water
absorption characteristic of the unit before even selecting the unit, right.
So, the water absorption is a parameter that gives you an indication of how well and how
quickly is a bond going to develop between the mortar and the unit and this bond is
essential for you because the strength of the assembly is established because of the bond.
So, you have moisture that is freely absorbed by the unit from the mortar. So, the
moment you place course by course you are constructing brick, the moment you have
your brick and then you put mortar on it, the unit has a tendency to absorb moisture from
the mortar; mortar is plastic right and this also can happen if you are working with
hollow blocks and if you are grouting the void in the hollow block the clay brick, the
hollow clay brick or the cement block actually has a tendency to absorb water from the
grout.
95
So, the grout and the mortar are sources of water and depending on the water absorption
property of the unit it sucks up less or more water from the mortar. Now, this is a
problem because if you take away water from mortar you are going to interfere with the
hydration processes of the cement in mortar. So, what really happens and the effect of
this we can examine if you have very high water absorption properties or very low water
absorption properties.
So, one of the tests that are carried out to evaluate the water absorption property of
masonry unit is called the initial rate of absorption test, right. And, this is very important
because it is in the first few minutes that the most important water that is available with
the mortar is taken away. It is not later how much of water can the unit absorb; in the
initial few minutes when the bond is going to be established if critical water is not
available for the mortar you will have a problem of bond.
So, what the initial rate of absorption test actually does is tries to establish in a minute
right, in 1 minute per unit area, right you are you are working with one brick, so, you can
estimates per unit area if you were to immerse a brick in a tray with about 3 millimetres
height of water, how much water is being absorbed? So, you bring a brick unit, you have
a trough in which you have got about 3 mm of water and you are placing a flat wise one
surface down and you are measuring the weight before the weight after to check in 1
minute how much of water is this brick unit capable of absorbing. So, that the test lasts
for a minute and then you make some measurements.
So, the initial rate of absorption is therefore, calculated as C minus B where C is the
weight of the brick unit immersed in 3 millimetres of water for 1 minute. So, once you
finish immersing it for a minute, pull it out weigh it, but before you do that you would
have actually weight the brick after drying it in oven in an oven for about 24 hours. So,
what you do you take the brick put it into an oven, leave it for a day; take it out, it is
going to be hot. You leave it outside for sometimes so that it comes down to room
temperature.
But, the other thing is remember we talked about moisture expansion. So, when you are
going to be placing this unit in chamber and dry it for 24 hours it is going to lose all its
moisture and the moment you bring it out is going to absorb moisture from the
atmosphere. So, if you were to test the brick unit coming directly out of the oven you
96
will get a wrong value for the water absorption because you are biasing it now as having
more water absorption whereas the moisture in the air will actually be absorbed by the
brick anyway.
So, you allow for moisture expansion, let it come down to room temperature and then
you carry out this test. So, once you measure B and C, C minus B over the area of cross
section which is the length into the breadth of the brick unit will get you the value of the
IRA represented in terms of kilograms per minute per metre square (kg/min/m2). And of
course, there are limits on this right and brick clay brick is notorious in water absorption.
If the IRA is too high, that it is absorbing too much of too much of water from the
mortar, the problem that you are going to have is, the mortar will dry up. Now, if the
mortar dries up the moisture that it requires for the hydration process is reduced and you
will have a problem of bond you will have a problem of bond and this is in the first few
minutes of laying it itself.
So, what is typically done is you, this is the reason why you wet bricks before you take it
to the site for construction and typically if the water absorption rate IRA is about 1.5
kg/min/m2 or higher you definitely have to wet your bricks otherwise you are going to
have a problem of bond. Yes, your question is why 3 mm right. So, it is it is a test that is
trying to replicate a condition at the site where I have a brick course and on top of the
brick course, I am actually placing mortar.
So, it is really the surface absorbing water. I am not interested how much the in this test,
I am not interested in understanding how much of brick itself is going to absorb. The
surface that is in contact with plastic mortar is only that top surface or the bottom surface
and that is why we are restricting ourselves to about 3 mm and of course, there is going
to be capillary action with the wet mortar that is in contact with the brick unit itself.
Now, if you have very low water absorption you have another problem, the mortar is
plastic and you have the unit which does not want to absorb water. So, what would
happen in this case is the mortar typically has a tendency to bleed that is excess water in
the mortar would actually come to the surface, this happens even in concrete. The
phenomenon is called bleeding. So, there is a film of water that typically forms at the top
and now, if a film of water is formed between the mortar and the brick unit you will have
no bond.
97
So, too much water or either too much water in the mortar or too low absorption from the
by the brick is problematic right and if you are looking at water absorption less than 0.25
kg/min/m2 it is problematic right. In such situations you must have a way of ensuring that
bond is developed that is tricky issue and if you remember when I was talking about
types of clay bricks we refer to moulded bricks and wire cut bricks.
The wire cut bricks typically have this tendency of very low water absorption. So, you
might have very strong bricks because of wire cut bricks, but you might have very strong
very weak masonry because it will not be able to establish bond whereas the moulded
bricks which maybe weaker in compression will have better overall strength in masonry
because it can established bond very easily ok. So, this is this is an important parameter
that really links the theory from the behaviour of masonry to construction.
The initial rate of water absorption is one parameter, but if you want to know how much
is the brick going to absorb water as such because you have a durability problem if the
brick unit is going to be soaking water. If it is very soaking water like a sponge that is
again a problem because it is already porous, it is already porous.
So, the water absorption test which is the typical test that is done, it is the 24-hour test
where you are immersing, in this case you are going to be immersing the brick unit in
water, because you want to know how much is the total weight of water that the brick
unit can actually absorb.
98
In this what you really do is, you submerge the entire brick at room temperature, leave it
for 24 hours; measure the weight of the brick before, measure the weight of the brick
after and you get by percentage by weight of the brick how much water can be absorbed
by the brick unit. Can you give, can you hazard a guess of what could be this number
typically for hand the moulded bricks?
Student: 20 percent.
20 percent. It can be as high as 20 percent of the weight of the brick. What is the weight
of a brick? Roughly, yes, 3.5 to 4 kgs would be the brick. If you have brick that is about
3 and half to 4 kgs and it is capable of absorbing one fifth by that weight of water, if you
do not protect your brick masonry and if the brick is highly absorptive, it is during rainy
seasons your masonry walls are going to soak up water right, it is a potential problem of
durability.
So, here you require the weight of the brick unit after immersion in cold water for 24
hours and you know the weight before. So, finally, the water absorption as a percentage
is calculated by D minus B by B into 100. So, this is established. Basically, what you are
measuring is how much voids are present and how much water is freely going in and
filling up all the pore spaces that are available. You get the overall water absorption
capacity of the brick.
99
There is another water absorption test and this water absorption test is not so much for
countries or at least the tropical regions, it is more for regions where you have extreme
cold weather and warm climates during other times of the year, 5-hour water absorption
test is done; where after you do the 20-hour water absorption test; where the water that
can freely go into the pores and fill up the pores is being measured. In the 5 hour water
absorption test what you are actually doing is you are immersing it in boiling water.
So, in this case you have pressure and water is entering the remaining pores under
pressure. So, the smaller pores are going to get filled up when you do a 5-hour water
absorption test and what really happens, what really this one captures is what is the
additional pore space available the smaller pores that do not get filled up when water
moves in freely.
In this case, you are under high temperatures and pressure water is going into these
pores. This becomes important because in climates where you have very cold freezing
temperatures, water gets into these small pores and then when it freezes there is change
of volume and you can actually have micro cracks that are generated in the brick and
with freeze thaw cycles. In freeze thaw cycles you will have brick deterioration
progressing from day one. So, this is a test that is typically used to understand how
durable is your brick that you have chosen for construction.
And, the value or the parameter that indicates how good the brick unit is referred to as
the saturation coefficient, is a ratio that is calculated ratio that is calculated by the weight
of the brick after the 5-hour water absorption test to the weight of the brick before the
water absorption test.
So, this saturation coefficient is checked to see if you are going to have a brick unit that
could create problems during freeze thaw cycles and the lower the saturation coefficient
is the better it is because those micro pores interconnected micro pores are not there for
build up of internal pressure and eventual cracking and disintegration.
100
There are of course, limits and it will be instructive to examine what these limits are. I
would like to point out that the IS code for clay brick unit does not have an a IRA test.
The initial rate of absorption test is not in the IS code, we only have a water absorption
test. The IRA test the 5 minute test is a test protocol that you can refer to the ASTM
standards, the American standards and carry it out because it is a very valuable
parameter.
So, the ASTM standard, ASTM C67, a code that refers to construction materials; in this
the IRA range that is prescribed for clay brick is between 0.25 and 2 or just above 2, 2.05
kg per minute per metre square and you have limits on the water absorption and limits on
the saturation coefficient as well.
The Indian code IS 3495 which talks about the methods of test for burnt clay brick and
specifications thereof, actually allow 20 percent water absorption by weight as long as
you are looking at classes of bricks from class 3 to class 12.5 and anything beyond class
12.5, the water absorption permitted is lesser which is 15 percent. So, the cap is 15
percent and 20 percent by weight, up to 12.5 and beyond 12.5 respectively. So, you see
that as you go to higher strength it is better to have lesser water absorption in your
bricks.
And, particularly when you have reinforced masonry you use higher strength bricks you
do not want to create durability issues like corrosion of the reinforcement simply because
your brick is actually soaking water right ok
101
Another property which is more related to durability, but if not addressed over time, you
can actually have a problem of strength reduction in the brick. So, efflorescence is
another property that is typically checked and efflorescence you would have all seen
masonry walls with white patches on them and most often you might not see it because
the wall is plastered.
But, this sort of transportation of salts and deposition on the surface because of drying
will actually be happening and if it is plastered you might not be able to see it so clearly.
But, if it is unplastered wall where you have exposed brick work finish, you can gauge
how much of efflorescence is happening in these walls because of transportation of salts.
Now, where do you think these salts are coming from?
Student: (Refer Time: 35:43) water.
Water. So, you it the source of the salts can be two-fold. It could actually be during
construction itself you have used water that has heavy concentration of salts which is the
reason why tests on water are carried out during construction. So, that you do not have
these undesirable salts.
So, one source could be the freshly laid mortar or the water that you use to actually wash
the bricks or wet the bricks before construction. Alternatively, you can have capillary
action from the soil and the wet soil can actually help in transporting salts from the soil
102
to the structure if you have deficient damp proofing courses or walls that are retaining
walls in contact with moist wet soils.
So, what really happens is the salts and these are soluble salts, right, soluble salts. They
can be present even in the brick unit itself. The manufacture of the brick unit itself. The
brick may have impurities and we have seen those impurities that are present, that could
be another source.
So, you have several sources and when moisture starts migrating due to capillary action,
comes to the exterior to get evaporated, you have these salts that will start crystallizing
on the surface. So, if you have heavy efflorescence you will have staining in masonry as
you see in this picture. If it is light you might be able to even, it may be small stains, it
can even go away quite easily.
Now, if there is sudden changes in temperature and spikes in temperature and there is
rapid drying what will actually happen is those salts may not be able to reach the surface
and will crystallize inside the brick cross section itself. In such a situation again
crystallization causes volume change and internal cracks are formed you can actually
have spalling of bricks if rapid drying and crystallization of the salts within the body
occurs, ok. So, efflorescence is something that is a parameter that needs to be checked
when you are studying, when you are selecting materials for the construction.
The IS code actually gives you a test method to check efflorescence. It i s simple test you
actually have a tray in which the brick units are immersed and you wait for a few days
the water has to get absorbed and evaporate. You refill and keep it for a few days till the
movement of water has actually happened through capillary action and then you examine
the brick surfaces.
103
The classification of what you observe in terms of the efflorescence, in this case referred
to as liability to efflorescence, you would look at five level classification: nil – you do
not see any perceptible, you do not see any deposit, Slight - 10 percent of the area is
covered by a layer of thin deposits, moderate covers about 50 percent of the exposed
area, Heavy – very heavy deposits and more than 50 percent of the area is exposed and
Very serious or serious- is when the so much of deposit that actually if you use your
hand they flake you will get salts flaking and that is where or that is serious
efflorescence.
And, as far as specifications are concerned up to class 12.5, only moderate liability to
efflorescence is permitted and if you are actually going to strengths beyond class 12.5
you cannot go beyond slight. So, you actually have to make this check for the lot of
bricks that you are getting for the construction.
Of course, another property that is of importance, knowledge of these properties useful is

coefficient of thermal expansion. Yes, the question is about why are we classifying the
liability to efflorescence of the brick when it actually has an influence from the type of
water that you use. True, but this test is actually looking at how much of salts does that
brick itself have, right.
So, if your clay had minerals and you did not know that they were present, if you do this
test and of course, in the lab you are not going to be using salt water. I mean you are not
going to be using water with heavy in minerals. You check the water that you that you
104
are going to be using and you are using distilled water. So, you are sure that it is free of
salts. So, this is actually telling you whether the brick is of good quality or not.
The coefficient of thermal expansion these numbers are useful to know where we stand
with respect to other materials that are used to create the masonry assembly. So, if you
have clay brick units that you are using for construction you see that the range is not too
far from the coefficient of thermal expansion for a material like concrete and steel. So,
these are strictly speaking compatible from practical purposes in being able to put them
together as a composite, ok.
Just for completeness, the concrete masonry units are again the type of unit that you use
for construction. You have different types of concrete masonry units. However, while in
the clay brick units it is the vitrification process which is helping it gain strength. Here it
is the cement hydration process that is helping the unit gain strength, that is the
fundamental difference.
We have seen a few typologies in our introductory lecture you could have units
constructed with normal weight aggregates, graded aggregates, units with lightweight
aggregates- it could be expanded clay, expanded schist and other materials. You have
lightweight aerated concrete, AAC or LAC as aerated autoclaved concrete as well.
105
Now, the materials typically used; You can use Portland cement, aggregates and water.
But there is also a tendency to use other blended cement or combination of cements to
reduce the quantity of Portland cement for several purposes. Ground granulated blast-
furnace slag is something that is used quite a bit; slag cement and fly ash or rice husk ash
(RHA) is again something that is used in replacing Portland cement. These are all inert
and help in the process of hardening like the cement in the composite.
You also have additives that are used; air entraining agents to make it lighter, pozzolanic
materials can be used, workability agents, colouring agents for pigmentation and so on.
And, the weight is typically manufactured you have these blocks into which the zero-
slump material is placed and you typically have moles that are vibrated. So, that you get
they are compacted and curing accelerated curing is used either at atmospheric pressure
with steamer atmospheric pressure or autoclave when you are using steam at higher
pressures.
So, that is the typical process with which these are being manufactured in comparison to
our clay brick which was fired, ok.
Let us move on to the other material which is part of the composite, the mortar and the
function of the masonry mortar is to bind the units together. So, it is really to achieve
bond between the units and to create a certain monolithic behaviour of the construction
that you use mortar. The way we identify mortars like we identified bricks as class 12.5,
106
class 15 and so on, the mortar is typically identified by it is compressive strength like we
do for concrete, but also by the relative volume of materials.
So, sometimes you might want to have additives like lime in your mortar and if you do
not, then the composition is different. So, by the volume of materials 1:4 or 1:3 or 1
1:1:2 and so on versus the compressive strength itself. As far as properties are concerned
when you have hardened mortar the compressive strength matters, the strength of mortar
matters, the tensile strength of mortar matters. The hardened property the hardened
mortar also ensures durability and water tightness in the masonry.
Compressive strength can be estimated. Transverse strength can be estimated. Drying

shrinkage is something that you need to keep tab on, because if there is too much of
drying shrinkage it can affect the bond and then it can also have cracks and the water
tightness of the hardened mortar is lost.
As far as plastic mortar is concerned, the fundamental reason why we actually use mortar
is because you will have undulations in courses. You will have undulations and the
plastic mortar actually helps to overcome those undulations. So, workability, water
retentivity and the rate at which the mortar hardens are properties that from the plastic
state you are interested in capturing, ok.
107
I would like to focus on a particular aspect here. What you see are tables from the code
that regulates the preparation and use of masonry mortars, IS 2250 and basically tells you
what is the grade of masonry mortar and as you see MM 0.5 would mean the
compressive strength, the average compressive strength of the masonry mortar 28 days is
0.5 mega Pascals up to MM 7.5, where 7.5 is the compressive strength of the masonry
mortar.
What you see in the table is the set of materials that are used to create the mortar- you
have cement, you have lime, you have pozzolans, you have a mixture of lime and
pozzolana and sand. So, these are the different compositions in the mortar and you can
have varying proportions of these to regulate workability and strength of the mortar.
However, an important word of caution is if you look at the column for cement and the
column for cement continues here you, just have one single column for cement right.
But, as you know the strength of cement has what is available in the market, increased
over time. You used to get 33 grade cement at one point of time 33 MPa being the
strength, 43 grade after sometime and today you get only 53 grade cement, which means
unless you are sure what strength of cement you are going to be using, you really cannot
be sure about the compressive strength at 28 days.
So, theoretically you might want a MM 5 mortar, but if you do not know what cement
you are using you can go completely off the mark and get a higher strength mortar. So,
this is, I am flagging of a potential problem that we are facing today. As far as masonry
construction is concerned you can see that if you are using load bearing walls you need a
decent strength for you masonry mortar and we are talking of 0.7 MPa which is very low
as a compressive strength and achievable even with lean proportions of cement to sand.
108
So, the recent version of the National Building Code 2016 which deals with the masonry
constituents has specifically brought in a distinction between masonry mortars that are
made with cements of strength 33 and 43 grade and cement strength 53 grade, which
means your mortar strength can actually be higher if the cement grade is higher. So, this
distinction, you need to keep in mind.
And, the problem is why are we so worried, if you get better strength material is better
for you right, that is not the point. The point is about compatibility, you need a certain
compatibility between the unit strength and the mortar strength and you need to be sure
what is the compressive strength that is achievable with this mortar. Now, if you have a
situation where the unit strength is lesser than the mortar, you have a change in the
mechanics under compression and very soon we will be examining what happens to an
assembly of masonry and units under compression.
109
So, in terms of properties the workability of mortar is something that we keep tab on,
you could do a flow table test and you expect that the flow is about 130 percent when
you do a flow table test. The way you describe flowable mortar is that it should adhere
on to the trowel that you use, it should be able to slide of easily from the trowel, it should
be able to adhere on to vertical surfaces and the moment you put a brick you should see
that it is squeezing out of the joint.
So, that is qualitatively describing the mortar, but that is how it should be. If it is
anything different and not respecting these physical observations, your mortar may not
necessarily have the necessary workability to help you with development of the bond.
Water retentivity is another important parameter. We talked about the plastic stage
parameters that are of importance. This is essential to ensure that water is not lost by the
mortar very easily. So, you do a water retention test and then you carry out the flow table
test again after carrying out the water after removing the water from the mortar and you
expect that the flow after the water is removed, flow after suction as a percentage of the
flow before suction is about 80 percent or 90 percent.
So, the point is, you do not want water to just come off from the mortar, separate from
the mortar and this will cause a film to form as the mortar is gaining strength, you really
want the water to be available for the hydration to be completed. So, if this happens then
the mortar is going to start hardening and the bond gets affected, you need the water for
the hydration process.
110
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 02
Lecture - 07
Masonry Materials and Properties Part - III
Good morning and we will continue looking at Properties of Masonry Mortar and that is
where we had terminated in our last lecture. We are examined the properties of plastic
mortar, ok. Water retentivity, workability being properties that are important as far as
ensuring you get proper finish with your bed-joint mortar, which is a very important
element contributing to the strength and durability of the masonry itself. The important
aspect that needs to be established is the bond between the mortar and the unit.
And therefore, this is achieved through interlocking, because you are looking at, let us
say you take unit- clay brick unit or a concrete block, you got undulations on the
surfaces. And there is mechanical interlocking at a very small scale that is contributing to
the bond, additional friction coming from the interlocking, there is chemical adhesion.
And typically, this bond must be established very soon, it is not something that will
develop over time, but it is something that at the moment you cast the mortar you should
expect this to start forming. And the bond itself is affected by the type of mortar that you
111
are using, is it a high strength mortar, is it weak type of mortar, it is affected by the
qualities of mortar, it is affected by the water strength ratio, it is affected by how close in
strength and properties is the unit. So, compatibility matters.
Workmanship has a very important role as far as the establishment of bond is concerned,
and conditions under which curing is happening for the masonry wall. You must have
seen after construction, the wall has to be kept wet for a few days just like you would
keep concrete wet. There is an important test that is done in the field, it is actually
surprising to know that you can establish bond in such a short period of time, it is called
the field bond test, it is done on the field, it is a quality control test.
And what is done is, you basically make a stack of two units with the mortar has been
prepared. So, you have got the first unit, mortar and the second unit. You leave it for not
more than 2 minutes, a minute to 2, and then you should be able to pick up the entire
stack by just holding the top unit and it should stay. If it does not stay, bond has not been
established.
So, that is why I said that initial bond has to form rapidly and that is what is actually
going to initiate the process of a good quality masonry taking shape there, ok. So, this is
a field bond test. It is actually done, if you have a good site engineer, you will go and
check, he or she will go and check, if this can be achieved. If not, you have to throw
away the mortar or check if you are units are, they might be too wet or they might be too
dry. So, this is something that is good to know.
You can as we saw earlier, workability and water retentivity of the mortar is important
property of the plastic state. So, if you want to improve workability, you can actually use
chemicals that create air entrainment and you can actually improve the air content in the
mortar mix by 12 to 18 percent, however, these can actually reduce the strength of
mortar. So, one has to be careful in using these additives and with the knowledge that
you can compromise strength, if you want to retain strength, you use lesser of these
additives. You should be able to proceed with some of these additives if necessary, ok.
112
Compressive strength of mortar and again as a quality control test small cubes of mortar
are cast in the site and tested, just as you would do quality control for concreting by
casting those cubes or cylinders; cylinders in some other countries. So, the cube
compressive strength is the parameter that we use both to classify the masonry mortar,
earlier said MM 7.5 and MM 5, it is the cube compressive strength. And it is a small
cube that is cast, it is a 50 mm x 50 mm side dimension.
And the masonry mortar has role, an important role to play in the compressive strength
of the masonry itself. It measures the quality of the of the brick work; brick work
meaning it is the assembly of brick with the mortar and typically you are looking at a
cubical piece of brittle material and because of the confinement of the end plates you
expect a pyramidal failure. In this typical x-shaped crack you would see because of the
confining effect of the end plates, but this is a standard test procedure that we use to
characterize the cube compression strength of mortar.
Now, we have talked of properties that are essential as far as the plastic mortar is
concerned, and properties are essential from the hardened state. So, you have twin
requirements, but you could have conflicting problems. If you make it too workable then
you are going to have problems with strength. If it is if you want very high strength,
water-cement ratio has to be reduced. So, you actually have you have a potential problem
on hand.
113
And what is typically done? In case you want to have desirable properties, you want to
tinker with some of these properties, what is normally done to cement is known to
provide strength to mortar. Lime on the other hand, which is as you know a raw material
for cement manufacture itself. Lime is not so much in use as a binding material today.
But you could use lime in the composition to improve workability, but it can
compromise with the strength. So, the proportion by which you add lime into the mortar
mixed is typically controlled.
So, in this graph you can actually see, how as the proportion on the x-axis you have the
proportion of lime and the proportion of cement. So, you could have a mortar mix which
is 100 percent cement and no lime at all. And you keep reducing, the percentage of
cement with lime. So, on the x-axis I go from 100 percentage of cement to 0, and lime
from 0 to 100 percent.
And you are looking at the compressive strength and the water retentivity. Now, the
water retentivity is an important property as we had seen earlier in the plastic state. So, if
you look at the compressive strength in MPa on the inner side 5, 10, 15 upto 30 MPa
and water retentivity in percentages, it becomes quite clear that, as you reduce the
percentage of cement in the proportion, you keep reducing the cement percentage in the
proportion, you get mortar that is more workable and has better water retentivity
properties.
But you look at the reverse, what is actually happening is your strength is decreasing.
The strength reduction takes place as you reduce the quantity of cement and keep adding
lime. So, lime will if you are working with this pure lime, you are going to get rather
weak mortar, relatively weak mortar more deformable probably, but definitely but
weaker mortar.
So, this is the conflicting outcome on the final property, but plastic stage you can you
can work around by changing the proportion of cement and lime or adopting a certain
proportion of lime if necessary, so you could keep these in mind in working with harder
mortars or soft mortars. In several cases working with the softer mortar is has shown to
be much more meaningful, ok.
114
Again, compressive strength is one of the properties that you would check, but you also
need to know the flexural tensile strength, the tensile strength of the mortar sample.
Three-point bending test as we had looked at; the three-point bending test for the brick
unit can be adopted here.
And the sample that is typically made is a sample which is of size 10 cm in length and
2.5 cm x 2.5 cm in cross section. And you load it in flexure and the stress gradient is
going to give you the possibility of maximum bending stresses at the mid span and
failure is brittle.
This is a brittle material and you can see how the mid span crack forms with maximum
flexural tension at the bottom. This is one property that can be rather easily assessed
experimentally. Another property of significance is volume change or shrinkage in the
mortar. And this is again experimentally tested using a small beam made out of mortar.
And then you look at what the volume change is, how much the mortar is shrinking as
the hardening process is happening; at 7 days and at 35 days, and there are limits for
shrinkage.
Because if mortar shrinks too much, it has established a bond with the unit; but if it
shrinks too much you can have failure at the bond by the time the wall gain strength and
hardenss. So, this is a fundamental problem. If there is too much of shrinkage, shrinkage
cracks will develop and shrinkage cracks would not probably immediately compromise
115
the stability of the system, but it will affect durability, because moisture penetration will
commence with formation of these cracks in the mortar itself. So, we are early talking of
the elastic and creep shortening as you have compressive loading and the thermal effects
and the shrinkage effects together deciding how much of volume change is going to
happen in the in the mortar itself.
If you have a softer mortar; the softer mortar has more deformability basically; when we
call it soft it is about how deformable it is. And therefore, these are more ductile, they
deform more before cracking and failing and harder mortars behave in a much more
brittle manner. And it is in this context that, the softer mortars possibly achieved with the
use of replacing cement with lime or just with lime, are much more desirable as their
performance is concerned. And a very important characteristic of lime is observed in
these situations and it is called the autogenous healing of cracks.
What actually happens is the mortar composition is such that when cracks are formed,
the lime mortar has a slow process of hardening, and material is still available to go and
fill up these cracks and almost close the cracks and continue to allow formation of
distributed small cracks. And therefore, the deformability is something that you see
much more than a hard, brittle material like cement mortar. So, this is a subject that is of
significant research focus, the behavior of lime mortars. It is still not fully understood
because it is a very complex chemical composition.
The autogeneous healing is something that is being steadily researched, because for
repair of masonry and historical masonry, this property of lime is extremely useful. It is
also being researched from the point of view of repair of other structural materials. So,
this is something you might want to know. So, sample for the drying shrinkage test again
as I said is a beam, here the beam is 25 mm x 25 mm x 300 mm and take measurements
at two points in time 7 days and 35 days, and the mortar shrinkage should be within
certain limits, ok.
116
So, that brings us to two sets of constituents that we talked about and as I had mentioned
earlier, grout is another important constituent of masonry construction today. The hollow
blocks partly are grouted or sometimes fully grouted and when you have reinforcement,
you have to grout the cavity in which you the reinforcement. So, grout itself is a different
material.
If you are using concrete blocks, the chances are that the grout material that you are
using is close enough to the concrete block’s composition, but it still could be different.
If you are using hollow clay bricks or if you are using solid clay blocks and you have
cavities in which you are pouring concrete, it is a completely different a material with
respect to the unit or the shell. So, this is a material that you must consider and has a role
to play in the strength of the masonry, in the deformability of the masonry and is
primarily there to protect your reinforcement.
Yes, your question is like we do a formal mix design for concrete, do you do a mix
design for mortar? I would answer it this way, if you want to achieve a certain strength
of your masonry, you can formulate the strength of the masonry by knowing the strength
of the mortar and the strength of the unit. So, you choose a certain strength of mortar and
a certain strength of unit and these two together are going to give you a strength of the
masonry.
117
Now, how do you work backwards? I can say I need a unit of strength 10 7.5 N/mm2 and
I can get that manufactured. Now, mortar if I by calculation want a mortar that is 7.5
N/mm2, it is again a composite. So, how do I achieve 7.5 N/mm2 mortar and that is
where you need to know; what proportion is required of cement, do you have any other
additive like a pozzolana and lime, and the fine aggregate.
So, you break it down you want to achieve a certain masonry strength; it is directly
dependent on the mortar strength and the unit strength. And therefore, since the mortar
strength has to be achieved, the average compressive strength has to be achieved, you
need a proportioning for that.
So, you can carry out the a process similar to mix design for concrete; however, the
tables that we have seen in the other class, were depending on the strength of cement and
depending on the proportions of the fine aggregate and the cement, you will get a certain
average compressive strength which is typically what is done. So, strictly speaking you
would not be doing a mix-design every time, you would be depending on these
readymade tables to guide you how to choose the mortar itself, right.
So, as far as the grout is concerned, you are looking at concrete that is high slump
concrete. You typically pump it into the into the cavity, you typically construct a wall to
a meter or meter and point two. And then once reinforcement is already in place, you
pump the high slump concrete into place, it could be into these voids created by the
hollow or it could be the cavity between two leaves that you are filling, where the
reinforcement is also placed and this is something we have seen when we were looking
at typologies of masonry construction.
So, you could either vertically fill the cavities in which the vertical reinforcement is
sitting or you might have the U shape blocks, you can see a block which is cut in the
shape of U for the horizontal reinforcement to run. So, you have both these possibilities,
but it has to be high slump; because mind you, it is not a, it is typically not a very large
cavity and you already put reinforcement there. So, you can have congestion quickly,
because these voids are limited in dimension.
The cavity walls would primarily mean, you have placed the reinforcement in position,
you have constructed the two leaves and you might need shuttering on the sides or
depends on whether this wall construction that is continuing return walls that are
118
continuing, and then you basically grout that cavity ok. So, this is how the construction
with a grout is carried out and typically what the grout does is you have got a hollow
cross section, you are grouting it with a significantly strong material, it is concrete
strictly speaking. So, it increases the capacity, the strength capacity, the resistance, in
shear, in flexure is immediately seen when you have grouted masonry. Primarily they are
meant to hold the reinforcement in position right and give corrosion protection.
So, typical proportions you will have to take a decision depending on the available
cavity, the size of the void that is available to you; whether you want to go with the fine
grout or you want to go with the coarse grout. And depending on whether you are going
the fine grout or a coarse grout, you actually will decide whether a fine, whether a coarse
aggregate is going to be used or not.
Because if you have let us say, a void that is about 50 mm x 50 mm and you actually
have a reinforcement bar sitting in there of say 14 mm or so, the space that you actually
have is not too large. So, if you choose to go with coarse aggregate, you will have to
ensure that the clear dimensions that you have are going to be pumpable spaces.
So, the choice between a coarse grout and a fine grout is something that is left to the
designer. So, if you go with the coarse grout, you will go with you will choose a coarse
aggregate as a part of the proportioning and if it is a fine grout, you do not use coarse
aggregate.
Typical ratios are shown here, it could be different from these; 1:2, 1:3 is typically
adopted, but an important point is that rarely would you go with a coarse aggregate size
larger than 10 mm; 10 mm is the is a typical cap on the coarse aggregate dimension.
Your question is whether load distribution would be changed. Strictly speaking if you
look at a cross section, where you have the shell of the unit itself ok, you have the outer
and the inner, inside of the structure and outside of the structure.
And then you have the core material which is now concrete, they are all of different. Let
us say this is brick, this is clay brick, hollow clay brick and the core is concrete itself, the
modulus of elasticity of these are going to be different right. So, at the cross section, the
distributional stresses is going to be different because of different modulus moduli of
elasticity- one.
119
The second problem is the unit is prefabricated and used. So, it is not going to change in
shape or volume, where as the grout is pumped into the cavity, it will shrink; so when it
shrinks, you could have issues of uniform transfer of loads and thereby you can have
differences in stress distribution caused by shrinkage of the grout itself, ok.
So, again since it is a property that can alter the strength of masonry, a check on the
grout property, grout’s compressive strength is one of the minimum tests that is carried
out to characterize the grout itself. So, the grout compressive strength, we expect it to be
at least equal to the compressive strength of the masonry, of the assembly right, it will
work out to be close to the compressive strength of the masonry.
You basically cannot have very weak grouts, because it does not bode well for protection
to corrosion of the steel reinforcement and after all the effort you do not want a grout that
is weak and not contributing to the compressive strength of masonry. So, a good thumb
rule is to see if your masonry compressive strength and the grout compressive strength
are comparable.
Now, you should also understand that the reinforcing bars are sitting there, the
reinforcement bars are going to be active in load transfer if the anchorages are good. So,
the steel reinforcement is going to be depending on development on the grout, so you
cannot have compromised strengths of the grout. So, this is something that requires due
diligence in the mix proportioning and the quality of grouting itself.
120
So, for testing the compressive strength of the grout, we do not have any Indian standard
that addresses the compressive strength testing of the grout, we depend on a ASTM
standard and the ASTM standard referred to here as C1019 and it is an interesting test.
Now, since the grout is actually sitting inside the masonry unit or the concrete block, you
are using a plastic high slump material which is going into something that has high water
absorption; you have seen that clay brick can have good high water absorption, concrete
also has water absorption. So, you actually pumping something plastic into this cavity,
there will be water that is absorbed from the high slump grout by the units.
So, if you were to just take that high slump concrete and put it into a mould and go test
the compressive strength of the mould, it will be completely wrong, because the water
cement ratio in the high slump concrete when you are pumping it is much higher than
what it is inside the cavity, because the walls will start absorbing the water in the grout.
And what you would finally get, is possibly a stronger grout if there is the too much
water is not absorbed.
So, the test protocol requires that you create a mould with real units that we going to be
using in the wall construction. So, you can see how this arrangement is; you have got
four blocks, you create a cavity and the size of this grout specimen is roughly 90 mm x
90 mm x 180 mm, I am sorry. Those strange numbers are simply because it is in inches
that it is defined in the ASTM standards and conversion will give you these strange
numbers, prismatic grout specimen.
And then what we do is that we actually place lining on the face of the units and this
lining will not inhibit the absorption of water by the unit. So, you use something like
blotting paper that is typically used to absorb moisture, you have to use something like
that; can you tell me why you use that?
Student: Both the moisture.
No, you want the moisture to be absorbed, you want the moisture to be absorbed from
the grout like in a real situation, but then you provide a lining material. Why do you
provide lining material?
Student: There are no bond that is.
121
Exactly, otherwise if there is no lining material, the grout will actually bond with the
units and you cannot do any test there. So, you give a lining material, but ensure that this
lining material is not going to prevent absorption of absorption of moisture. So, it is an
absorptive lining material that is provided and at the bottom you normally give a wooden
block, so that you get a finished surface. And then once it is hardened, you move away
the blocks, use this, test it in compression and that gives you the grout compressive
strength, so that is how this test is conducted.
You have to basically create the absorbent mould. So, you will be careful about what
material you choose to create the absorbent mould such that you represent the effect of
water that the walls actually will absorb from the high slump grout ok; so that is the
grout compressive strength.
Of course, if you are using a clay brick, hollow clay brick or any other type of block, you
have to be sure that you are using a similar material to create the grout sample, grout
specimen to replicate the typical absorption that you get in such a material The fourth
component- unit, mortar, grout, reinforcement, a steel you can test it, like you would test
reinforcement steel for concrete and you need to know these strengths if you are
designing your masonry.
Typically, mild steel or high yield strength, deformable steel are used both for vertical
reinforcement and horizontal reinforcement. So, a standard tension test is done to
122
estimate the tensile strengths of these materials. It is recommended, strongly
recommended that corrosion resistant steel or procedures to ensure corrosion resistance
is put in place for steel, because unlike in concrete where you have good corrosion
protection by design, by the composition of concrete itself. In masonry that is the big
challenge, because masonry units are porous.
So, you can do different things, the IS code, the national building code recommends that
you use you use stainless steel, because stainless steel is not completely corrosion
resistant, stainless steel is not corrosion free, but it takes a longer time for stainless steel
to corrode, you could use rods that a hot-dipped galvanized or epoxy-coated steel
reinforcement for the construction.
There is a trend to use epoxy bars, there is a tendency to use carbon fiber reinforced or
FRP bars for construction. This is something that is still in a research R and D stage,
because there are issues of bond and also economics, the cost of these of this type of
construction which matters, but if in the future FRP bars going to become easily
available and solves completely all the other problems in the construction of the
structural material, I think you overcome corrosion as far as structural systems like these
are concerned.
There is another possibility that you could use normal reinforcing bars, but which have a
coating of stainless steel around at least for a millimeter. And therefore, you have to be
careful that you are using corrosion resistant steel and you cannot complain that masonry
has led, reinforcing masonry, has led to severe corrosion problems. This is mentioned to
you, well in advance by the codes themselves.
Let us say you have a bed-joint and you place a reinforcement bar, and give cover of 15
mm above and below, then you will get a very thick mortar joint in relation to the unit
itself, this ratio is a critical ratio and there is a direct correlation between the thickness of
the mortar joint and the strength of the masonry itself; so thinner the mortar joints,
stronger is the masonry. So, you have again a conflicting requirement here, steel has to
be protected, but you need thin mortar joints.
So, if you remember in the typologies of masonry, I was talking about high strength bed-
joint mortars. The whole idea of high strength bed-joint mortars is to ensure that you get
thin bed-joints, when you have steel in the in the joint itself. So, bed-joint reinforcement;
123
you have couple of good options for bed-joint reinforcement, today available in the
market.
One of them is the truss type, it is in the form of a truss and the inclined elements are
either made out of thinner cross section of bars or even strong wire. Now, this the trusts
type reinforcement with the wire actually ensures that the percentage of steel is
achievable, but you can reduce the size of the steel bars and thereby you can minimize
the joint thickness itself. So, it is a good; it is a good typology and there are different
ways in which these wires are attached- some of them are welded, but welding very thin,
elements in steel has other complication. So, this is another area by itself.
You can also have this ladder type joint reinforcement bed-joint reinforcement, which is
basically with the series of lugs between the rods again. This is again a typology that will
help you achieve a certain percentage of steel that you require for the joint itself and
minimize the size of the reinforcement as much as you can.
Of course, the bed-joint reinforcement has to be coupled with the vertical reinforcement
and that is the kind of detailing that you are seeing here, where vertical reinforcement is
connected to the horizontal reinforcement as you have seen, the horizontal reinforcement
improves the effectiveness of the vertical reinforcement in flexural capacity itself, ok.
124
So, having examined the different components of masonry construction, four of them.
We now start looking at the masonry assembly itself and properties of the masonry
assembly, strength properties, primarily compressive strength, tensile strength, but here
we are examining the flexural tensile strength. And we will examine flexural tensile
strength parallel to the bed-joints and perpendicular to the bed-joints, and then the shear
strength of masonry. These are characteristics, these are mechanical parameters that
directly impact the strength of the masonry.
So, to begin with, we will examine behavior under compression and how it is tested for
compression, and what factors influence the compressive strength of masonry itself. So,
if you take a stack of bricks subjected to uniaxial compression, the behavior in the
assembly - There are three different materials or interfaces in this assembly; the first one
being the unit, the second one being the mortar and the third- it is plain brick masonry,
there is no reinforcement. The most critical is the interface between the mortar and the
units and that has a completely different stress strain behavior compared to the unit and
the mortar. So, it is really these three working together under compression, right.
And you will start getting used to the fact that we are going to be talking about the
behavior of the unit, the behavior of the mortar and how is the interface, how is this unit-
mortar interface behaving under every action. And the complexity of masonry is to be
able to establish the behavior under compression, the behavior under shear, the behavior
under flexure, you have to break it down to the individual behavior, individual load-
displacement behavior.
But then of course, to complicate our life it is not additive, if you add all this, you will
not get the behavior of the masonry. So, it brings in complexities it is closer to
anisotropy than isotropy for sure, not even orthotropic. So, we will examine the effect of
this interface in the behavior first under compression, but we will be examining this
under the other actions as well, ok.
So, what happens? You look at a masonry construction, you have the unit and the mortar,
these are you know lined up, stacked up. The masonry unit; masonry unit which is less
deformable right; it is more brittle, it is less deformable; actually starts confining the
mortar, because of mortar is more deformable of the two constituents. The mortar tends
to expand, it is not in the plastic state that we talking about, the plastic state of course, it
125
gets squeezed out of the joint, but even when it is hardened and you keep loading the
masonry, the mortar tends to expand more than the unit.
So, but since a bond is present between the unit and the mortar, the unit starts confining
the mortar, so there is what is referred to as a co-action between the unit and the mortar.
Because of which, because the units starts confining the mortar, the mortar is in a state of
triaxial compression, vertically you have the gravity load, but in the other two lateral
directions, the units starts confining the mortar.
So, if you look at the state of stress in the mortar, it is in triaxial compression, it is
completely confined. Your question is whether this confinement is coming from the unit
above and below in a stack or from the neighboring units in a wall construction ok. As of
now we are actually examining the stack and the confinement is because of the bond
with the unit above and the unit below.
We are not talking of the kind of confinement; actually while the confinement from
neighboring adjacent units in a wall constructed in a certain pattern exists, this is more
critical right. So, the mortar is an state of triaxial compression.
Now, it is important to pause for a moment and an understand what is really happening.
You can go and estimate in the cube compressive strength of the mortar, you are able to
estimate the uniaxial compressive strength of mortar right. In the lab test you actually
just doing uniaxial compressive strength, but in reality, the mortar in the wall
construction is not under uniaxial compression, it is under triaxial compression ok.
So, how do you get the triaxial compressive strength of the mortar or how would you
estimate the compressive strength of the masonry by just having the knowledge of the
uniaxial compressive strength of the mortar? So, this is the trick in the behavior of
masonry and is something that is addressed. In the next module, you will see how the
uniaxial strength of mortar, then find its way into an estimate of the compressive strength
of the masonry with necessary modifications to account for the confinement effect or the
state of triaxial compression.
Now, the bond exists, the mortar has a bond with the unit above and the unit below
because of which as the mortar is getting confined, the unit in turn experiences tension
because of the bond, right, equal and opposite actions. So, as I said the mortar is now
126
resisting, is expected to resist higher compressive strength because it is in a confined
state than the uniaxial compressive strength of the mortar itself. So, this is a point you
need to keep in mind.
Because of the bond and because of equilibrium, the unit now starts experiencing tensile
stresses ok. So, if you look at the triaxial state of stresses in the unit, vertically in the
gravity direction this compression. So, there is vertical compression, but in the two
lateral directions because the mortar is deforming in both directions, it is free to deform
in both directions you have bilateral, biaxial tension in the unit, ok. Now, that is a catch
because unit is the brittle material of the two and could be weak in tension. So, this
mechanism is what causes the formation of cracks in the unit at failure, ok.
So, this co-action is something that is at the foundation of how masonry is going to
behave. However, a word of caution, this is true; this understanding of triaxial
compression in the masonry mortar and the biaxial tension and uniaxial compression in
the unit is true as long as Poisson’s ratio of the mortar higher than the Poisson’s ratio of
the unit meaning this unit is more compressible than the mortar. This theory is valid as
long as your compressibility of the unit is more than the compressibility of mortar.
So, typical values if you want to look at the Poisson’s ratio of the unit would be of the
order of 0.1, and the Poisson’s ratio of mortar would be about 0.25 or higher. So, the unit
is more compressible than the mortar, this should not be confused with the deformability.
The as far as deformability is concerned and we are examining properties such as the
modulus of elasticity, the modulus of elasticity of mortar is higher than the modulus of
elasticity of unit.
So, in terms of deformability, softer material, mortar is a softer material; unit is the
harder material, and more brittle material. But as far as compressibility is concerned, you
know that material like cork is more compressible right. And it has it has a Poisson’s
ratio close to 0 unit is about 0.1. Rubber is highly incompressible about 0.5 and the
mortar is at about 0.25. So, it is the compressibility that matters as far as the problem on
hand is concerned.
And because of the mortar being less compressible, it gets into the state of triaxial
compression at the bond, ok. So, and you need to keep this in mind because if the
composition of the unit in the mortar such that you get mortar is going to be more
127
compressible than the unit, you can have a completely different way in which the stresses
are going to be working out for you in the failure of the masonry in compression.
So, we will examine that it is very well documented in the literature. So, as far as failure
is concerned, these tensile stresses developing in the unit in the lateral directions will
actually lead to formation of vertical cracks in the unit, and that is how the unit will fail
ok. The moment the unit fails the confinement to the mortar at that joint is lost. So, the
mortar now suddenly falls from a state of triaxial compression, confined compression to
a state of uniaxial compression, its compression strength suddenly drops and it gets
crushed. At the same value which was able to resists suddenly fails under the same value,
because it has now shifted from triaxial confined compression to uniaxial compression
state.
So, you see the formation of these fine vertical cracks. I hope you are able to observe
these cracks. You will not see single cracks, but you will see a series of you will see a
series of fine vertical or sub vertical cracks like you would see in a concrete cylinder on
or concrete cube, these series of sub vertical cracks form, these vertical cracks are going
to be the unit. And once they sufficiently form you will get you will get bulging and
failure in the unit itself. So, these cracks are all going to be parallel to the direction of
loading and at ultimate you would see a crushed system the mortar would actually be
powder.
128
And in this state, if you go and pull out the mortar, it is actually powder because the unit
has failed, and it is not offering anymore confinement and you will see that the mortar is
also crushed at this at this point of the test itself.
Now, it is important to understand the behaviour of the strength of the brick work, when
I say brickwork is the assembly versus the strength of the unit itself right. And when you
actually look at the stress-strain curve of the unit and the stress-strain curve of mortar,
this is where we said, unit is stronger right; unit is stronger, but less deformable, modulus
of elasticity of the unit versus the modulus of elasticity of the mortar. So, the mortar is
more deformable, but of lower strength. Together, they give you something that is in
between as far as the masonry is concerned.
So, if you were to compare the strength of the brickwork masonry versus the strength of
the unit itself, the brickwork compressive strength, masonry compressive strength is
lower than the unit compressive strength ok. And typically, the correlation between the
two, the relation between the two is that the brickwork compressive strength, the
masonry compressive strength varies as the square root of the compressive strength of
the unit or the crushing strength of the unit. This is typically observed relationship
between the masonry compressive strength and the unit compressive strength, that it
varies as the square root of the crushing strength of the unit itself.
129
But if you were to examine the mortar, the mortar, the strength of the mortar in the
masonry will be higher because of the triaxial confinement, the triaxial compressive
stress in the state of confinement and will have a value, the compressive strength of the
masonry will be significantly higher than the strength of the mortar itself. And this is
because of the triaxial effect that is there the triaxial confinement that is there of the
mortar.
And the way the mortar compressive strength and the prism strength or the masonry
strength are related is in this manner that the brickwork compressive strength, masonry
compressive strength varies as the third or the fourth root there is variability depending
on the compositions, third or the fourth root of the mortar cube strength. So, this is how
you would be able to relate the constituent strength to the strength of the assembly itself.
130
So, just to summarize the inferences on the compression failure in masonry, the uniaxial
compression and the bilateral tension that is forming. These are the these are secondary
tensile stresses because of Poisson’s effect that is developing in the unit itself. These are
lateral actions; the lateral bulging is causing these stresses, because you have the bond, it
does not allow it to bulge and lateral tension, secondary tensile stresses is causing the
splitting of the brickwork.
The compressive strength of the unit, therefore, is really not a direct measure of the
compressive strength of the masonry and that is simply because it is controlled by the
mortar. It depends on the strength, the compressibility of the mortar, the failure of the
unit in compression individually is different from the failure of the unit in the masonry
assembly.
So, if you have a very strong brick unit, it does not mean that you will get strong
masonry, it depends on what the mortar is going to be. So, the basic message is, you
cannot qualify the properties of the masonry by simply doing a test on the unit. If you
have good quality unit it does not mean that you got good quality masonry. You have to
be very careful about that you have to have a measure of the compressive strength of the
masonry itself.
The mortar instead withstands higher compressive stresses in the brick work because of
the multi axial state of stress. So, we will stop here and we will look at what happens if
131
you have different materials in the mortar joint, does it give us an insight into the
structural mechanics of the masonry itself.
132
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 02
Lecture – 08
Masonry Materials and Properties Part - IV
Good morning. We will continue examining the behavior of the masonry assembly under
compression, get an understanding of the compressive strength behavior of masonry and
the role played by different factors on the compressive strength of masonry. And then
examine the deformability characteristics of masonry.
So, in continuation from the last lecture, it is quite instructive to look at several
experiments that were carried out in the past to gain a deeper understanding of this co-
action between the unit and the mortar. So, it is instructive to note that the interaction
between the brick unit and the material that is used for the bed jointing. If you were to
consider just a stack of bricks right, assume it is dry stack construction- there is no
mortar; in this condition let us assume that there is the contact surface which is acting as
the mortar.
133
So, if you just have a loosely stack set of bricks, but assume the bedding planes are
perfect; the bedding planes are perfect implying that the contact is established in a
perfect manner between the units. It is found that the compressive strength that you will
achieve in the stack is twice as much as you would achieve or more when you have a
mortar joint. So, the mortar in reality contributes to reduction of the compressive strength
of masonry, which means if you can go for thinner and thinner joints tending to almost
disappearance of a mortar joint you would approach the compressive strength of the unit;
you would approach the unit compressor strength right, I hope that makes sense.
So, there is a role that this co action is playing, but since the jointing material is of lower
strength, as an outcome you have lowering of the overall strength of the masonry
assembly in compression, right. A few experiments done in the past in the 1970s actually
gave a good understanding of the rationale behind keeping mortar weaker than the unit
and then contributing to the co-action itself.
So, a couple of experiments that were conducted- one of them look that the stack of
bricks instead of the mortar had rubber in the joint ok. Now rubber as you know has a
Poisson’s ratio of a close to 0.5 and it is classified as a incompressible material, right.
Now when you have incompressible material, but deformable highly deformable in the
stack of bricks the bricks failed intention because tensile stresses were developed in the
brick unit because of the deformation of the rubber.
The rubber incompressible, but deformable much more than the unit led to the brick
being able to fail in tension because of the tensile stresses that were developing at the
interface, when this is replaced with a material which has a lower Poisson’s ratio of the
order of 0.3 for steel the Poisson’s ratio of the mortar would be off the order of 0.25.
This created a restraining effect in the mortar itself because now it is more compressible
than the previous case in the rubber we looked at an example which is highly
incompressible material whereas, you are looking at steel which can be compressed
relatively more and this causes lateral confinement of the mortar and as you would
expect in a material that is brittle under triaxial compression, the mortar actually would
fail in crushing as you would see what happens in this sort of an experiment.
Where the brick is now able to create the restraining effect lateral deformations are
controlled, you get the triaxial state of stress and the typical failure that that would
134
expect in a material in compression, a material that is brittle and in compression failure
by crushing is seen.
To be able to visualize this entire process it will be instructive to look at the behavior, the
trend under lateral compression and tension versus the axial compression when you are
loading a stack of bricks in compression. So, prism that is loaded in compression
concentrically. Now this will actually form the basis of a set of formulations that arrive
at the compressive strength of the assembly of masonry with an understanding of the
roles played by individual strengths, particularly the unit and the mortar in compression
and in tension ok.
So, if I were to look at the trend of the stresses in the masonry, the stresses in the unit
and the stresses in the mortar depicted on a graph that has axial compression along the y
axis and the lateral effects on the x axis- lateral tension on one side and lateral
compression on the other. The two points A and B; the two points A and B would
represent the uniaxial tensile strength of the brick and the uniaxial compressive strength
of the brick unit right, you see that the point A is on the x axis on the lateral tension side.
So, A is actually depicting the uniaxial tensile strength of the unit, B is sitting on the y
axis on axial compression and is depicting the uniaxial compressive strength of the unit,
these are the component properties unit properties.
135
The behavior of the unit is rather brittle. So, an idealization with a straight line of the
tension-compression behavior is acceptable. So, that green dotted line there is actually
the tension-compression failure surface or the envelope of the brick unit right. And on
the sidelines, you can see that the tensile strength is roughly about 10 to 20 percent of the
compressive strength of the unit and that is a typical value that you can go with. The
point C again on compression, is actually the mortar compressive strength; the
compressive strength of the material of the mortar right. So, A is the unit tensile strength,
B is the uniaxial compressive strength of the unit, C is the uniaxial compressive strength
of mortar.
Now, as we had discussed earlier the mortar tends to be in a state of triaxial compression.
So, this envelope that you see here between axial compression and lateral compression is
the line that defines the failure envelope of mortar in triaxial compression ok. If you
were to examine the stress path of the unit in the prism itself; now you got the stack of
bricks which has been subjected to uniaxial concentric loading in compression and we
are examining the stresses formed in the unit, in the prism right.
These are now not the individual failure surfaces that we are looking at, but the stress
path of the unit in the prism. As the axial compression increases we know that because of
the co-action because of the bond with mortar the unit which is trying to confine the
mortar itself experiences by axial tension. So, as the compression loading increases you
have the mortar, the unit which is experiencing increase in stress that would go along this
line O D right and then finally, reaches the failure surface we will come to that point in a
moment.
So, the line O D is actually the stress path of the unit in the prism finally, coming and
intersecting the line A B which is the failure envelope of the unit in compression-tension.
Now, if you were to examine the stress path of the mortar in the prism, the stress path of
the mortar in the prism it is no longer responding as a material that is in uniaxial
compression. It is actually in triaxial compression; however, the mortar being more
deformable is a material that is now behaving in a non-linear manner, the brick behavior
can be idealized to an almost linear behavior.
So, as the loading progresses the mortar follows this red line that you see the stress path
of mortar and in the prism O F right, you see that the stress levels in the mortar can
136
exceed C which is the uniaxial compressive strength of mortar which is C it goes beyond
that. But at a certain point; the stress levels in the unit reach the failure surface in
compression-tension (the surface A B); cracks are formed in the unit and you have the
initiation of failure in the unit itself.
The unit starts cracking and failing in tension. So, you get the units hitting the point D on
the surface A B, but the moment the unit fails in tension it is capacity to restrain the
mortar and cause a state of triaxial compression in the mortar is also lost and that is when
there is a simultaneous failure the unit has failed almost the same time, the mortar can no
longer resist the level of compression now higher than the uniaxial compressive strength
of mortar, but it is suddenly fails because the confinement effect is lost. So, there is
almost a simultaneous occurrence of these two phenomena which is the splitting failure
in the brick and the loss of confinement and crushing failure of the mortar itself.
So, this is how the failure mechanism propagates between the mortar and the unit in a
prism which is subjected to uniaxial compression, you must note here the linear envelope
that is used to define the failure surface in the unit and the almost linear line O D because
a material is quite brittle in comparison to mortar. Whereas, the stress path of the mortar
itself O F is rather non-linear in comparison to the constituent and the constituent
particularly brick and the behavior of brick itself in the prism right. So, this will form the
basis of one or two formulations that we will look at in terms of defining the
compressive strength of masonry knowing the strengths of the constituents.
So, to summarize when a combination of vertical uniaxial compression and horizontal

biaxial tension reaches the compression biaxial tension envelope, O D reaches the line A
B at D of the failure envelope A B, you have the cracking of the units and a simultaneous
crushing of the mortar you reach point F now you see that it is at the same level of axial
compression and this is due to the loss of confinement on the non-linear surface O F
now.
So, this is your question is again dealing with whether D and F are simultaneous
phenomena. Of course, we are looking at an instant in time you see that they are at the
same axial compression level; that means, the prism has reached a level of axial
compression, at that point the stress in the unit has reached a state where the biaxial
tension is sufficient enough to hit the failure envelope A B right. So, that at that moment
137
the unit is cracking, but the moment the unit cracks it has does not have the luxury of the
confinement that it was providing to the mortar.
So, at that instant in time if you were to look at masonry compression test a prism test
you would really not be able to distinguish between the formation of the final tension
cracks in the unit. At that moment if you try to touch the mortar, the mortar is powdered.
So, the crushing in the mortar has occurred at that stage. So, this is almost like a cause
and effect that we are examining, but these are phenomena that are extremely close in
succession and the reason why we are examining this is, closed form solution to arrive at
the compressive strength of masonry that uses this concept of a simultaneous occurrence
of the failure in the mortar and the unit is what is most probable as the real phenomena.
In terms of the test method itself, a standard prism test is what is conducted and now we
are really looking at an unconfined compressive strength test. The unit is subjected to;
the stack of bricks with the mortar subjected to uniaxial concentric loading.
So, it is an unconfined compressive strength. Recommendation when you are using solid
units clay brick solid units is to go with a height to thickness ratio of 5 and this thickness
here for the stack of bricks refers to the least lateral dimension. So, if you take a stack of
bricks the length of the stack is going to be at least 190 millimeters whereas, the other
dimension is 100 mm.
138
So, the height of about 5 times the least lateral dimension is what is required as far as the
unconfined compressive strength of masonry. So, typical stack is seen here you might
have for several reasons you might not necessarily be able to go with the height to
thickness ratio of 5, several things can control the overall geometry you might not have a
test setup that gives you the headroom that allows fitting all these 5 layers of bricks or
the required height to thickness ratio in your system, you might have units that are of a
dimension which again is different from the regular modular dimension.
So, you can have some deviations and it is interesting to examine if you were to use h/t
ratios lower or h/ t ratios higher what effect do you typically get. So, most codes, in fact,
all codes would actually then give you the compressive strength that you will be able to
achieve for masonry based on typical unit strengths and typical mortar strengths defined
again based on the classification of the mortar. So, for a given classification and
proportion of mortar you can get a certain strength and so, if you look at a table of mortar
strengths or mortar classification and unit strengths, you will know what is the expected
compressive strength that you will get for the masonry itself.
So, that is typically height to least lateral dimension, not the other dimension. One unit
long to stack test one unit long and one unit thick, you can go from about 1.5 times h/t
ratio of 1.5 to 5, because if you were to deviate you have correction factors and that is for
practical applications range is given to you. And when you are conducting the test now
you really have to understand that it is no longer the component behavior, the constituent
behavior it is an assembly. So, if you were to measure deformations you have to be
careful that you are measuring overall deformations or are you measuring deformations
in the constituent material.
Therefore, when you place the bricks as a stack in a universal testing machine as shown
here. LVDTs or Linear Variable Differential Transducers are used to measure the
deformations, you have to be careful whether you are measuring deformations of the unit
or are you measuring deformations across the joints of the masonry assembly itself and
that is the reason why we typically use a combination of strain gauges. The strain gauges
will give us the strains and from which you can calculate deformations in the unit, but if
you want them across the joints, we typically make use of LVDTs and measure the
deformations in the masonry.
139
We also tend to have measuring devices on all 4 surfaces because you want to be sure
you are applying uniaxial concentric compression, because due to any reason which
could be due to the unevenness of the masonry units, you might have mortar joints that
are thicker in one plane compared to another which basically alters the geometry.
And because of the difference in the composition, you might have flexural compression
instead of uniaxial concentric compression. You want uniform compression, but you
might not get it because if there are deviations in the mortar thickness it could lead to the
sort of a situation. And hence to be sure that you are getting you concentric compression
you would place 4 LVDTs, at least 4 LVDTs on the 4 sides and be sure that the
deformations are comparable deformations.
Again, we have seen the effect of capping. Even here soft capping is adopted, but
basically the capping is to ensure that the load transfer is uniform. If you are using
molded bricks the brick at the top will have a frog, the frog is filled with mortar or
plaster of Paris and then you use a plywood plank that is then serving as the capping for
uniform load transfer. If you are using hollow blocks; then basically the loading is on the
face shell, the loading is only on the face shell. You are not going to be filling the hollow
blocks with any material you are testing the compressive strength of the hollow block
itself so, face shell loading is what is happening.
140
So, what is important is that you have measurements of what is the strain or deformation
in the brick. So, you will have strain gauges fixed on to the brick unit itself, but if you
want the deformation in the masonry you need to have measurement across at least one
mortar joint and that is what you see here.
You can see that the LVDT here, this is a linear variable differential transducer that is
running from the point here to point here, across two mortar joints 1 and 2. So, unit
mortar joint unit mortar joint unit and so, you have got the deformation being captured
over a gauge length in the masonry. This is what you will be using for estimating the
stress-strain behavior of the masonry itself and you can see in the other figure, how on
the other two sides you have the LVDTs. This is primarily for a check that the flexural
compression, a strain gradient is not occurring in the test as you are conducting the test
itself measuring instruments strain gauges and LVDTs are typically used.
And then you would basically calculate the compressive strength of masonry as the
failure load to the net area and that is something that we discussed earlier that the
compressive strength and the compressive stress is estimated based on Anet and here
how much area of void is present matters to the strength of the masonry itself.
If you are unable to carry out a test with prescribed values of h/t adjustments for the joint
thickness or the number of layers of bricks or units in the stack can be carried out by
factors typically given to you in codes. So, we look at; we look at the differences that are
141
there between codes, but there are factors that are based on the h/t ratio. Typical failure
modes in the prism, you would see that the unit will split you can see the formation of
several vertical or sub-vertical cracks and you will see that the mortar has crushed after
the test. So, will be lateral bulging and the splitting of bricks along with the crushing of
mortar.
But when you have very low values of h/t ratios that you are adopting for the prism, the
problem is you will have confinement effect coming from your plates the loading platens
of the top and the bottom and you will not get a range of uniform compression happening
in the unit and you will not get the formation of these vertical cracks and lateral bulging,
you will see the formation of the x crack the conical failure because of the confinement
effect. The failure that you that we talked off earlier in the mortar cube or the brick unit
or even in a concrete cube that you would see is the hourglass kind of failure is what will
happen if you have values of h by t that are small.
Now, if you were to use h/t ratios that are more than what is prescribed, you would
expect buckling failure in the prism that is why a cap of h/t ratio of 5 is prescribed,
because if you go beyond that the failure mechanism would have second order effects
and you will not get a compressive strength that is representative of the compressive
strength of masonry. So, with sufficient h/t ratios you will get vertical cracking through
the masonry units ok.
142
Just to examine what is the order of these correction factors that codes talk of, in terms of
the prism compressive strength, in case you are working with prisms height to thickness
ratios which are non standard or beyond the prescribed limits. So, this graph here shows
you the correction factor for clay brick units and there is a comparison of the codes from
the United States American Concrete Institute, the ASCE American Society of Civil
Engineers and The Masonry Society TMS code, the Australian code and the Canadian
code. So, here in this graph will actually examining clay brick masonry you will see that
the correction factors converge to a value of 5 for a h by t ratio of 1.
So, the h by t ratio 5 is what is prescribed; with a h by t ratio of 5 you do not need to
correct or if your h by t ratio is lower you see that codes can differ and that comes from
variability in the manufacturing processes, variability in the materials available from
country to country and that is clearly the reason why you cannot adopt codes from
different countries particularly for factors such as these or any other empirically arrived
at values.
So, you can see variability in the correction factors across codes in 3 countries here, if
you were to look at IS code, the IS code gives values for 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4 and 5; h/t ratios
ranging from 2 to 5 and you can see that more or less we are in the same order probably
lesser for h/t ratios of 2, but that is the typical trend you would get correction factors
trend of correction factors for clay brick masonry prescribed by IS 1905 this information
is available in appendix B of IS 1905.
So, the prescription for the compression test and correction factors is available in
appendix B of 1905 the masonry code for unreinforced masonry as a structural system,
but if you were to examine concrete block masonry. In concrete block masonry you
already have units which are significantly different the blocks are significantly different
in dimension in comparison to the clay brick units, you would have heights that are 150,
blocks which are about 300.
So, these are typically very different in unit geometry, the block geometry in comparison
to the clay brick units. And so, you must be careful about this the correction factors are;
the correction factors are based on a completely different set of h/t ratios, here the
threshold h/t ratio is 2 it is not 5 and that is because of (1) the material and (2) the
geometry itself.
143
So, if you are using concrete block masonry you can see again how the three different
codes give you different values, you can see that typically almost two codes look at h/t of
one as the threshold value as the value for which no correction is required beyond that or
less than that you have to have a correction factor for the h/t. So, if you have value is
greater than 2, correction factor is greater than 1 according to the ACI or the TMS the
masonry society and for the others you can see that there is a difference.
So, it is important that you are looking at these factors with reference to the specific
code and the specific typology of blocks, geometry of blocks that are being used. The
Indian code IS 1905 again gives you a set of correction factors which are with respect to
the block geometry that is prescribed in the Indian standards and also the composition
that is prescribed for the material of the blocks.
And you can see that the value at h/t of 2 commences at 1 and then you have values that
are greater than 1 for the correction factor used for concrete block masonry if there is a
deviation from h/t of 2 and beyond. So, given the block geometry given the block
geometries it becomes cumbersome to do anything like h/t of 5; the UTMs will not be
typically designed to have h/t of 5 sitting in the machine and also because of the material
these values are significantly different, you can see the h/t at 5 for clay brick masonry
and the concrete block masonry are different 1.0 it is 1.37 in this case for clay brick
masonry at this at this point whereas, it is 1 for clay brick masonry. So, the geometry
being hollow the material are what matter in terms of these values varying. So, you will
be really careful what correction factors you are using ok.
144
To examine what factors affect the compressive strength of masonry, all factors that you
can think of at the constituent level has a significant role to play, but depending on
whether you are looking at clay brick masonry, depending on the type of mortar and
depending on whether you are looking at concrete block masonry, the importance of one
factor or the other can change.
So, unit strength in geometry, the mortar strength so, we looking at geometry of the
constituents, the strength of the constituents, deformation characteristics of the unit and
the mortar, the thickness of the joint, water absorption characteristics of the unit and
retentivity of moisture of the water of the mortar, because the mortar has to gain strength
adequately and the type of brickwork bonding.
And at this stage I would like to point out one important aspect that you must consider-
we are looking at compressive strength based on testing a stack of bricks right and you
arriving at the compressive strength of masonry based on a standard prism test. However,
you know that when you are constructing a wall you would never construct a stack of
bricks right, you typically require thicker cross sections, stack of bricks is rarely used
because you are going to get vertical joints.
So, you use bond patterns, now depending on the bond pattern adopted; let us say you
are adopting a header bond, a stretcher bond, English bond or a Flemish bond, you can at
145
and if you were to create small wallet us using different bond patterns the compressive
strength of masonry will be different from the stack compressive strength.
So, the stack compressive strength really does not account for the interactions of the
masonry from the pattern of joint and the lateral effects that come from the units that are
sitting around bonded to it in the masonry wallet itself. So, brickwork bonding has a role
to play, but since you can have several types of bonds you do not have compressive
strength defined based on the bond, you have compressive strength defined as the
compressive strength of a stack of bricks ok.
Let us examine a few factors that affect the compressive strength. You are looking at the
unit geometry and the mortar bedded area. So, primarily what is the kind of role the unit
geometry has or the mortar bedded area has if you are looking at solid blocks versus
perforated blocks right. The gross area versus the net area effect as far as the strength is
concerned.
So, on the x axis you are looking at the joint thickness in millimeter at the top, on the y
axis it is the ratio of the prism strength to the unit strength; taking the ratio of the prism
strength to the unit strength right. And this is clearly what we were talking about earlier
that if you take a stack of bricks with no mortar you should be able to reach the unit
strength; you will be able to reach the unit strength.
146
So, if the ratio of the prism strength to the unit strength is 1 you can be sure that the joint
thickness is 0, which means introduction of a mortar joint of any thickness is going to
reduce the compressive strength of the masonry. So, you can see how the ratio of the
prism strength to the unit strength keeps dropping both for solid blocks and for
perforated blocks as the mortar joint thickness increases.
But what is instructive to note here is the geometry between the 2 types if you have solid
blocks versus perforated blocks the effect of the joint thickness is much more
pronounced in the perforated blocks the reason being you are really looking at a smaller
area in the perforated block that is carrying the stresses as against the solid block right.
The geometry matters in the solid block you have larger area that is getting affected by
the joint thickness whereas, in the perforated blocks it is a smaller area that is actually
resisting and the role of the joint thickness is much more pronounced in the perforated
blocks. So, between the solid blocks and the perforated blocks this difference is primarily
due to the available bedded area; available mortar bedded area that changes the behavior
under compression itself.
If you are looking at the role that the mortar strength will play on the compressive
strength of the masonry assembly what comes out as an important message is beyond a
certain mortar compressive strength you cannot increase the prism compressive strength.
There is a saturation; it does not mean that you keep increasing the strength of the mortar
147
you going to get stronger and stronger unit stronger and stronger masonry, there is a
saturation that happens.
So, if you are looking at mortar strengths on the x axis for clay brick masonry first and
the prism strength on the y axis, then you can see that beyond a certain mortar strength
you have a saturation of these values right. Of course, these pictures are given for a
specific unit strength and the trend would be similar keeping in mind what the ratios are
between the unit strength and the mortar strength.
If you come to the concrete block masonry again with the mortar strength on the x axis
and the unit strength on the y axis what you start seeing is that really the mortar joint is
not playing a significant role, any idea why that is so? The masonry compressive
strength, the prism strength is almost insensitive to the variation of the mortar strengths.
If you look at clay brick masonry and the mortar the unit and the mortar are significantly
different materials with different values of Poisson’s ratio whereas, in the concrete block
masonry the mortar cement mortar and the concrete block made in almost the same
manner probably with aggregates which are of a slightly higher size than the mortar.
So, you are looking at almost a uniform material in the concrete block masonry; there is
no significant difference in the constituent behavior in the concrete block masonry as
against the clay brick masonry with a clay unit has a very different compressibility very
different deformability in comparison to the mortar. That is why there is an insensitivity
to the mortar strength in concrete block masonry whereas, in clay brick masonry it is
quite significant which also saturates after certain point.
148
The unit strength how about the unit strength you are again looking at clay brick unit
compressive strength on the x axis (MPa) on the top and the prism compressive strength
on the y axis you can see that it definitely has a very significant role in the compressive
strength of masonry, again significant or steep increase and then saturation beyond
certain level.
Those high values that you see at the top is also because you can get very good quality
bricks particularly used for refractory purposes as lining for kilns where you fire
materials. So, high compressive strength is useful in such situations even in our country,
if you look at you do not have to look at refractive bricks, but if you were to look at
bricks coming from the Indo Gangetic plain the clay is of such quality that you would get
bricks easily of a compressive strength of 30 to 40 MPa.
So, the variability is because of the variability of clay in South India and Tamil Nadu for
example, it is difficult to get brick units which are more than 10 MPa or 12 MPa. So, that
is the kind of variability that you will have, but the unit has the unit strength has an
important role in the masonry compressive strength.
Again, with the block you see a similar trend here it is more uniform that is because it is
a manufactured, I mean it is a material that is manufactured with more quality control
cement and aggregates in a factory sort of situation. Whereas, clay brick masonry you
149
see that this slightly non-linear is the kind of trend between prism unit compressive
strength and the prism compressive strength.
Joint thickness, it is very clear that thinner the joint better is going to be the masonry
compressive strength you can see the; you can see the trend here, it is the best that you
can ask for, you see on the y axis the percentage change in the compressive strength to
the ratio of brick height to mortar joint thickness and it is normalized; and normalized to
a height to joint thickness of 6.
So, you can see that with the ratio of the brick height to the mortar joint thickness
increasing, which means you are getting thinner and thinner joints as you go along the x
axis, thinner joints means improvement in the compressive strength of the masonry. If
the ratio is falling, you are getting thicker joints and then you see that the compressive
strength is actually going below; it is going to the negative range that is the role joint
thickness will have.
If you are looking at block masonry concrete blocks- grouted and un grouted, the role is
again not as significant as in clay brick masonry right. And you will appreciate the kind
of complexity now, in concrete block masonry, in hollow block masonry you have space
to put the reinforcement.
150
And the compressive strength of the masonry is not affected so much by the joint
thickness, but in solid clay brick masonry where compressive strength is affected by the
joint thickness you have this issue of how can you place the reinforcement without
changing the or increasing the joint thickness. So, it is easily demonstrated by this trend
between joint thickness and the compressive strength of the unit itself, what is on the x
axis here, is the height of the brick unit.
Student: Ok.
Height of the brick unit divided by the joint thickness. So, if you keep increasing the
joint thickness, then the height to joint thickness is coming closer to 0 whereas, thinner
joint you getting a higher ratio, with respect to optimum thickness levels typically it is
expected that the mortar joint is not more than 10 millimeters.
But you can get see that depends on the kind of tolerance you have on the brick unit
itself if the brick unit is undulatedd which is very often the case when you use country
bricks the tendency by the mason is to use a thicker joint which is then going to give
stability to the entire wall. Because, if he is going to use thin joints then you will you will
have out of plain deformations while manufacturing the wall itself, that is the reason why
the mason puts a thicker joint, but the effect is significant on the strength of the masonry
and that is why there is dimensional control on the unit which is required.
151
And finally, examining the grout strength; so, if you looking at hollow grouted masonry
and if you were to again grout the void we are not looking at reinforced in this case it is
just the hollow block with grout, what you see is that the effect of the grout is it is there it
is weak right.
If you were to use the strength of the block superpose it with the strength of the grout it
is this line that you should be getting right, you are actually you are actually getting a
more resistant cross section you have the block geometry, block has a certain strength
you have the grout you test the grout; the grout has a certain compressive strength you
put these together superposition does not work right.
And you see that as you keep increasing the grout strength you do not have significant
increase in the strength of the masonry. That is the reason why it is prescribed that keep
the grout strength close to the block strength properties and you should be; you should be
able to get desirable performance in compression of the masonry itself.
Student: Design (Refer time: 45:23).
Yes of course, if you are using; if you are using the grout strength has a role to play
when you are looking at design of a hollow block of partially grouted masonry
construction you will have to account for how many of those voids in a cross section are
filled, how many are unfilled and the net area matters as far as the axial load carrying
capacity of the wall is concerned ok. I think I will stop here and we will examine the
remaining properties of the masonry assembly in the final lecture in this module.
Thank you.
152
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 02
Lecture – 09
Masonry Materials and Properties Part - V
Good morning, we continue looking at behavior of the masonry assembly, we were

examining the behavior of masonry under compression, the standard tests that are
conducted to get the compressive strength of masonry and the various factors that affect
the compressive strength of masonry.
In today’s lecture we continue examining other mechanical parameters, we continue

examining masonry under compression, but the modulus of elasticity is a parameter of
structural interest and we will examine how you go about getting the modulus of
elasticity (1) and (2), what is the kind of protocol that you should adopt, both from a test
perspective and from arriving at the value of the modulus of elasticity of masonry. And
then in case you do not have the possibility of actually carrying out a test to be able to
use the modulus of elasticity of the material that you are going to be using in your
design, are there any ways that you can still use reasonably accurate value of the
modulus of elasticity for your design, right.
153
So, mind you we are still examining masonry under compression. So, the elastic modulus
that we are referring to is the elastic modulus under compression, many materials have
elastic moduli that are same in compression and tension. Masonry is not a material where
the modulus of velocity is same in tension and compression. The modulus of elasticity in
tension considering that masonry has very little tensile strength is really not important
from the design perspective, but when we when we are carrying out analysis of existing
structures, particularly historical masonry an estimate of the modulus of elasticity of
masonry in tension may become important; however, our focus is going to be on the
behavior in compression.
So, with the modulus of elasticity values you have the possibility of estimating
deformations. So, deflections and the stiffness calculations would require a value of the
modulus of elasticity of the material. We were looking at a standard prism test for
compression, it is the same test that is going to be able to give you a full stress strain
curve of the material and from the stress strain curve of the material you can establish
what the modulus of elasticity is. So, it is standard practice today to carry out tests that
are strain controlled or displacement controlled so, that you get post peak behavior of the
material itself.
So, if you are carrying out a force control test, the force control test would be able to
give you the stress-strain curve of the material up to the peak, beyond the peak you have
to look at the descending branch; that is the resistance of the material starts decreasing
and you cannot have a force control test anymore because you cannot reduce the applied
force the system is not going to respond. Displacement controlled or strain-controlled
tests are where you continue to increase the displacements or the strains and you get
reducing resistances beyond the peak.
So, a displacement control test or a strain control test is what is going to give you the
entire stress strain curve of the material from initial loading, elastic behavior, pre peak
softening, peak strength and post peak softening until failure. So, let us assume you have
the stress strain curve derived from a standard compression test, standard prism test on
the masonry, you can then use this to arrive at aspects like the modulus of elasticity and
the Poisson’s ratio if need be. What you can clearly see in the stress strain curve is that,
at about 35-40 definitely within the first half of the stress strain curve, you start getting
non-linearity, you start getting non-linearity in the material.
154
And this is this is strongly representative of a material that is composite and porous in it
is constituents, the unit being porous the material being composite because of the units
behavior, the mortar behavior and the interface which we have seen has a significant role
to play in the co-action between the unit and the mortar. So, this sort of a complex
composite is actually going to have non-linear behavior beyond 50 percent of the peak.
So, to be able to use this and arrive at the chord modulus, arrive at the modulus of
elasticity we basically make use of the chord modulus. If you remember when we were
talking about the modulus of elasticity of the brick we were talking of the secant
modulus. The difference between the secant modulus and the chord modulus as you
know is the secant modulus you go from the origin, but in the chord modulus we are not
going to be going from the origin as far as the stress strain curve of the masonry is
concerned, but the prescription is that you go from about 5 percent of the peak stress to
33 percent of the peak stress, we are stopping at 33 percent because you start seeing
deviation from linear behavior, but can you think of why we neglect the first 5 percent.
So, if I were to if I were to zoom in on this initial one third of the stress strain curve. So,
initial one third of the stress strain curve is what is enlarged for you in the finger down
there and you see that the chord modulus that we are looking at is examining a 5 percent
to 33 percent range, why 5 percent is the question ok. The reason why we look at about 5
percent of the peak stress is simply because this is a composite, you have the brick unit
and you have the mortar joint, you can have some voids that form between the mortar
joint and the unit itself.
And as you start loading there is a certain rearrangement of the entire system because of
the initial load you get some compactness in the entire stack, but this can actually create
a bias in the estimate of the modulus of elasticity because this is not material behavior,
this is actually closing of voids. So, it is prescribed that the initial 5 percent be neglected
and hence you take a chord modulus that goes from 5 percent to 33 percent of the peak
strength and get the modulus of of elasticity.
The point that you definitely would like to keep in mind is you cannot do one test and
determine the modulus of elasticity, we are already talking of a material which has
significant variability in comparison to other structural engineering materials such as
concrete or steel. Therefore, it is always going to be an average and depending on the
155
code which you are depending on these numbers can vary. Some codes require that you
test a minimum of 3 prisms, other codes require that you test 5 or 6 and take an average
of the compressive strength and then you can also look at the stress strain curves and
arrive at modulus of elasticity values from the average estimates across the set of
specimens that you are testing.
So, please keep in mind that it is not one single specimen that you are depending on for
arriving at these average compressive strength values or the average modulus velocity
values. Yes; so 5 percent is to ensure that the closing up of voids is neglected that is not
material behavior you do not account for the initial 5 percent of the loading. 33 percent is
we do see that there is non-linear behavior around 50 percent of the peak stress and
beyond. So, to be sure you are examining only the linear elastic range you looking at the
first third of the stress strain curve and the therefore, you stop at 33 percent, 34 percent,
but the point is we looking at first third of the stress strain curve right ok.
Masonry is a material that is highly affected by variability and the graphs that you will
see in a few minutes will convince you that the kind of variability that you will expect in
clay brick masonry is far significant and you should be careful about having statistically
relevant numbers whenever you are working with actual materials and actual values
coming from the tests. Of course, the variability is lower in the concrete block masonry;
however, you still do see significant variability.
156
So, this is an interesting graph that looks at the compressive strength on the x axis and
the modulus of elasticity estimated from a stress strain curve of the same test on the y
axis and you have got several tests sitting here of course, this is not from one single type
of clay brick masonry, it could be from different locations and different countries
manufacturing processes and workmanship. However, you can see the kind of scatter
that exists even for one level of compressive strength.
So, if I take a compressive strength of about 10 MPa you can see that you have a scatter
even they you look at 30 MPa you have a scatter there and so on. So, the point is the if
you look at this sort of a data and pull out an upper bound lower bound of the modulus
elasticity as a function of the compressive strength and mind you this is simply because
the modulus of elasticity happens to be correlated to the compressive strength right.
The correlation is empirical, the value between modulus of elasticity as a function of the
compressive strength is an empirical correlation. So, if one were to look at modulus of
elasticity Em here, as a function of compressive strength f mt, this outer boundary and here
the lower bound itself, you can see varies between 210 to 1670. So, it is almost 8 times
from the lower bound to the upper bound, 210 being the factor in the lower bound 1670
in the upper bound. So, this is a fantastic piece of research where lot of these tests have
been clubbed together and what is of what is of immense interest is the kind of
variability that you will get; the kind of variability that you will get.
So, what can you do in the face of such variability is to be careful in the adoption of
fixed values for parameters such as modulus of elasticity and have always a range. So,
that you have an upper bound lower bound estimate and that is definitely going to give
you a little more little more prepared in terms of the behavior of the system itself. As I
mentioned what you saw earlier is clay brick masonry ok.
Now, clay brick masonry as we were discussing yesterday we talking about clay brick
which is very different in composition, in nature compared to the mortar itself, but when
you look at concrete block masonry grouted, hollow, partially grouted, the grout material
and the block itself- the concrete block itself and the mortar joint, the mortar material are
materials which are rather close to each other.
So, the variability exists, but still reduces when you go from clay brick clay brick
masonry to concrete block masonry. So, here you see that again it is about 3 times where
157
your factor, the multiplying factor to the compressive strength to get your modulus of
elasticity is about 400 to 1290- 3 times here, earlier we had seen it is about 8 times. So,
appreciate the reduction in variability, but the variability still exists that is a quantity that
is going to be affected by your estimate of the modulus of elasticity from the stress strain
curve. So, it depends a lot on the way the experiment is being carried out and variability
that can come in executing the experiment also.
So, well if you do not have the luxury of doing a test, but you still need to make an
estimate of the deflections, you need to do a deflection check, what is the modulus of
elasticity that you can assume? You do not have direct estimate; a closed form solution
that comes from knowing the strains of the constituents. So, what is typically prescribed
by the codes is a relationship that is based on the strength of the masonry in compression
ok.
So, what the code if it distinguishes between short term loading and long-term loading,
which the code should mostly do, is to give the modulus of elasticity as a function of the
masonry compressive strength. As you had seen in the previous slide the factor k as an
empirical parameter coming out from statistically relevant number of tests, Em as the
modulus of elasticity as a function k into fm which is the masonry compressing strength.
Such a format is normally prescribed for short term loading and is specified in the code
158
that it is for short term loading. Now, if it is for long term loading masonry is a material
that is quite significantly affected by creep.
So, here I have just got one example that is typically used for the Indian conditions, if
you were to use a factor then 550 is a good estimate for the type of clay brick units that
you get in India and the construction practice is adopted in India. So, 550 times the
compressive strength of masonry that you are adopting in your design is a good estimate
of the modulus of elasticity.
So, the reason why we need to be looking at short term loading versus long term loading
is primarily because masonry again is a material that is significantly affected by long
term loading effects particularly creep. So, code should actually be prescribing the
modulus of elasticity under short term loading and a way of arriving at the modulus of
elasticity for long term loading or prescribed values in a similar manner with empirical
coefficients such as k for short term loading and long term loading right.
So, if you were to look at typical values, you are looking at the long term modulus, you
get softening in the material over long term loading, which means the modulus of
elasticity is going to be is going to drop with respect to the short term values. So, you got
a stiffer more brittle material initially, but over time it is get it is becoming softer and the
modulus of elasticity is going to be about one-half to two thirds of the modulus of
elasticity for the short term itself.
So, if you were to use the short-term modulus and arrive at the long-term modulus, one
way is to look at the creep coefficient that is material specific. So, if creep coefficients
for the type of material that you are using, it may be clay brick masonry, it may be
concrete block masonry, it may be your autoclaved aerated concrete. So, depending on
the type of material you use, if there is an estimate of the creep coefficient then you can
use the creep coefficient to be able to arrive at the long-term modulus.
Eshort − term
Elong −term =
1 + u
u = Final creep coefficient
So, you use the short term modulus divided by 1 plus the creep coefficient, here the
parameter was we talking of is the final creep coefficient and the final creep coefficient
159
is going to be from long term loading tests, the final strain to the elastic strain is
estimated to give you the creep coefficient; the final creep coefficient itself. So, if the
value is available then you can make a more accurate estimate of what the long term
modulus of elasticity is going to be, this format is followed in the Euro-code the
European norms for masonry constructions which is EC- 6 and that is what is reproduced
here for you.
As you can see the values of the final creep coefficients can differ significantly
depending on the type of material you can see that the value for clay brick masonry and
concrete block masonry can be significantly different. So, if you have these values you
could use them to arrive at the long term modulus, but if not codes may specify what
values for these coefficients should you use for the type of masonry that you are
examining for short term loading versus long term loading and again for different types
of mortar that has been used for the masonry construction.
So, word of caution modulus velocity be conscious whether you are looking at short term
loading or long term loading, values typically prescribed by codes would be for short
term modulus, but if you were to make account for long term effects know that you will
have to get the modulus of elasticity for long term long term loading itself.
So, we have examined compression, we have examined the stress strain behavior of
masonry in compression, modulus of elasticity coming out of the behavior in
160
compression of the assembly, we need to now examine the behavior in tension right. And
again, it is not about direct tension, we are not interested in characterizing the strength of
masonry in direct tension. There is a finite value of the masonry tension strength in direct
tension, but we are really not interested because that is a value that is rather small non-
zero, but rather small and not dependable right. The masonry tensile strength is not
something that you can depend on and hence from for most practical purposes it is good
to assume that you have a zero-tension material.
So, if there is some tensile strength in the material that is a cushion that you have that is
that may work in your advantage though you are being conservative in your calculations.
But here what were really interested in is flexural tension. It is the strength of the bond
between the masonry unit and the mortar and that matters particularly when you have
lateral loads right. So, the unit mortar bond is what we are characterizing when we talk
of masonry in tension and it is flexural tension that we are examining.
So, combination of lateral loads and gravity is when you would expect masonry to go
into flexural tension, it could also be due to gravity loads that are acting eccentric to the
wall cross section itself. The bending in a wall you could have bending about the vertical
axis, bending about the horizontal axis or a combination of both vertical bending and
horizontal bending and we will examine each of these cases to understand what sort of a
interface behavior- unit mortar interface behavior would you get and how do you
characterize that because you need the strength.
So, when you start examining the bending behavior about a vertical axis, about a
horizontal axis or a combination of both vertical and horizontal which is referred to as
diagonal bending. Two parameters become important- it is the flexural tensile strength
normal to the bed joint and the flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed joint right. So,
the flexural tensile strength when the action is normal to the bed joint when tension is
normal to the bed joint and when tension is parallel to the bed joint.
So, you need both these estimates and often you may be able to do a test to characterize
one and the other one is for the same material that the masonry is composed of, you can
get an empirical correlation between the tensile strength parallel to the bed joint and
tensile strength normal to the bed joint. And the ratio between the tensile strength
parallel to the bed joint and the tensile strength normal to the bed joint is very often
161
referred to as the orthogonal strength ratio and we will come back to this aspect when we
deal with design.
So, the strength in tension in two orthogonal planes is referred to as the orthogonal
strength ratio and typically you would have the flexural tensile strength of the bed joint
parallel to the bed joint twice as much as that of the strength normal to the bed joint. So,
OSR; OSR the Orthogonal Strength Ratio of about 2 is typically expected, but again this
value will change from material to material. This is a parameter that again has a high
degree of variability so, if you are doing tests you need to have significantly large
number of specimens. So, that scatter is reduced; however, keep in mind that variability
is going to be a going to be an issue in this sort of a situation.
This bond, the tensile bond, depends on a number of parameters that we have looked at
earlier, the initial rate of absorption IRA, the water retention properties of the mortar,
what sort of composition does the mortar have, have you used admixtures, how well is
the joint itself made, workmanship therefore matters, whether the surfaces are clean or
the dust particles that inhibit the formation of good bond and after placement, if there are
disturbances in the initial period after placement your bond can get affected. So, there are
workmanship aspects, material aspects and specific properties of the units and the mortar
that will matter in establishing good bond and thereby giving you good flexural tensile
strength normal and parallel to the bed joint.
162
So, let us examine the 3 typical cases when you have a combination of gravity forces and
lateral forces, where the flexural tensile strength is required for the masonry to resist the
external actions.
One-way vertical bending. So, if a wall is bending between supports right and is assumed
to be free on it is edges on the vertical edges, if a wall is free on the vertical edges and it
is supported only at the top and the bottom and it is subjected to out of plane loads, if it is
subjected to wind loads or inertial loads due to an earthquake and there is gravity force
acting along the wall itself under a combination of gravity, loads and the out of plane
loads the wall is expected to be in vertical bending right.
When the wall is in vertical bending the bed joint; the bed joint is subjected to flexural
normal to the bed joint. So, each bed joint is going to be subjected to tension,
compression induced by flexure. So, same joint would have compression on one end and
tension on the other. So, this is a joint you got tension on one end and you have got
compression on the other, one end of the cross section is experiencing compression, the
other end of the cross section is experiencing tension and that is the flexural tension
effect on the bed joint.
This is the effect of vertical bending of the wall and this is happening because you have
top support and a bottom support or in your wall the sides are free right. The sides are
free from any effect coming in, any restraining effect coming in from a neighboring wall
or any other edge restrained. So, in this particular case when you have one-way vertical
bending, the parameter of importance is the bed joint flexure, you should be able to
estimate what is the bed joint flexural strength. In this case tension is actually acting
perpendicular to the bed joint right, you will agree with me you have the bed joint and
you see that the tension is acting perpendicular to the bed joint (normal to the bed joint).
So, bed joint flexure is a parameter that is essential if you were to estimate the vertical
bending capacity of a masonry wall. If now you were to examine one-way horizontal
bending that the wall has very little restraint at the top and the bottom. The top support
and the bottom support is almost not effective to restrain the wall, but your lateral
supports the edges the vertical edges of the wall are restrained. In such a situation the
wall is expected to go into horizontal bending and when you have horizontal bending the
bed joint is expected to be in a state of torsion.
163
So, in this situation if you were to examine horizontal bending happening in the masonry
wall, then there are two aspects that you will have to consider - one is that the head joints
will have a tendency of opening up and will be in a state of flexural compression-
flexural tension, whereas, the bed joints will be in a state of torsion- will be subjected to
torsion. So, they will be shear stresses due to torsion and when we talk of flexural tensile
strength parallel to the bed joint we really talking of this phenomenon that the tension is
acting to split the unit bond mortar parallel to the bed joint right. So, under horizontal
bending the two aspects of importance as far as the strength of the masonry wall and
horizontal bending would be the head joint flexure and the bed joint torsion.
Now, if you were to have a masonry wall which has restraints on more than 2 sides
supports which restrain the wall on more than 2 sides, 3 sides or 4 sides are restrained
and out of plane loads are acting on this wall when loads or inertial forces. Then you
would get a combination of vertical bending and horizontal bending and that is referred
to as diagonal bending or two-way bending and when you have two way diagonal
bending 4 parameters come into the play now. You have the bed joint and you have the
head joint.
The bed joints will be subjected to flexure, the head joint will be subjected to flexure. So,
in this situation both the head joint and the bed joint will be subjected to tension normal
to the bed joint, normal to the head joint and in the other case you will have torsion on
the head joint and torsion on the bed joint and that will require the estimate of the
flexural tensile strength parallel to the joint itself.
So, this would is basically affected by head joint flexure, bed joint flexure in which case
it is the flexural tensile strength normal to the bed joint and then will also be affected by
head joint torsion and bed joint torsion and therefore, you will need an estimate of what
the flexural tensile strength parallel to the joint is if you need to know at what level of
shear stress will you get failure in the joint itself. Of course, to complicate matters if you
were to make an estimate of bed joint flexural tensile strength, head joint flexural tensile
strength, perpendicular and parallel to the joint, you will get different values for the same
masonry.
So, it is a typology a structural typology which presents to you this complication of

different strengths in different directions and so, you will have to be prepared for that
164
from estimates of strength perspective. However, we make simplifications in design but
if you are doing an assessment, if you doing a detailed assessment of masonry strengths,
it is essential to understand that you going to have different values for each of these
actions and each of these failure mechanisms in the same masonry wall itself, ok.
So, how do you estimate the flexural tensile strength of masonry? You have normal to
the bed joint and parallel to the bed joint. The flexural tensile strength normal to the bed
joint can be estimated there are different codes that regulate the type of experiment that
you can carry out to estimate these values to measure make an estimate of these values
from experimental tests. If you were to create a beam and subject the beam to bending,
then the bed joint is subjected to flexural tension normal to the bed joint.
So, you are making a beam with a single stack of bricks supporting it and then subject
again to 2 point loading and you would have the flexural tensile strength normal to the
bed joint that you can estimate, you can also do what is called a bond wrench test will
examine the bond wrench test in a moment. You can also do a wall test subject the wall
to some lateral loads and then the single stack of bricks when subjected to lateral loads
we will have failure of the joint with tension occurring normal to the bed joint, you can
make an estimate of the flexural tensile strength normal to the bed joint. It is interesting
to examine the bond wrench test, it is a rather simple test very effective in estimating the
flexural tensile strength normal to the bed joint.
165
So, in this test called the bond wrench test what you are really doing is, you prepare a
stack of bricks, you have the stack of bricks that is seated inside a clamping arrangemen,t
you clamp. So, you make a stack of bricks at about 5 stacks high and then you have a
camping arrangement to hold the lower 4 brick units, you have a wrench that will hold
on to the top unit and the bed joint that you are testing is really this bed joint here. The
bed joint that is being tested is the one that is between the clamped portion and the part
that is going to be that is going to be pulled out; I mean that is going to be wrenched out.
So, you have this bond wrench and at the end of this bond wrench which has a prescribed
length you apply a force and you are able to estimate under flexural tension what is the
strength of the bond itself. Now, you will have to be careful the bond wrench should not
deform you should have a sufficiently stiff bond wrench that does not deform as you are
applying a force that can foul with your measurements and typically the value at which
the weight that is required to cause failure, the weight that you will be hanging or the
force that you are going to be applying at the end of the lever arm is actually small.
So, control in this test is what is essential; we do this in a very simple way, we hang
bucket here and have sand filled in the bucket because often if the bond is not good you
can get failure even when you just hang the bucket and add maybe a mug or two of sand.
So, it is a test that requires a little bit of a control. You might have brick units that have
good bond strength, there you need higher forces, but you can also have situations I was
166
talking to you about the wire cut bricks. Wire cut bricks have very poor bonding with the
mortar particularly because they have low water absorption and no frog on the unit itself;
we have seen that the bond strength there- the flexural tensile strength normal to the bed
joint is very low.
So, you can you should be careful in the rate of application of the load, the level of load
the resolution at which we are applying the load and control the entire system as you are
applying this. Variability is something that you will have to deal with here, it is an
interesting test we do not have an Indian standards that deals with this, but we do have
the ASTM standards and some other codes that give a system that you can follow for the
bond wrench test, you are required to do at least 12 such tests right because of the
variability.
Now, as you can see if you can change the clamping arrangement you can use the same
stack and keep shifting the joint that you are actually examining. So, I could use the
same stack examine this as the first joint, that as a second joint, that as a third joint and if
possible that as the 4 joint. So, you can if you make a stack that is sufficiently high you
can get about 4 tests from the same stack and then you also try to reduce the variability
that way, because it is the same mix and the same unit in which your same stack within
which you are getting a few tests being conducted.
You will expect failure; you expect failure at the mortar-unit interface right or you can
have failure inside the mortar itself. So, if the tensile strength of the mortar is low you
can have the failure within the mortar, but if the tensile strength of the mortar is good
and is higher than the joint tensile strength you can have failure in the interface itself,
you can have an undesirable performance where the mortar has good tensile strength, the
interface has good tensile strength, the unit has poor tensile strength, you can have a
situation where are part of the brick unit is ripped off in the test.
So, you can have any of these three failure planes; failure plane can be within the mortar
if the mortar tensile strength is the lowest. You can have a failure plane between the
mortar and the unit that is the interface that is failing that is the joint that is failing or you
can have failure in the unit itself, where the unit tensile strength is lower than the joint
tensile strength and the mortar tensile strength which is not a desirable situation to be in
because what is failing is the brittle material of the composite.
167
So, you can then estimate what the flexural tensile strength of the of the bed joint itself is
you need to consider the fact that there is some pre-compression and the pre-compression
there is no additional pre-compression being applied, but just under the self weight there
is going to be some compressive stress in the setup. So, the stress due to compression is
actually removed from the estimate of the flexural tensile strength. So, you will be able
to measure the estimate the applied moment divided by the section modulus of the cross
section that you are examining and reduce the stress due to pre compression due to the
self weight itself. So, that is the bond wrench test.
But if you were to estimate the flexural tensile strength now parallel to the bed joint, if
you want failure of the unit to happen in the bed joint with failure due to torsion and
shear induced due to torsion how do you do that. So, there are modified tests to estimate
flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed joint, if you remember the previous case
flexural tensile strength normal to the bed joint a beam test was being carried out right. A
beam is just a stack of bricks subjected to bending and you get tension acting on the bed
joint normal to the joint itself.
But in the modified test in the flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed joint test you do
not use a single stack of bricks, but you use a small wallet- you make a small wall
referred to as a wallet and you can then subject it to two point bending tests as we had
seen earlier, but now because of the bending you will appreciate that in these joints; in
168
these joints as the wallet bends those joints will be subjected to tension or shear inducing
tension parallel to the joint itself. So, this test is something that can help you estimate
what the flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed joint is, but interestingly you can
carry out a modified bond wrench test.
And in the modified bond wrench test what we are actually doing is everything remains
the same, but in the wallet that you create, the wallet is no longer a stack of bricks, but a
stack a small masonry wallet that is created by full units and half units right. So, you
have one set of full units and on the two sides one set of half units and then this is the
front elevation of the setup of the wallet, you turn it around place it within the setup and
then you are actually subjecting those two joints into tension.
So, you are clamping you are clamping the middle, you are clamping this middle layer at
the top and from the top and wrenching it, the clamping arrangement holds these two
portions and hence you are subjecting the joint that is shown with dotted lines to flexural
tension parallel to those two joints right. So, modified bond wrench test can also give
you this estimate of the flexural tensile strength in masonry ok.
169
To conclude, we will be dealing with masonry and behavior of masonry under shear
extensively in a few modules from now. But if you need to be able, if you need to
estimate the shear strength masonry what options do you have and what kind of care
should you take in adopting values and adopting test methods to arrive at the shear
strength of masonry.
So, this is an area that has received significant research focus, but that is also and you
have different test methods that have been prescribed in the literature and across different
countries codes you have different methods to test the shear strength of masonry and that
is primarily because that is pure shear is hypothetical. So, to be able to estimate just the
shear strength is definitely a challenge, but then what is important is to understand what
strength are we talking about here right, are we talking about the joint shear strength or
are we talking about the shear strength of the masonry as a composite ok.
Now, the reason why that matters is you might have a situation where the failure may not
necessarily happen in shear in the joint, it can actually rip through the masonry units. So,
the type of shear failure here is classified as line failure and a stepped failure; stepped
failures taking the profile of the joints whereas, the line failure just rips through the unit.
We will be examining these in detail, but you will be surprised to know that you can
have different tests to actually carry out this sort of a test. So, this is as I said received
research focus for decades now, there are several of them the first one that you see here
170
is you are subjecting a stack to compression and under that you get a failure surface
which is because of the shear failure in the material itself.
You have another test which is quite popular where you are trying to subject a two
masonry units jointed with the mortar between the two; subjected to shear and you
expect failure in the masonry joint, either at the interface of the unit and the mortar or
between the mortar and that gives an estimate of the joint shear strength. So, this is a test
that is used quite extensively.
There is another test referred to as the diagonal tension test where the depending on the
strength of the masonry unit and mortar that you are looking at, the strength of the mortar
and the strength of the interface itself you can have different failure mechanisms here.
The failure could actually go through the joint as a stepped failure or it could actually rip
through the entire panel itself.
So, again if it actually rips through the unit with the line failure versus if it actually failed
in the joint the characterization of the joint strength could actually come from a test such
as the Van der Pluijm test whereas, in the Van der Pluijm test is not going to be able to
successfully give you the strength in shear of a masonry panel if a line failure is going to
be resulting.
So, we will examine this in detail when we look at biaxial stresses due to shear and
compression; however, I am giving you an overview of the different tests available.
Again there are two tests here- were looking at a triplet test because you have 3 units that
are being subjected to shear and you see that the joint that is of interest is the joint that is
between the 3 units that you can see here. Shear is induced in the shear loading is
induced in the central unit. However, pre-compression is also provided; that is the joint is
not under zero compressive stress it has pre compression levels that you can regulate and
provide, we will examine that in a little detail.
So, triplet test and a and a modified version of the triplet test here called the Meli test and
then while in the triplet tests there are 2 surfaces that are subjected to shear. So, it is a
double shear test if you will permit whereas, the direct shear test is where 2 units are
being subjected to shear force and it is a single joint that is being examined in the direct
shear test.
171
We will examine in detail, you have interesting research works that are examining a
comparison between the different estimates of shear strength, because of the different
tests the problem as I said is to be able to create pure shear in the joint or pure shear in
the masonry which is not which is not simple in any way. And many of these would have
a further component because of the eccentricity of the loading and can foul with the
estimate of the strength that you are able to get from any of these tests.
So, when you idealize, it is easy for us to show an arrow that is sitting right along the
center line of the brick, but it is not a point load there, you actually have a contact
surface, you have a finite length of the contact surface and then you have a finite length
of the reaction surface. So, ultimately you can actually have eccentricities that are
causing some moment to come at the joint along with the shear load (shear force) that
you are subjecting the joint two. We will examine two of these, we will examine the
triplet test and the diagonal tension test in detail in the next class.
172
Arun Menon
Module - 02
Masonry Materials and Properties Part - VI
Lecture – 10
Good morning; we will conclude the part on the Masonry Materials and Properties
examining the different strengths of the constituents and the assemblies by looking at
masonry in shear. So, that is the part that we were examining at the end of our last
lecture.
Fundamental aspect that you need to keep in mind is when you are examining the shear
strength of masonry you will have to distinguish it from the joint shear strength. The
joint shear strength is dealing with the bond between the units and the mortar. So, the
joint shear strength establishes the strength present in shear between the unit and the
mortar. The shear strength of masonry is affected by the joint shear strength but is not the
joint shear strength, ok.
So, the shear strength of masonry is a mechanical parameter that is not straightforward to
establish. It is fundamentally difficult to create conditions of pure shear in the first place-
experimentally challenging, but is affected by other factors as well which the joint shear
173
strength does not account for. So, it is important to understand that we are dealing with
two different phenomena in this context.
So, I gave you an overview of the different tests that are conducted to characterize shear
strength of masonry and shear strength of the joints. You will appreciate the fact given
these differences that exist between the different test methods that really there is no
consensus in the scientific community on one single test that characterizes the either the
joint shear strength or the shear strength of masonry.
So, I had concluded my previous lecture presenting the different types of tests that are
available in some codes and in the literature that examines shear strength of masonry and
joint shear strength. Of these ,except for the diagonal tension test, the one that you see in
the center here, the diagonal tension test, all the others are actually examining the joint
shear strength.
The first test that you see there the nuss shear test is like actually examining over one
single joint the load at failure in shear. All the others are examining one or two brick unit
mortar joints under the action of shear. It is the diagonal tension test, the one in the
center, we will examine in a moment which characterizes the shear strength of masonry
ok. Of course, this is also not a test that is free from certain assumptions and difficulties
in executing as well.
174
So, let us first examine the diagonal tension test and we are actually characterizing the
shear strength of masonry with the diagonal tension test. There is an ASTM standard, we
do not have an Indian standard that regulates the testing under the diagonal tension
condition, diagonal tension test condition. The ASTM standard E519 gives the protocol
for testing. It is also referred in the literature as a diagonal compression test and in a
moment you will agree with me why the nomenclature.
Now you know that in masonry walls; in load-bearing masonry walls, if it is a situation
where you have both gravity loads and lateral loads, the load bearing walls are
simultaneously resisting the gravity forces and the lateral forces. So, if you look at
masonry wall, it is really in a state of biaxial stresses. You have stresses due to gravity
and you have stress is due to lateral forces acting on it. So, these it is this condition that
actually brings us to the basis of a test such as the diagonal tension test.
So, when you have two different actions it is important to examine the principal stresses
because you have a combination of stresses now and the principal stresses examined
under the action of shear stresses in the wall, and normal stresses due to gravity become
important as far as the failure criterion is concerned.
So, when the, considering that we are looking at a material which is weak in tension,
strong in compression, when the principal tension approaches the tensile strength of
masonry, you get failure in the masonry panel, right. So, in this it is important to
examine the principal stresses and we are concerned more about the principal tension.
Failure occurs under a combination of the lateral force and the gravity force when
principal tension approaches the tensile strength of masonry, right. So, in a way this test
is actually characterizing the tensile strength of the masonry for you. So, the literature
also refers to this test, in some parts of the literature, as conventional tensile strength test
of masonry, right.
So, the standard that we are talking about ASTM E519 experimental methods so, we are
actually looking at a wallet and the wallet is of a size 1.2 meters by 1.2 meters. So, it is a
significantly large test specimen; you have to have at least three of such specimens. The
masonry wall is constructed with a single stack of bricks, right. Now, of course, you will
have this point in mind that the shear strength is going to be affected by the bond; of
175
course, it will be affected by the bond but the test protocol gives you the possibility of
working with a single unit construction.
So, you have a stretcher bond and that is the thickness of the wall. So, if it is 100 mm
wall; 100 mm unit then it is 100 mm wall that you are constructing in this manner. Of
course, you construct it keeping it flat and then it is transported and put into the loading
setup. You can see a loading shoe, a metallic loading shoe at the top and at the bottom;
prescribed metallic loading shoe is what is used for uniform transfer of the compression
that is applied onto this system. Under the action of compression, it develops tension; it
is unconfined on the sides it develops tension along the other diagonal and you will have
failure in the masonry. So, we will examine the setup and then discuss about the rationale
behind this sort of a test.
So, as you see in the photograph here, you can see that axial compression is being
applied using the actuator at the top. You have the actuator there and then the loading
shoes are seen at the top and the bottom and these subject the masonry panel along the
diagonal into compression, and failure is going to be due to the tension across the
diagonal itself.
So, if you are basically considering a combination of gravity forces and lateral forces; the
state of stress is actually going to be that of shear stresses and compression right. So,
under this sort of a situation where you have normal stresses acting on the material and
shear stresses acting on the material you are interested in examining the principal
stresses. So, if you consider a state of pure shear stress, then your principal stresses can
be considered on a 45 degree rotated plane, but depending on the magnitude of the
normal stresses you know that the principal stress direction would change.
So, basically you would have a situation of principal stresses acting with tension and
compression, and failure is expected to occur perpendicular to the direction of principal
tension. So, the test setup tries to replicate this sort of a situation and hence diagonal
compression is being applied, you expect failure to occur perpendicular to the direction
of diagonal compression.
So, if you actually examine the test setup the compression load is actually acting along
this line and if you take the area of cross section; if you take that area of cross section
176
with respect to the area of cross section of the wall itself A, then the diagonal is basically
a much longer area of cross section right.
However, it is seen that if you were to take the total load and divide it by the area of
cross section given by the vertical dotted line that I have shown here; you do not get the
right estimate of the failure load or the stress at which the failure is occurring. And hence
a correction factor has been introduced to account for the right value at which failure
occurs and the diagonal tensile stress at which you get failure is about 0.5 times the load
at failure P divided by l into t.
0.5P
Diagonal tensile stress, f d =
lt
So, this l into t is the area, if you were actually going to be considering the area of cross
section along the dotted line that should actually be 0.707 divided by A; however, if you
take that value you are going to be overestimating the stress at failure instead. After a
differences between few codes, we adopt this value of 0.5 divided by A as the 0.5 P
divided by A; A being the area of cross section length of the specimen into the thickness
of the specimen as the diagonal tensile stress at failure.
So, this provides an estimate of the shear strength of masonry; the referential or the
conventional tensile strength of masonry because the failure is clearly due to the
principal tension approaching the tensile strength of masonry, right. However, the other
aspect that you need to keep in mind is here depending on how strong the joint shear
strength is, the bond between the mortar and the unit, the failure can occur either along
the interface in the form of a stepped crack or fail by splitting the unit is themselves.
So, you can have what is called a line crack splitting the unit or you can have a stepped
crack that actually follows the pattern of the courses the joints and that is typically when
the joint shear strength is far lower in comparison to the tensile strength offered by the
unit itself.
177
So, if you were to examine the failure pattern you can see the line of tensile cracking
parallel to the line of application of the compression and as you can see in this particular
figure in this particular picture, you have a combination of line and unit failure. So, the
bed joints typically are stronger than the head joints. Yes, the bed joint is the horizontal
joint, the head joint is the perpend or the vertical joint between the brick units.
The strength of the head joint and the bed joint is typically different. Could you think of
a reason why? It is the same material, it is the same interface only the position only the
direction of the of this the orientation of the joint changes, and why should one expect a
difference between the head joint and the bed joint? For unit area of the head joint versus
unit area of the bed joint, the head joint is weaker and that is the right answer; is that the
bed joint is consolidated by the weight of the construction itself. The head joint has no
way of getting consolidated under precompression.
So, the head joint is typically a weaker joint and more variable a joint than the head joint.
So, in this particular case we can see that the head joints have actually given way, but the
bed joints are strong enough and tend to end up breaking the bricks as the line crack is
propagating. So, you should be able to examine the failure mechanisms in such context
both from the perspective of bed joint to head joint strengths versus unit tensile strength
versus the joint shear strength itself. However, this test here is actually giving us the
shear strength of the masonry itself.
178
Of course, by instrumenting this, you can capture deformations. So, you can estimate the
shear strain because you are estimating the shear stress at failure; you can also estimate
the shear strain and look at the stress strain in shear behavior of the masonry itself. So,
you can estimate the shear strain by having measuring devices typically an LVDT linear
variable differential transducer that is placed across the unit, across the wallet you
measure the deformation in the horizontal direction deformation, in the vertical direction
and with the fixed gauge lengths that you are looking at the shear strain can be estimated
as the difference in the horizontal the length in the horizontal direction. The length in the
vertical direction divided by the gauge length from which with the estimate of the shear
stress and the estimate of the shear strain, you can get an estimate of the shear modulus
from the different stages of the testing itself ok.
The second set of tests and i think it is important if you want to characterize the shear
strength of the joint, you cannot use the test method that we just saw which is the
diagonal tension test. So, we tend to use couplet test or triplet test the type of test that
you have seen in the first slide. So, the shear strength of the bed joints; one of the codes
that gives a test method and a protocol to conduct the test method is the European
standards European norms 1052 part 3, and it does give you two different types of
loading setups that you can use there is this type one setup where you are basically
looking at a triplet arrangement there are three pieces of brick unit bonded by mortar.
179
So, in gray you see the mortar joints; the two mortar joints which are going to be
subjected to the shear loading and the three pieces of brick unit is that is sitting with the
mortar joints between them. And as you can see a double shear test setup is what we are
going to be using, you can also introduce pre-compression to the joint in this case right.
So, if you look at the numbering here, you have the loading platen; the loading platen
which is going to be applying the shear force you have the precompression in the walls
and you have the overall loading frame which is holding the setup in position right. So,
you have pre compression which is subjecting the block arrangement into a state that is
expected in a wall. So, you have the masonry wall construction the joint has some
precompression because of the superimposed loads and it is weight itself. So, you can
replicate the precompression by deciding at what level you want to carry out this test. So,
the precompression is provided to this sort of a setup and the test is carried out in a
loading frame.
As you can see it is important to have control on the eccentricity of loading, if you can
see both type 1 and in type 2, i will come to type 2 in a moment. If you look at type 1
you can see that it is important to have a limitation on the eccentricity of loading.
Because if there is going to be significant distance between the line of action of force and
the line of support you are going to have additional moments acting on the joint, you do
not want that you want to try and minimize it. So, there are limit is on the eccentricity
that is prescribed. So, the test has to be conducted with significant amount of care as far
as the accuracy is concerned in the test setup itself.
A modified setup can be seen here where you are focusing on one joint instead of two
joints as earlier and again there are prescriptions given as to what should be the size of
the second unit and that is h2; the size of the first unit is h1 the size of the second unit is
h2. How do you arrive at the loading based on the intention to reduce the moment that
can act on the joint itself. You want just shear to be acting on the on the joint that is
being tested. So, this test is conducted under different precompression levels, because
you want to characterize the behavior of the joint; this is affected by the level of
precompression.
180
So, the way this test is conducted the code gives you a minimum number of samples that
you must look at, you have it is expected that you look at for every level of
precompression here denoted as fp that you have at least 3 specimens or more, right. And
the repeatability of the test protocol and the outcome is the reason why you have a
minimum number of samples that you must have in each of these levels.
And therefore, procedure would require that you look at least three levels of
precompression and then you would have at least 9 specimens in all. You could also
have another procedure where you are looking at six specimens and also include a state
where there is no precompression; zero precompression. It is useful, in a moment you
will understand why it is useful to do a test with zero precompression right. So, the way
the test is conducted, let us say you have designated the different precompression levels
you have zero precompression level as well. Since the test is being conducted in a
vertical manner, you can theoretically have a situation of zero and practically have a
situation of zero precompression.
And then if you can change the level of precompression you have designated levels at
which the test is being conducted. The test is conducted, the failure stress is estimated
you have the precompression level determined as the precompression force divided by
the area of cross section whereas, the shear stress at failure as the force required for the
joint to fail divided by since it is the double shear test you have two surfaces divided by
181
2Ai. And hence you will get several points at different precompression levels of fpi and
fvi and that is then used to arrive at a best fit line which will determine what is the
behavior of this masonry joint, the bond between the unit and the mortar itself. So, if you
examine this graph here between the shear stress and the precompression, τ and σ right.
Now, the best fit line makes an angle with the horizontal and you have this value referred
to as fv0 which is at zero precompression which is of importance. Two things are of
importance- what is this angle, this angle is actually the internal friction angle of the joint
and this value; which is the value of shear strength of the joint at zero precompression.
This value physically if you look at this value, the only thing that is resisting the failure
of the joint is the bond right; there is no precompression; there is no other resisting
element here. So, what we are really looking at here is what is called cohesion which is
nothing, but bond.
So, this y axis intercept is referred to as cohesion which is available because of the bond,
if the bond strength is poor, if the bond between the masonry mortar and the unit is poor
you will have very low value of cohesion. And then as precompression levels increase
because of the internal friction angle which is again material dependent, you will have an
additional component of resistance coming from precompression and frictional
resistance.
So, the theoretical basis of such a test comes from an understanding of the failure as tau,
the failure stress in shear as a combination of cohesion plus μσ, right. So, the shear
strength of the joint comes from two components- cohesion © added to the friction
coefficient (μ) into the precompression level (σ).
 = c + 
 = tan 
So, if you do not have precompression this goes to zero and then you have just the
question, but if you have a crack initiated between the unit and the mortar there is no
cohesion left and you have only the frictional component. So, you could have a situation
where tau was equal to c plus mu sigma initially then the bond is lost C goes to 0, tau is
then the residuals shear stress shear strength that you have in the masonry is nothing, but
μσ. So, there will always be a residual shear strength as long as contact between the two
surfaces is going to exist.
182
Of course, one aspect that I did not talk about here is alpha is referred to as the angle of
internal friction; however, it is noticed that in materials such as masonry be it stone
masonry or brick masonry as two surfaces slide there is a tendency for opening up of the
joint when two surfaces slide, there is a tendency for the two surfaces to open up and that
again how much it opens up it is because of crumbling of material on the surface and that
causing a gap between the two surfaces that are in contact.
So, overall when you finish this sort of a test there is an increase in the volume that is
noticed and that can be characterized as the dilatancy and the angle which a certain
material assembly can give you. So, the second component mu into sigma; so, strictly
speaking you should be able to characterize what is the dilatancy and what is the angle of
internal friction to be able to understand the resistance offered by the joint itself.
With this, we have addressed the final aspect of the strength of the masonry assembly
which was shear and we have looked at standard test protocols that can be used to
characterize each of the properties from compression to tension. Particularly flexural
tensile strength normal to the bed joint parallel to the bed joint and finally, shear in two
situations shear strength of masonry and the shear strength of the joint. So, that brings us
to the end of the second module which is on the strengths of the materials that constitute
the masonry and the behavior of the assembly itself.
183
Prof. Arun Menon
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Module - 03
Lecture - 11
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part – I
We start with our third module, where we examine different actions and a combination
of these actions. The primary purpose of the third module is to examine Behavior of
Masonry in a detailed manner and be able to arrive at a closed-form solution/ closed-
form analytical expression for masonry under different actions and combinations of
actions. That becomes important because we are then able to establish the strength under
different actions of different sizes of masonry components; maybe you are interested in
looking at slender walls, squat walls, beams, columns and so on.
Starting with compression- concentric compression, eccentric compression; bending- out

of plane bending and then finally in-plane bending or shear acting on a masonry wall and
then of course we are interested in understanding how they interact with each other-
Axial load with moment, axial force with shear force and have our failure surfaces under
these actions ready and understood as far as the behavior of masonry is concerned. This
becomes the analytical basis for design, right. So, the next module which will deal with
design is going to be really feeding into the behavior of masonry under different actions.
184
So, I begin with the mechanical behavior- the mechanics of masonry in compression, this
is something we have already seen quite carefully, particularly the co-action between the
unit and the mortar. However, the intention is if you were, if you had with you the
strengths of the constituents and the properties of the constituents - the unit and the
mortar, will you be able to estimate the compressive strength of masonry?
It is not often that you will be able to carry out a an experiment in the laboratory and say
this is the failure strength of the masonry that I am going to be working with, you need to
have an understanding analytically how this is performing and the unit strength and the
mortar strength is something that you can establish quite easily even in practical
situations. So, with that knowledge is it possible to be able to arrive at, for a complex
behavior as we have seen, because of the coaction what is the failure strength of masonry
itself in compression, ok.
So, we are examining in today’s class, we are going to be examining uniaxial

compression only- concentric. We have still not, we would not be going into strain
gradients due to eccentricities of the compression and we are looking at the strength in
compression of the masonry. It is not the strength of a wall; we are not bringing in the
slenderness of the masonry wall where second order effects can come into the picture.
So, we are still examining the masonry as a material under compression. So, we have
studied this carefully and we discussed that the strength of the masonry is going to lie
185
somewhere between the strength of the unit and the strength of the mortar and this is
because of the co-action that occurs between the two; between the unit and the mortar.
The unit is going to be the stronger of the two, but the more brittle of the two, less
deformable of the two; the mortar is more deformable, weaker in strength, but what you
get as the combination of the two because of the bond that is established between the two
constituents is something in between and we have also examined how the state of stress,
in the multiaxial state of state of stress in the unit characterized by the uniaxial
compression and the bilateral tension forms and how the triaxial state of compression in
the mortar, because of the confinement offered by the unit itself.
So, let us keep that in mind and use this as a basis for the formulations. So, I am going to
be examining the formulation under an assumption of linear elastic behavior of the unit
and the mortar which is of course not true as you know. We are dealing with materials
which have different strengths and can enter nonlinearity/inelasticity quite early and
therefore we will examine a second theory which accounts for the inelastic behavior of
both the mortar and the unit in arriving at the failure strength of the masonry itself.
So, to begin with the linear elastic theory- this is a well-established theoretical
framework; it comes from the work of Haller-Francis several decades ago. Assumption
the fundamental assumption here is the entire assembly is working in an elastic manner,
right and that is where the problem arises for us, ok. So, we were talking about the
186
Poisson’s effect being fundamental in creating the states of multiaxial stress in the unit
and the mortar.
So, if I were to examine the brick unit, just to get the know the notations familiarized.
We are looking at the z-axis, the stress acting in the vertical direction-uniaxial
compressive. The axial compression as σz, the lateral bilateral tension in the brick unit in
the two directions σbx and σby. Whereas the multiaxial state of stress of compression in
the unit in the mortar σz as the axial compression and the other two directions which are
also in compression σjx and σjy. Here the subscript b is used to refer to the brick unit and j
is referring to the joint itself. So, we have σbx and σby, σjx and σjy.
So, in terms of the dimensions of the unit and the mortar joint, we are looking at the
thickness of the brick unit as tb and tj as the thickness of the mortar joint, ok. Now based
on an understanding that under the state of triaxial stress, Poisson’s effect comes into the
picture, we can write down the deformation in the brick unit and the deformation in the
mortar with respect to the states of stress in the different directions. So, if you look at the
deformation in the brick unit, we can write down the strain in the brick unit in the x
direction.
1
 bx =  bx +  b (z −  by )
Eb 
So, εbx in terms of the triaxial state of stress, Eb here refers to the modulus of elasticity of
the brick σbx is the direct stress in the direction bx, νb here is the Poisson’s ratio of the
brick unit and the other two directions and the stress in the other two directions σz
compression and σby.
So, you are looking at the Poisson’s effect with respect to the triaxial state of stress.
Similarly, εby is written down.
1
 by =   by +  b ( z −  bx )
Eb 
We have the states of stress σby which is going to be the direct contributor to εby and the
Poisson’s effect in the other two directions causing changes in the strain in the direction
by. Similarly, we write down the deformation of the mortar joint itself; mortar joint is in
triaxial compression.
187
1
 jx =  − jx +  j (z +  jy )
Ej 
1
 jy =  − jy +  j (z −  jx )
Ej 
So, you have εjx, so the compressive strain in the joint in the x direction and the
compressive strain in the joint in the y direction where Ej is the modulus of elasticity of
the mortar joint; again the strain caused by the stress which is in direct correlation to the
direction. So, σjx and σjy for εjx and εjy and the other two directions caused because of the
Poisson’s effect and νb here refers to the Poisson’s ratio of the mortar or the joint
material itself.
However, we know that a bond exists between the two materials and therefore there is
compatibility of lateral deformations that will occur; there is going to be a compatibility
of the strains, a compatibility of the lateral deformations because of the existence of the
bond, which means that the strain in the x direction in the brick unit is going to be the
same as a strain in the x direction in the mortar material as well. So, εbx should be equal
to εjx and εby should be equal to εjy. That is basically, the lateral strains at the interface
should be same as long as equilibrium is maintained- till you do not have failure. This is
acceptable, right.
We also have to consider equilibrium of forces, so if you are going to be looking at an

equilibrium of internal forces in both the x and the y directions, the lateral directions; we
can examine the thickness of the mortar joint, the thickness of the brick unit over which
these stresses are acting and write down the equilibrium in these two directions.
bx =    jx
by =    jy
tf
=
tb
So, this is the basic set of assumptions that we are working with and the force
equilibrium and the compatibility of deformations is what is helping us write down this
set of expressions.
188
If we were to combine the previous set of expressions, the final output we have, what we
are interested in arriving at, is can we get an expression for the stress at which the
masonry will fail under σz ; σz is the vertical compression. We want an expression for σz
which is a function of the constituents- The modulus of elasticity of the brick, the
modulus of elasticity of the mortar, the geometry of the unit and the mortar, particularly
the joint thickness and the Poisson’s ratio of these materials. So, knowing the constituent
materials and their constituent strengths- the tensile strength of the brick unit, the
compressive strength of the mortar, will we be able to arrive at σz or the failure value of
σz itself ?
So, in the previous expression that we have seen, α is representing the joint thickness
ratio. Similarly, if we were to use β as the ratio between the modulus of elasticity of the
mortar material to the brick unit, we are writing down σbx is equal to σby in terms of σz.
So, it is a mere rearrangement of the previous set of expressions which are based on the
deformation, now those were expressed in terms of the strains; we are writing them in
terms of σbx and σby. Eliminating the different stresses in the unit and the mortar with
aspects that we are able to measure and know- the geometry and the individual values of
Poisson’s ratio - of the mortar, of the brick and the the moduli of elasticity of the two
materials.
189
bx = by =
(
  j −  b )  z
1 +  −  j −  b
So, the expression that you see here basically eliminates the unknown states of stress. So,
we have an expression of the local stress here, which is the tensile stress that the brick
unit is subjected to σbx and σby. It is important to be able to write it in terms of that stress
because we know that the brick unit will fail in tension right. So, we have an idea of the
mechanism since the brick unit is expected to fail in tension, we now have an expression
that relates the stress in the brick unit, the tensile stress in the brick unit to this overall
stress - vertical compressive stress that you are actually applying and under which the
prism is going to fail. This is the generic expression.
We now need to be able to plug in strength values and the reason why it is in this form is
you already have the stress in tension of the brick unit right, σbx and σby are actually
tensile stresses. But we know that the brick unit is going to split; it is going to split at it is
tensile strength. So, if I have an estimate of the tensile strength of the brick unit, I can
plug it in here to be able to get an expression in σz so that is the way it is designed.
So, you need a criterion for the failure of the brick unit, if you remember the graph that
we had looked at- the figure that we had looked at in terms of the behavior, the stress
path in the unit, the stress path in the mortar will come to that in a moment we were
assuming and it is a fairly reasonable assumption that the failure plane in the brick unit
under compression and tension is a straight line right. So, that forms a criterion for us
you have a straight-line interaction between the compressive strength of the unit and a
tensile strength of the unit- that is a straight line failure plane. So, if fbc is the
compressive strength of the unit; the uniaxial compressive strength of the unit and fbt. So,
fbt is the uniaxial tensile strength of the unit. If you were to do a direct tension test and
get the tensile strength of the unit, you do a uniaxial compression test flat wise
compression test on the brick unit you get fbc.
So, with fbc and fbt available a straight line interaction between the compressive stress in
the brick unit,
190
z t
+ = 1;
fbc fbc
f
 = bt
fbc
And it is only to make things a little simpler that we are looking at a ratio such as lambda
here, we have discussed that the tensile strength of brick would be about ten percent of
the compressive strength.
So, you could you could work with if you do not have the exact value coming out of
direct tension test, you could still use this relationship between the tensile strength of the
unit and the compressive strength of the unit itself. So, you have this straight line failure
surface of the brick in tension-compression which is what we will feed into to be able to
establish the criterion.
So, if we now substitute in the expression, we have been using σbx and σby which are
nothing but tensile stresses in the unit. So, we have an expression here in σt, so σbx and
σby are being substituted by σt in the failure criterion and rewriting in terms of σz, we get
an expression for σz since we are now bringing in the failure strength in compression of
the unit the σz is going to be referring to the failure in compression of the masonry
assembly itself.
1
z = fu =  fbc
1+
(
  j −  b )
(
 1 +  −  j −  b )
So, we have an expression now which is the failure strength of masonry under uniaxial
concentric compression, where the parameters that you require are the Poisson’s ratio of
the unit, the Poisson’s ratio of the mortar, the modulus of elasticity of the unit, the
modulus of elasticity of mortar. You have the term alpha which is nothing but
geometrical parameter-joint thickness versus the brick thickness and finally lambda
which is nothing but the ratio of the strengths fbt by fbc. So, this is an expression that is
fairly good, but linear analysis is the basis; linear elastic analysis is the basis of this
expression itself.
191
So, the fundamental limitation of this theory which is often referred to as the two people
who propounded this initially Haller-Francis theory, is the fact that we are assuming
linear elastic behavior and we know that the mortar and the unit to an extent much more
the mortar, is not going to behave in a linear elastic manner. And the problem of
considering this sort of a basis for the behavior of the masonry composite is that you
remember this picture where you have axial compression which is the load that is being
applied the stress caused by the load.
The compression load that is being applied against the lateral compression lateral
tension. The point is the stress path in the unit is assumed to be linear and then, it hits the
failure criterion that we have used which is the straight line in compression and tension
envelope for the unit. We are again assuming that the stress path in mortar is the stress
path of the mortar in the prism, is also linear elastic, we would not be able to explain
how the unit and the mortar failed together in reality.
In reality, you expect a simultaneous occurrence of the tensile cracking in the unit and
loss of confinement and the crushing failure of the mortar. If you go by this theory,
depending on what the mortar strength and the unit strengths are you will get a disparity
between the points of failure. So, according to this theory brick will fail and then after
some time you increase the load and then the mortar will fail which does not happen
there is a simultaneous failure of the two.
192
So, I will stop here, we will come back and examine the same situation, but with mortar
strengths different from the unit strengths as shown here and then examine how we go
into a situation where inelastic behavior of the mortar can give us a much better
prediction of the mechanical behavior under compression.
Thank you.
193
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 03
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part – II
Lecture – 12
Good morning so, we continue looking at the Strength and Behaviour of Masonry under
different actions, we were examining the behaviour of masonry under compression and
trying to look at the possibility of a closed form solution that gives you the compressive
With the knowledge of its constituent properties- the unit and the mortar and the
theoretical framework that we were looking for failure under compression on the basis of
linear elastic; an assumption of linear elastic behaviour of the constituents was what we
were looking at in the previous lecture. And we were examining, as we were concluding
the lecture, how this important assumption that the constituents are behaving in a linear
elastic manner actually does not explain completely the failure mechanism as physically
observed, right.
So, the Haller-Francis theory which is what we actually defined, neglects this non-linear
behaviour that you should expect of the constituent materials and the point is, if it is
194
linear behaviour that you are going to assuming both in the unit and in the mortar it is
going to be difficult to explain how the failure in the brick and the crushing of the mortar
actually happen as simultaneous phenomena in reality, but the theoretical framework
developed in this manner could not be able to give a justification for the physically
observed phenomenon.
So, therefore, further developments in this direction have actually examined the
possibility of looking at an inelastic behaviour of the mortar. This becomes an
unrealistic, the elastic linear elastic assumption becomes an unrealistic assumption both
for situations of the brick unit failing first or crushing happening in the mortar early on.
So, this slide that you can see is where the unit has reached level of biaxial tension that
causes cracking following which is where the crushing of the mortar is expected to
happen. However, if you are looking at very weak mortars then as per this theory you
should have crushing in the mortar that that happens quite early on and the failure in the
brick unit that happens after which again does not really explain the physical
phenomenon of co-action between the two. So, you see the disparity in the values of F
and D which do not give us clarity on how physically the phenomenon is occurring with
the cracking in the brick unit leading to loss of confinement in the mortar causing
crushing failure in the mortar itself.
195
So, the extension that we will look at, which is useful to examine is one way we consider
that the mortar behaves in an inelastic manner. Now between the mortar and the unit you
will agree that the behaviour of the unit is being the brittle material, probably closer to a
linear response and it is ok to consider a linear elastic behaviour there, but look at a non-
linear behaviour and an inelastic behaviour of the mortar itself.
So, we looking at the basis of this approach is the Hilsdorf’s approach of 1969 and if you
remember the initial slide that I showed you when we will looking at co-action between
the two, the mortar and the unit is where the stress path in the unit also has a inelastic
behaviour of stress path of the mortar in the prism also has inelastic response and you
can see that it is almost a simultaneous occurrence of failure in both the unit and the
mortar.
So, if this is really the more appropriate basis to describe a theoretical framework for the
failure, then what is important is that you have analytical form of the failure of the unit
and an analytical form of the failure of the mortar and considering factors of
compatibility and equilibrium be able to use these two and write the final expression. So,
that is exactly what we will be looking at.
196
So, the condition under which the unit is going to split we looked at this earlier, the
straight-line failure surface between uniaxial compression and uniaxial tension in the
brick masonry unit itself. If you are looking at the axial compression which you can
estimate the axial compressive strength of the brick unit uniaxial compressive strength of
the brick unit from a flat-wise compression test and you get fbc the uniaxial compressive
strength of the brick. You do a direct tension test on the brick unit and establish the
direct tensile strength of the brick unit and it is a straight-line failure plane that you get
for the condition under which the brick is going to split. So, this is something we have
used earlier in the Haller-Francis expression themselves.
197
Now let us examine mortar and what happening to mortar, and we understand that when
we are doing uniaxial compressive test on the mortar it is under uniaxial compression,
but in the prism under compression the mortar goes into state of triaxial compression. So,
you need to alter the uniaxial compressive strength of the mortar to be able to explain
what strength you would get in mortar in a confined manner right.
So, the triaxial compressive stress, multiaxial state of stress with triaxial compression is
something that we should be able to account for and so, if you are looking at the axial
compression versus the bilateral compression that you have σjy and σjx. Knowing that the
uniaxial compressive strength of the joint material from a uniaxial test, it is fj, it has been
observed that the behaviour that you would get for mortar if subjected to a triaxial
condition in compression would follow a linear pattern. The important aspect to
understand is what is the factor by which, this is going to increase so, the slope of that
line is used and this is basically based on tests that have been conducted on concrete.
So, the model that we looking at here is coming directly from concrete, developed quite
early in the 20th century and the is of the form that the failure strength in compression of
the mortar is an additive form of the uniaxial compressive strength plus, the compressive
stress in the lateral direction multiplied by a factor that comes empirically from
experimental observations. So, this is the failure surface that we would use for the multi-
axial state of stress in compression of the mortar.
198
We are interested in rewriting this in terms of the stress in the joint and therefore, it is
just rewritten in terms of σjx with the knowledge of the uniaxial compressive strength of
the mortar joint material itself.
1
 jx =
4.1
(
z − fj )
So, this basically this last expression that you have seen is giving us literally at the point
of failure is telling us how much minimum lateral confinement is available to the mortar
joint just before the point of failure. So, σjx is the lateral compressive stress in the mortar.
So, this expression now in terms of the uniaxial compressive strength and the stress in
the z direction which is what we want to establish for the failure of the masonry
assembly is written in terms of σjx ok.
So, with the failure planes for the constituents defined if we assume that now these two
phenomena are meant to occur together; that is the crushing of the mortar is happening as
soon as or immediately after the splitting of the bricks in the bilateral tension. Then we
use our original equilibrium equations and rewrite the expressions that we saw in the
previous slide to be able to pull out an expression for σz now from the material
constituent strengths themselves.
199
So, from equilibrium of forces we established that σbx which is the lateral stress in the
brick into the thickness of the brick unit itself is equal to σjx which is the stress the lateral
stress in the mortar into the joint thickness tj established because there is bond at the
interface considering compatibility and equilibrium you get their expression.
tj
 bx =
4.1t b
( z − fj )
And now we are able to write down the earlier expression that we had in σjx in the
previous slide in terms of the lateral tensile strength; the lateral tensile stress in the unit
itself.So, we write the previous expression, the previous expression if you remember in
the previous slide was in terms of σjx. So, σjx was pulled out from the expression, the
empirical expression of the failure criterion for mortar, we use that and with the
consideration of equilibrium and compatibility, with this defined, we rewrite the
expression in terms of σbx. That is what is done in this particular slide; give a factor this
part tj/4.1tb is then replaced with this α’, we could simplify the expression a little.
So, now we have an expression that comes from the failure criterion for mortar and using
equilibrium in compatibility and expression for the mortar and now an expression for the
unit itself coming from the consideration of the linear failure surface in tension
compression of the brick unit itself.
  
x =  y = fbt  1 − z 
 fbc 
So, this is again the lateral stresses σx or σy in the unit defined in terms of the failure
stress in tension and the failure stress in compression under uniaxial conditions of the
brick itself.
So, you have now these two expressions which are going to be linked now if you were to
merge these two expressions and pull out σz from this, you get the at ultimate conditions,
because you are considering the strength in the mortar uniaxial compressive strength of
the mortar, the uniaxial compressive strength of the unit, the tensile strength of the unit,
would then and the compressive strength of the uniaxial compressive strength of brick
unit again you get the expression in sigma z.
200
z = fu = fbc 
(f bt +  'fj )
( fbt +  'fbc )
This is the final expression that is used with respect to the Hilsdorf criterion.
However, in comparison to experimental results there is a slight deviation and that is

really because of the fact that in this we are assuming that the stress is going to be
uniform at all points in the cross section which is not the case, stress is typically defined
at a point. But here there is implicit assumption that entire cross section is under the
same state of stress. So, that non uniformity that is there in the distribution of stress
owing to several factors needs to be accounted for.
So, it is included in an empirical manner in this expression.
z = fu =
fbc

(fbt +  'fj )
U u ( fbt +  'fbc )
U u = coefficient of non − uniformity
So, this non uniformity is actually coming from several sources, some of the sources are
you can have perforations in the geometry, in the block itself and then the dimensions of
these perforations can be different that can lead to a different state of stress in the block
in the masonry prism itself. You can have irregularities on the brick surface and
201
therefore, there will be concentration of stresses in some points. And smaller level of
stresses in other points the mortar bed joint is again not something that is completely
perfect.
And therefore, again can contribute to a non uniform state of compressive stress and
therefore, the expression that we saw in the last slide is altered to factor in the effect of
this non uniformity. And the non uniformity factor is actually brought in; it is to be able
to match experimental results in a way. And of course, this is dependent on the type of
masonry that you are looking at some more variable than other types of masonry.
So, this value actually comes from experimental investigations on different types of
masonry you can see that if you can adopt an average value of 1.3. So, 30 percent
correction is required; however, depending on the type of mortar and brick unit these
values can actually vary quite significantly from about 1.1 to about 2.5. So, this
theoretical framework, the Hilsdorf theoretical framework, actually gives you better
physical interpretation of the failure mechanism and is appropriate primarily because it
considers the inelasticity in the material, the weaker material the mortar in formulating
the expression itself.
So, so have would looked at couple of formulations one based on linear elastic approach
and one which bases base bases itself on the inelastic behaviour of the material. So, you
could look at how well they are able to match experimental results. Both fairly well do
their jobs in capturing the failure strength of masonry.
Student: Sir fj and fbc are both uniaxial compressive strength?
Yes. So, the yes that is true. fj is uniaxial compressive strength, fbc is the uniaxial
compressive strength of the unit, j is of the joint material and fbt is the tensile strength of
the unit. So, the basic point is that it is an assembly of different constituents it is a
composite masonry is a composite construction.
Now, if I know the strengths of the individual elements can I arrive at the strength of the
assembly in compression it is we have seen that it is not additive, it lie somewhere in
between the strength and deformability of the unit and the strength and deformability of
the mortar. So, the whole attempt is to be able to look at an analytical framework for it
and you have seen that it is possible to link it to the geometry. So, the joint thicknesses
202
are what alpha prime is standing for; the ratio of the joint thicknesses. You also have the
factor 4.1 that comes in here and then the uniaxial strengths of individual materials
compression mortar and unit and tensile strength of the unit.
However, there is still variability and the non uniformity factor is something that is
accounting for the variability that we are not able to capture analytically within the
within a closed form solution itself ok.
So, continuing it is useful to look at in terms of stress- strain curve what sort of what sort
of a analytical formulation fits the stress-strain curve of masonry itself. Again ,we are
examining compression and in a way it is not very different from concrete in its
behaviour in compression and studies were carried out few decades ago and they still
valid because they do a rather good job in capturing the stress strain behaviour of
masonry in compression.
So, work carried out in the 70’s- Powell and Hodgkinson and Turnsek and Cacovic are
two typical initial works that tried to examine what sort of a stress strain relationship do
you get in different types of brick work. They also examined do you get differences if the
bond patterns change, do you get differences if you are looking at face-loaded, if you are
looking at flat wise compressive strength that is a prism made out of bricks laid out in a
flat wise manner versus brick on edge and so on.
203
So, several iterations were carried out in the configuration of the brick work and the type
of masonry units and mortar as well. However, that is the typical stress strain curve and
you can see a certain idealization the stress strain curve is possible because it tends to the
close to a parabolic shape and here represented in terms of the ratio normalized stresses σ
to σmax and ε to εmax. Then makes it possible to closely related to the shape of parabola
and have if you need to use it for design purposes the equation of the parabola very well
matches the stress strain curve of masonry itself.
The fact that a parabola is what is matching the stress strain curve of masonry, also tells
you that if you were looked at in initial tangent as the description of the modulus of
elasticity and secant modulus close to the peak. Let us say two-thirds or three quarters to
the peak you will see a significant difference between the model I defined as a tangent
modulus in initial elastic tangent modulus and the secant modulus. And this is principally
telling you that the material starts showing non-linearity quite early on right ok.
So, with that let me move on to elements. So, what we did examine in the previous
lecture and today’s lecture in the beginning is the behaviour of masonry as a material in
compression. And the expression is a representation of the strength of the material, but
you do not get the same strength in a wall, for example, and that because you have other
effects that come into the picture. So, we have now moved on from strength of the
material of masonry to the strength of masonry element in compression and what effects
204
the strength of walls in compression for example, and we will again examine if there is
eccentricity of your axial loads, if there is eccentricity of your compression, what sort of
effects occur and what sort of effects should you be able to analytically capture if you are
estimating the strength of the masonry element itself.
So, the moment we look at structural elements like walls, the slenderness of the wall, the
basic geometry of the wall can start inducing second order effects. We have just been
looking at a first order effect as for as arriving at the compressive strength is concerned,
but you will never get that compressive strength of masonry in your wall. And therefore,
if you where to estimate the compressive strength of a masonry wall, you cannot use the
compressive strength of the masonry and say I have arrived at the strength of the wall.
You need to factor in other problems coming in from geometry and we grossly refer to
that as second order effects.
But there are several aspects that contribute to the second order effects and some of them
are listed here. It is almost exhaustive- you can have an eccentricity of the loading itself
that the load is not acting concentric there is an eccentricity induced by the load. So, if
the eccentricity is e you already have P into e acting on the wall which would mean there
is a component that is just the gravity load P plus the moment acting on the wall.
So, this itself can cause stress gradient and a strain gradient in the cross section and the
compressive strength of such a wall is not going to be the same as when you are
considering pure concentric uniaxial compression. So, this is typically represented in
terms of the effect of eccentricity to thickness as a ratio, we talk of the e/t ratio and we
are interested in understanding what is the e/t ratio that you are examining, where does
e/t sit with respect to the overall thickness of the cross section, are you talking of e/t
within the middle third or, are you talking of e/t that is outside the middle third, how
severe is e/t right and codes would like to classify the way you deal with the compressive
strength such walls to account for second order effects into different categories of e/t.
So, low e/t, medium levels of e/t and high levels of e/t and a cap on what e/t is going to
be as far as your design is concerned. And where does e/t, where does this effect come
from. It is simply because your superimposed loads are not always design to sit
concentrically with the wall you will have because of the geometry of the construction an
eccentricity of the load transfer itself. So, code giving you a limit on the eccentricity ratio
205
implies that you have to have construction detailing that ensures that the eccentricities
induced by; the eccentricity of the load transfer by superimposed elements has to be
curtailed.
So, this is one of the important contributing factors of second order effects, another
aspect that definitely has role to play is how slender the wall is right. Now typically
codes would prescribe limits on the slenderness ratio that is defined here as the height to
thickness ratio. We are looking at the least lateral dimension. So, you take the height of
the wall to the thickness of the wall and again there are limits on what should be the
slenderness ratio, because slenderness and eccentricity loading together is going to lead
to compromise in the compressive strength of the masonry ok.
So, we will examine eccentricity of loading first and then the effect of slenderness ratio
and you will see as we start looking at design that most codes would give you the
reduction in compressive strength because of a combination of e/t and h/t effects. So, the
IS code for example, would give you a table which has h/t on one axis, e/t on the other
axis and you look at what is the fact by which you may reduce the compressive strength
because increase in slenderness ratios and increase in eccentricity ratios would mean
lesser and lesser compressive strength of the element itself.
Now, the other aspect that does have a role to play which very often we do not give
enough attention to is you have a wall, you have boundary conditions that are the real
boundary conditions that occur because of the construction detailing and typology and
then for our calculations we idealize the boundary conditions right. You would idealize it
has a fixed-fixed boundary condition top and bottom, you would want to idealize it as a
pin-pin condition, but reality does not always have to be exactly what the idealized
conditions are going to give you.
Now, which means that there can be a deviation you can actually work out some
estimates of what is the rotational restraint and the translation restraint partial restraints,
you may be able to estimate those partial restraints and actually use those partial
restraints to be able to arrive at effects in the wall due to eccentricity of loading or due to
slenderness effects. So, this is an additional layer of complexity that would definitely
come in and therefore, first being able to idealize rather correctly what the boundary
condition should be and if there is significant deviation from idealized conditions being
206
able to estimate what those partial rotational translation restraints could be is the other
aspect that needs to be looked at.
There is another aspect the moment we consider the boundary conditions the point is
when you are looking at walls and floors interacting the amount to joint rotation that you
can get really depends on what is the relative stiffness of the floor and the wall itself. The
joint rotation that is that the floor is permitting is something that can alter the boundary
conditions and the deflections in the wall itself and then of course, the distribution of the
loads.
Now, we are not talking about single load, you can have multiple loads, you can have
loads that are varying over the length of a wall and that can introduce certain difference
in the estimates of the strength of the masonry wall, and together these effects contribute
to geometric second order effects also referred to P-delta effects. So, what we are going
to be doing now is examining what is the role of second order geometric effect in
reducing the strength of the masonry wall and if so can we have a simplified analytical
framework based on a set of assumptions, of course, to estimate the force displacement
relationship, the P-delta relationship of the masonry wall itself.
So, if I know the geometry and the material strengths can I for the geometry estimate
what the strength in compression of the masonry wall is ok. So, that is what we are going
to be looking at in this half of the lecture.
207
The assumption, the basic assumption that we make in this process here, we are looking
at when you have eccentricity there is bending in the wall and that can basically lead to a
situation of buckling. So, we looking at a brittle material masonry wall or masonry
column and examining the phenomenon under elastic buckling itself.
For the case that we are going to examine we are going to be looking at pinned ends
which means the ends are free to rotate, that is you might ask me when you construct a
masonry wall how is that you get pin conditions at the ends of the wall, but typically
what happens is you have a different material on which the wall is constructed. It is not
brick work that is going to continue for the entire length of the building entire height of
the building, you normally have a concrete slab that will come in at a certain point if you
are looking at the ground storey and the plinth you might have a damp proofing course.
So, you would normally have a different material at the boundaries of the wall and
because you have different material thermal expansion coefficients will be different and
that is sufficient to cause a cracking between these two surfaces.
So, you can work with the assumption that you have crack surfaces at the top and the
bottom allowing for some rotation and therefore, the assumption of a pinned end, two
ends being pinned is rather acceptable from the engineering calculations themselves. So,
we looking at a wall that is initially straight subjected to eccentric loading and examine
the deflections in the wall due to these eccentric loading and see if those deflections are
actually going to compromise the force capacity, the strength capacity of the wall itself.
So, if this is the wall we are examining, we have an eccentricity of the load acting on it,
P and we assume that the eccentricity is same at the top and the bottom; eccentricities
can be different at the top and the bottom. Again, depends on support conditions, if you
have full support and loads coming at a certain eccentricity different from what the
reaction eccentricities are the base you will have top eccentricity and bottom
eccentricities that are different.
Now, due to the deflection of the wall, due to the deflection of the wall because of the
moment induced by the eccentricity of the load part of the wall will crack and part of the
wall will remain un-cracked ok. So, there will be a part of the wall which goes into
cracking along the height and you call that the cracked zone. This crack zone is really not
208
going to be participating in the load carrying function, it is only the uncracked zone that
is actually going to be actively participating in stress distribution.
So, we have seen earlier in our introductory lecture that if the resultant of the forces
acting on the wall lie within the middle third of the section, then we know that the entire
cross section is in compression, but the moment the resultant falls outside the middle
third of the cross section you start getting tension and if the material is assume to have
low or no tensile strength you can start getting cracking in a material which is brittle. So,
under this assumption it is possible that for the deflection you have cracking in some part
of the wall. If the crack has to if the entire height of the wall has to crack, it means a
significant amount of the wall has thrust which is acting outside the middle one third of
the cross section.
So, basically you need to account for the fact that part of your wall, based on your
calculations should have cracked in part of the wall maybe in the un-cracked condition,
which means you have now different cross sections to deal with as far as load
equilibrium is concerned right.
So, we will keep that in mind and use that as the fundamental difference between
different resisting sections of the wall itself. The wall is expected to fail when the
cracked zone reaches the line of thrust and that is at the moment of collapse itself you get
a hinge that is forming at the mid height of the column the mid height of the column
209
itself is the location where you have the maximum displacement and expect maximum
cross section to have cracked.
So, let us say a significant amount of cross section has cracked at the mid height and now
the resultant compression is basically passing through a point and when the stress level
reaches the compressive strength of the material masonry, you get crushing and you can
have failure. But now we have basically assuming that the mid height section is
completely cracked, but the line of thrust is passing through a point which is now the
hinge and we are considering that almost two blocks are capable of rotating about the
hinge itself and still continue to equilibrium the axial load that is acting on the eccentric
axial load that is acting on it.
Now, if you were to examine the wall along it is height which has some parts cracked
and some parts uncracked, the deformations are going to be different and therefore, for
the crack zone and the uncracked zone you should actually be using different differential
equations to be able to estimate the deflections that occur because of the deflected form
itself.
So, we will come to these aspect, you will have to consider a different differential
equation for the cracked zone and the uncracked zone and then you could solve these
equations for different boundary conditions and arrive at an expression to get a load
deflection curves. The load deflection curves will actually be able to tell you how much
the strength in compression of the element is going to be different from the compressive
strength of material itself.
210
So, let us examine this we want to calculate the vertical load bearing capacity of the wall
and these are the assumptions that we begin with. We are considering a wall of length l;
height h, it has pinned ends and it subjected to eccentric compression. We have the same
eccentricity at the top and the bottom; eccentricity represented with the notation e here
top and bottom eccentricities are equal.
So, we are basically assuming a first order eccentricity; you can complicate this problem
little more with and have etop and ebottom there are different you will have to then account
for that in the differential equations. Your deflections are going to be different based on
the relative values of etop and ebottom. We assume that the material has no tensile strength
right, which means the moment you reach an eccentricity equal to the middle third of the
cross section you get the conditions for cracking because zero tensile stress has been
arrived at the extreme fiber.
And a fundamental assumption here, which can become a point that you take forward
and improve with a non-linear stress strain relationship in compression. In this particular
exercise we are going to be looking at the behaviour and compression as being linear
elastic. To keep things a little simple the self weight is neglected is assumed to be very
small in comparison to the superimposed load and this is also useful as a simplification,
because then you can assume that the same load P is acting at all sections if you consider
211
the self weight that is going to be incremently changing from the top to the bottom. So,
this is again a simplification ok.
So, now we need to assume we need to start examining the cracked zone and the un-
crack zoned and look at developing expressions differently for the cracked zone and the
uncracked zone. So, let us examine one of the sections along the height of the wall itself.
You look at a generic cross section. So, if the eccentricity is going to be within the
middle third of the cross section, we are looking at section 1-1, if the eccentricity within
the middle third the entire cross sections in compression. So, that is the uncracked region
of the wall itself. However, in regions of the wall particularly the middle portions of the
wall, the eccentricity is now going to be beyond the middle third of the cross section and
so, you will have cracked conditions.
So, section 0-0 or other sections between section 1-1 and the 0-0 should possibly have
the situation of cracking. So, you have got cracked sections defined and the uncracked
sections defined and we are going to be assuming that the cracked zone is not going to
participate in the load equilibrium itself ok. We are looking at sections along x, along the
height x, delta x is the deflection at any specific section x that you are looking at. So,
there is a total eccentricity- one is contributed by the eccentricity of the load, the other is
contributed by the deflection of the wall itself, total eccentricity e’= e + Δ.
212
And now since we have assumed that part of the wall section is going to be cracked and
part is uncracked, we are interested looking at what is the width of the compressed zone
because you can use only the width of the compressed zone in the equilibrium equations.
So, let us assume that the width of the compressed zone is c and it varies for the
uncracked zone and the cracked zone. So, the total thickness is t the compress zone the
width of the compress zone is equal to t if the eccentricity is within the middle one - third
of the cross section. So, if the eccentricity is less than or equal to t/6 then c = t, right.
If eccentricity is greater than; if eccentricity is greater than t/6 then we have to then
estimate what is going to be c which is less than t. Now for the cracked portion we look
at a trianglur distribution the width of the compressed zone is c, the total length is t and
we want to estimate what is this width of the cracked zone in case the eccentricity is
greater than t/6.
So, we looking at a triangular distribution and the total width of the cracked zone is
going to be based on a triangular distribution.
t  t
c = 3  − e −   if e >
2  6
213
So, we have established the width of the compression zone for the two situations. Now as
I said we need to established differential equations that are different for the two cracked
and uncracked segments of the wall itself.
So, for the uncracked portion of the wall for the uncracked portion of the wall; the total
eccentricity is the eccentricity of the load plus the deflection at that section. So, we write
the differential equation,
d2 
EI + P(e +  ) = 0
dx 2
t3
Let,  = e +  ; I =
12
d  12P
2
Then, + =0
dx 2 Et 3
So, that the differential equation from the first expression taken forward and for the un-
cracked portion in the cracked section you have a triangular distribution we are assuming
that the material remains linear elastic it is a triangular distribution of stresses and the
resultant is actually going to be acting at the centroid of that triangular distribution one-
third. So, it is written in terms of the compressive stress now the compressive stress in
the extreme fibre is considered as fc.
c  fc 2P
P=  fc =
2 c
Now, knowing the load knowing the compressive stress the strain in the cross section is
defined merely in terms of the distress edge stress fc by the modulus of elasticity of the
material and having defined the stress the width the compressed zone and the strain the
curvature in the section can be defined in terms of curvature of that section can be
defined in terms of strain over the compress length.
fc
Strain,  =
E
 2P
Curvature,  = = 2
c Ec
214
So, now with the curvature established this is essential because we know that the
curvature is going to be different in the cracked zone and the curvature is going to be
different in the uncracked zone ok.
The curvature therefore, in the cracked zone is now written in terms of the curvature
itself. So, we defined the total displacement eccentricity plus delta as ω. So, the second
derivative of the displacement as the curvature with now the expression for curvature
derived as we saw in the previous slide is going to help us write down the differential
equation for the cracked zone of the wall right.
d2 2P 2P
2
== 2 = 2
dx c t 
9E  −  
2 
d2 2P
− 2
=0
dx 2 t 
9E  −  
2 
So, with the two differential equations available we can now proceed to work towards a
force displacement relationship now ok. The fundamental problem that this is rigorous,
because your curvature can actually be different at different sections can some
simplification be useful. So, what is done here is we assume that the wall is cracked for
the full height ok. This is an assumption of course, the wall is not cracked for the full
215
height, but this would be a conservative estimate and this basically helps us to keep the
curvature same along the entire height of the wall ok, that can help us work towards a
single closed form solution for the situation itself.
2P 2P 2P
fc = = = ;
c t  3 ( yt −  )
3 − e −  
2 
1 e
where y = −
2 t
2P 2P
= ; =
3E(yt −  ) 9E(yt −  )2
Double integration of that curvature can give us the displacements.
So, now in this particular case we know that the mid height displacement is maximum,
delta naught maximum is at an x is equal to 0 you saw that the x that the origin is at the
mid height of the wall and with the expression that we have developed for the curvature
we can actually estimate what the displacements are at different height. The boundary
conditions in this case if you were to have the curvature for all heights defined the slope
of the displacement would be 0 at x is equal to 0 and looking at one half of the height of
the wall itself and the displacement is going to be 0 at x is equal to h by 2.
216
So, you have boundary conditions and you can actually then be able to arrive at what is
the displacement at mid height by double integration of the expression. However, this
curvature profile is something that is not known to us because the cracking is different at
different stages this complication can be overcome if we assume that the curvature
profile is uniform throughout the cross section. But the fact is this is still conservative an
estimate, conservative with respect to the exact solution of the problem itself.
So, if we were to assume the curvature along the height being constant then the double
integration becomes simpler you get from the expression for the curvature at any section
plug in the values solve it and plug in the values and you get an expression in P. So, you
get with this simplification you are able to pull out an expression in P you need a load
displacement you need a load displacement finally, to be able to draw the effect of
eccentricity of the load itself.
So, simplifying this expression by assumption of the curvature being constant along the
height you get an expression in P and earlier we have actually written down that
expression for fc in P. So, we have 2 ways in which the axial load can be written, we
have pulled out one from the integration of the curvature profile and the other one which
was written down earlier with respect to the edge compressive stress. So, these 2
expressions you could, use these 2 expressions together to get an expression for delta, I
217
need 2 independent expressions one for the axial load and the other for displacement at
mid height.
So, you use the terms coming from the expression that you see there and the 2 ways in
which the axial load has been derived use the 2 and get to get a quadratic expression and
get the solution of the quadratic expression for mid height displacement Δ0. So, now, you
have an expression for P and an expression for Δ0 and together you will be able to look at
the force displacement relationship in the case of the wall with the dimensions as we
started with.
So, if you substitute the expression for delta naught back into P you get the expression
for the force P as you see here and for a what you can basically do you see that this is an
expression in fc in which is the edge compressive stress and the geometry of the wall and
it also has the modulus of elasticity. So, for a given value of edge compressive stress, if
you know that the edge compressive stress fc is the stress that which the material is going
to fail feel. So, if fc is the compressive strength of the material for a given compressive
strength of the material fc you can estimate what is the load that wall can carry.
So, the final expression has P as a function of fc, P as a function of fc so, you know the
compressive strength of the material, but the compressive strength of the material is not
the strength of the wall because of the second order effects. So, knowing the geometry of
the wall and therefore, you can see that there is h/t that comes into the picture directly
that is the slenderness effect and y is the one that takes into account the eccentricity. So,
the eccentricity effect eccentricity ratio and the slenderness effect together comes to
reduce the the compression capacity, compression strength of the wall itself.
So, this expression and the earlier expression for delta can help you draw a force
displacement relationship knowing the compressive strength of the masonry, height of
the wall thickness of the wall modulus of elasticity and the eccentricity of the loading
itself. However, if you look at the closed form solution and the equation is actually valid
only for a certain range of y or the eccentricity ratios. So, this is basically an exercise that
looks at arriving at the capacity in compression of a masonry wall considering two
important effects the eccentricity ratio and the slenderness ratio of the wall itself.
218
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 03
Lecture – 13
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part – III
So, good morning, we continue examining the Behaviour of Masonry elements under
compression, we looked at a derivation that would allow us to account for geometric
second order effects right. And to begin with, we have the examined the effect of the
slenderness of the wall and the effect of the eccentricity of the load, represented both as
normalized values h/t for the slenderness and e/t for the eccentricity ratio. So, that is
where; that is where we were in the last lecture, we will looked at a derivation that
accounts for
the estimate of the vertical load bearing capacity of a masonry wall; URM here is
Unreinforced Masonry. Of course, you will agree that with reinforcement these values
will of course, change and we will examine how in a reinforced masonry situation you
can estimate capacities of the wall, but currently, we are examining the strength of
masonry and now in the component or the element which is the masonry wall itself.
219
So, we make the derivation of the vertical load carrying capacity, with a certain set of
assumptions which really become the basis of how you get these expressions- how you
have these expressions or the curves that you can develop from these. International codes
have different basis for developing such force-displacement or load-deflection curves for
compression. They can vary from linear elastic basis to non-linear stress-strain
definitions for the material itself, we have examined under linear elastic condition.
So, that was our first assumption- that the behaviour in compression of the material is
linear elastic and that is why, we were able to simplify the distribution of stress to a
triangular distribution in the in different sections along the height right. And that
distribution, the triangular distribution, was simplifying the estimates of the cracked
length and the un-cracked length in each section, which was essential to be able to arrive
at an expression for the edge compressive stress fc. So, this assumption is very important,
the second assumption that goes into the calculation of the vertical load bearing capacity
is that the material has no tensile strength.
There is some reserve tensile strength; however, we have seen in our previous lectures
that this is not something that is uniformly available and dependable and hence assuming
that it is a zero tensile strength material makes sense from an engineering estimate point
of view. We also have examined the problem under first order eccentricity implying that
the load eccentricity at the top and the bottom is the same which may not necessarily be
the case if the contact areas at the base of the wall are different from the contact areas at
the top of the wall.
So, load eccentricities at the top and bottom can be different, but here we have examined
the problem under a first order eccentricity, where etop is equal to ebottom. We then
develop the whole premise that the you need a differential equation to examine and solve
the elastic buckling problem here, but these differential equations have to be considered
differently, because part of the wall where maximum deflections are expected may be
cracked where as part of the wall could be uncracked.
And so, we had different differential equations for the cracked and the uncracked
portions and the classification between cracked and the uncracked portion was on the
simple basis that, if the total eccentricity lies beyond the middle one third of the cross
section or e/t > 1/6 the wall should have cracked otherwise the wall is uncracked.
220
Again, a further simplification was made of course, depending on how much of a section
is cracked at different heights of the wall. The curvature will be different, but again that
introduces the complexity in terms of arriving at a closed form solution in a simple
manner and therefore, we assume that the curvature remains constant along the entire
height of the of the wall itself. This again is a conservative estimate; with respect to the
exact solution itself. So, what we finally had if you are examining the estimate of the
vertical load at failure, we had P as a function of the edge compressive stress right.
So, as the wall is being loaded from 0 to maximum load at which failure is expected, the
edge compressive stress is going to keep increasing. So, we have an estimate of the edge
compressive stress and P the load is directionally proportional to this edge compressive
stress. We have also built in two important aspects that affect the second order effects on
the wall, geometric second order effects on the wall, which are the slenderness ratio h/t
and the eccentricity ratio e/t.
The calculations have been made for unit length of wall, in a similar manner the
displacement was also established in this case, we have assumed pinned-pinned
condition for the top and bottom boundaries of the wall. And the force-displacement with
the displacement at mid height being the maximum displacement is arrived at. So, with
the expression, you should be able to arrive at a force-displacement curve, P-delta curve
for the wall itself.
So, you start from zero load, keep increasing the load, you could estimate it in terms of fc
because you have the edge compressive stress which is directly proportional to P, you
keep increase in the edge compressive stress, till the edge compressive stress reaches a
maximum or you have instability in the system. So, a P-delta curve can be obtained for a
certain geometry for the load till failure. So, from this single load-deflection curve that
you estimate, you can identify what is the critical load or Pcritical as for as the wall is
concerned.
221
If you were to work on this problem, you can look at the edge compressive stress
incrementally reaching the compressive strength of the material, fc is the edge
compressive stress. Let us say, you know the compressive strength of the material, it is
this strength of masonry, the wall is not going to be able to fail in crushing because,
second order effects will govern.
So, basically you can increment this ratio fc by fm from 0, keep increasing at till the value
of 1 meaning that the edge compressive stress has now reach the crushing strength of
masonry and you have material failure in the cross section right. So, as you do this, if
before instability is reached, the material crushes then that is the load at which the wall is
expected to fail. That becomes your critical value of P or the vertical load bearing
capacity of the wall, but in some situations you might not have the crushing strength of
the edge compression fibre reaching a value of fm before the wall fails; before the wall
fails due to instability.
So, you could either have Pcritical by Pu reaching a value of 1 before instability, that is the
edge compressive stress reaching a compressive strength fm or you could have a situation
of instability being reached right. So, the P-delta curve that you see here, it has been
worked out for two different values of h/t, two different slenderness ratio, and for
specific values of compressive strength of the material fm and modulus of elasticity, these
222
are the values that are actually going. And these curves have been worked out for a
single eccentricity ratio e/t, a single value of eccentricity ratio.
You can see that, you could have a situation with respect to h/t equal to 16, you see that
the edge compressive stress reaches the value of the compressive strength of the material
and for all practical purposes, you can assume that the wall has reached its failure load
that becomes your Pcritical, but you might have another situation, where the edge
compressive stress is still less than the compressive strength of the material, but failure is
happening due to instability itself.
So, this is what such set of equations can help you arrive at- the load-deflection
excursion of the entire wall and the Pcritical and whether the Pcritical is occurring due to
instability or Pcritical is occurring due to failure due to crushing of the material itself right.
So, this is, what we were targeting. Now of course, this is mid-height displacement and
as I told you, we have made these calculations considering a wall that is pinned at the top
and the bottom. You could do the same calculations for a wall that is cantilevered- fixed
at the bottom and free at the top, you could do the same calculation assuming that the top
and the bottom are a fixed and not pinned right.
I mention that the assumption of the top and the bottom being pinned is a reasonable
assumption because, very often you will have cracking at the top and the bottom of a
wall occurring due to thermal movements not because of structural loads, dissimilar
materials are present at the top and the bottom of the wall. Masonry is placed on
reinforced concrete the reinforced concrete slab or if it is the ground floor you might
have the damp proofing course.
So, typically due to thermal strains, you will have crack formed at the top and the bottom
allowing rotations at the top and the bottom of the wall. So, it is acceptable to assume
that the wall is pinned at the top and the bottom, but if you want to assume that it is
closer to a fixed-fixed situation rather than a pinned-pinned situation, you have to go
back to the boundary conditions that you are imposing in solving the differential
equations.
Same is true for a wall, let us say a parapet wall and if you are estimating the load
carrying capacity of a parapet wall. I would assume it is fixed at the base and free at the
top and you might want to relook at the expressions and the boundary conditions used for
223
estimating the expressions for arriving at the expressions of P and delta. Again, to recall
what we have done, we have actually in this case considering the symmetry of
deformations been working on one half of the height of a wall right. If you remember the
integration was done from 0 to h/2, because of the symmetry. So, when you working on a
cantilever you will have to do it from 0 to h. So, these are some aspects that you might
want to keep in mind.
One aspect that I touched upon as I was completing the derivation in the previous lecture
2
fc  h 
is that, this expression is going to be valid as long as y 2    . Physically, we are
6E  t 
looking at instability and the effect of instability in the system.
So, you will be able to estimate a peak value and you will see that beyond the peak value
this is going to be a reduction in the load carrying capacity of the wall, but values beyond
2
f h
the limit of y = c   cannot be estimated. So, that is a limitation that you should be
2
6E  t 
aware of and as I said we are interested in the peak value of load that the wall can carry.
So, the peak value of load in this case is estimated as the maximum value that you can,
you see that the wall is able to resist and typically the limitation that you are talking
about would occur a few steps beyond this point right. So, you need to keep this in mind.
So, the curves that you see in the graph here, pertain to a single wall right or 2 walls, one
wall which has a h/ t of 16 and other wall which has a h/t ratio of 18. So, if this is the
basis to be able to arrive at the vertical load bearing capacity of a masonry wall of certain
dimensions and strengths, compressive strengths of the material. How is that you can
look at limits of slenderness ratio, limits of the eccentricity ratio of the load, eccentricity
ratio on the wall and that is how typically codes would give you the response of a
masonry wall under compression right.
224
So, what I am trying to examine here is the effect of slenderness ratio and so, I look at
several walls with changing slenderness ratios and changing eccentricity ratios and do
we get a pattern and does that pattern give a some indication of how codes are going to
be able to give you simple charts for arriving at the load that you must design the wall
for and limit eccentricities and slenderness.
So, let us examine the effect of slenderness ratio to begin with. The graph that you see
here has a number of slenderness ratios, you see that the ratio goes from something as
low as 6 to something as high as h/t of 28 ok. And we are reaching practically limiting
values and we are talking of slenderness ratio of 28. So, a slenderness ratio of h/t of 6 is a
very thick wall right and is not going to be affected so much by second order effects,
marginally by second order effects. Primarily if this wall is loaded till failure it should
fail in crushing; it should not fail in fail in buckling.
So, this is something that, you can see with increasing h/t ratios the effect of buckling
comes into the comes into the picture for initial values that are there in this graph, you
really not looking at; really not looking at any effect, any practical effect of the
slenderness itself. The red dotted line that you see there is the value at which for the
strength considered to prepare this graph, the edge compressive stress actually reaches
the value of fm, which means the curves that you see above beyond the red dotted line
really do not make sense because, for all practical purposes the wall cross section has
225
reached with compressive strength and the curves below that red dotted line is what
really matter .
Now, one fundamental aspect that we must keep in mind is that, the these curves have
been arrived at assuming we have a triangle distribution of compressive stresses in the
compressed zone. We have the entire cross section, part of it is cracked, part of the
section is carrying loads and this part of the equilibrium of the system. We are assuming
that till failure, the stresses there are linear elastic, the triangular distribution continues.
But I am sure all of you are familiar with the way we deal with stress distributions at
failure in a material like reinforced concrete. There is softening of the material as the
material edge compressive stress reaches the compressive strength of the material
because of which the stress distribution cannot be linear, the stress distribution has to
take a different shape. Parabolic shape is typically, what we start seeing, the edge
compressive stress reaches the value of compressive strength and the consecutive fibres
start softening.
Now, if one were to consider the softening, there is further level of accuracy in the
estimates. These calculations have been based on the linear elastic distribution of stresses
in the cross section implying, we have conservatism in this estimate right. So, if you
were to examine different codes in different countries some of them use a non-linear
stress-strain relationship for the cross section, the compressive stress in the cross section.
So, if you were to do that you will get values that are different for same h by t or same e
by t ratios.
Student: Till (Refer Time: 00:52).
Right your question is again to do with what do all these graphs, what do all these curves
in this graph represent with respect to the red dotted line that we are looking at right.
Yes, that is exactly what I said that the red dotted line is the point at which the edge
compressive stress reaches the value of compressive strength of the material ok. So, for
all practical purposes with the for us, we are assuming linear elastic response of the cross
section. So, we have not built in non-linearity or inelasticity in our estimates. So, we
need an artificial way of saying ok this is where I stop the response.
226
So, I artificially come and stop the response, when the edge compressive stress reaches f
m. Which means, you are right and saying that the curves above this red dotted line, are
not to be considered right, you can estimate them, but you not to be considering them
simply because crushing would have occurred in the cross section and that is now
dictating the behaviour of the wall and not the instability as the equations are going to be
prescribing.
So, we will examine a close up of the of the lower portion and it will become clearer to
you, but the point that I wanted to make is you can get a deviation from these curves. If
you use different code and that comes specifically because of the fact that, this is based
on linear elastic distribution of stresses, but in reality you are going to have a non-linear
distributional stresses.
Again, if you were to examine this against real data, you will see that this overestimates.
This underestimates the load carrying capacity of the wall, which is airing on the
conservative side and good as for as a design approaches concern, but the reason for the
divergence between the real values and these is simply because of the fact that we are
assuming an unrealistic distributional stresses even at failure. That is the point that I want
to make.
So, if I were to zoom in on the portion of the graph capped by the load at which edge
compression stress reaches compressive strength of the material. This is the valid region
of the; valid region of the load deflection P delta graph itself for the different walls. And
you can immediately see, that all those curves depicting walls which have a slenderness
ratio that is rather small, which are thick walls are not governed by instability, you do not
see the the curve goes way beyond the the red dotted line.
Meaning that, they not governed by instability the peak values according to those
expressions have not been reached yet, but the material crushing has actually occurred
which means, those walls are not being governed by second order geometrical effects.
Those are being governed by material failure in the cross section itself. Whereas, the
graphs below the last 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 graphs, which are basically pertaining to h/t ratios
of 18 to 28 are the ones which are being governed by second order effects right.
So, I would; I wanted to focus on this to tell you the role h/t plays; it changes the failure
mechanism in the wall itself. Now, question would be ok what is the maximum h/t that
227
you can consider and in experimental tests it is been seen that up to h/t ratio of 30 right,
you can have failure that is limited by the strength depending on the strength again this
set of graphs have been made for a certain compressive strength of the material and a
certain modulus of elasticity of the material. If I were to change that you will have a
dependency based on the strength of the material and the stiffness governed by modulus
of elasticity of the material; you have a very stiff construction versus a material which is
more deformable you going to have differences again.
So, your assignment will actually make that quite clear to you, but if you look at a
practical limit up to which the axial load is limited by strength over buckling that value is
about 30. So, generally speaking and this statement is general irrespective of strength and
stiffness of the wall itself. Now, what it means is if you have a h/t ratio 30 and above it
so close to instability merely because of its slenderness ratios; nearly because of its
slenderness ratios you do not need to load the wall even under its gravity under itself
weight you can have instability in the wall itself.
So, this is the other aspect that I did not mention, but was there in our initial
assumptions, is for our calculation, we have not used the self weight of the wall right.
And that is an acceptable assumption, because the self weight of the wall is going to be a
very small fraction of the total load carrying capacity the P critical of the wall itself and
particularly so, for smaller values of h/t. So, that is another assumption that comes into
the picture, but will not change your estimates significantly ok.
228
And it is observed that, when you have slender walls; when you have slender walls you
have significant lateral deflection before it can actually fail ok. So, if you were look at a
slender wall and look at the P delta for that wall you will see and in fact, in this figure
you can visually see the lateral deflection that the wall is undergoing, but it is still stable
right.
So, slender walls show significant lateral deflection before failure, but now the cross
section is subjected to; quite part of the cross section is cracked, rest of the cross section
is subject to quite a strong gradient in compression right. Strong gradient in compressive
strains and failure will be catastrophic. You get sudden buckling of the cross section
because, the edge compressive stress has given away your cross section is already
limited because of cracking.
So, you can get catastrophic failure these are tests that have been conducted several years
ago, but give us a very clear, very clear picture of what sort of a failure mechanism you
can get. And that is fundamentally, the reason why slenderness ratios are limited by
codes. You have cap on the slenderness ratios because, what you get by optimizing is a
very brittle failure mechanism. And codes typically tend to avoid occurrence of brittle
failure mechanisms.
You want to avoid the occurrence of brittle failure mechanisms. And you will start
appreciating in a few lectures, that depending on the earthquake zone that we are
229
working in, the slenderness ratios of walls is further limited. So, if you are in a high
earthquake zone, slenderness ratios can come down to as low as 12 and that simply
because, you have lateral forces along with the gravity forces. Under gravity forces to
avoid buckling control behavior you limit the slenderness ratios, but in the presence of
lateral forces you have if you have very slender walls you have out of plane failure
which cannot be controlled.
And so, you have slenderness ratios, which are controlled to prevent premature out of
plane failure. That is not primarily in compression, but because of the lateral forces, but
we come back to the concept of slenderness ratios being controlled. In this case, it is
being controlled for gravity, but in earthquake zones, its controlled to avoid significant
lateral deflection and failure due to the inertial forces themselves. So, that is a point that
we will come back to very soon ok.
So, I wanted to show you, how with this sort of an estimate, a structural code would then
give you the framework within which you design walls under second order effects. So, as
I was mentioning earlier, I can take a single wall for a given strength of the masonry and
modulus of elasticity. You remember that modulus of elasticity, we could have an
empirical relationship between the modulus of elasticity and the compressive strength.
So, Em the modulus of elasticity of the material could be k times fm. So, fm known, I have
230
the modulus of elasticity with me and so, for a single wall, I keep incrementing the edge
compressive stress and I get the Pcritical.
Now, I can look at different walls and the able to arrive at with respect to slenderness
ratio and with respect to e/t, what sort of trends can I get? And that is what codes
typically give you in terms of graphs. So, if you look at the effect of eccentricity ratio
now, this graph here is making use of I would say several walls, where the eccentricity
ratio is varying from no eccentricity of the axial load, which is concentric compression to
a very high eccentricity ratio of e/t of 0.4 right.
And if you remember, we said, if you have an e/t of 1/6 right. Plus or minus 1/6 that is
the middle third, you can start having cracking in the wall, but codes would typically
allow you to go up to about one third even one half. One half is typically when you start
having instability.
So, you can see that here; the here these graphs that have been made these curves that
have been made of a five different values of eccentricity ratio e by t going from 0 all the
way to e by t of 0.4. Now, I use walls of different h by t; so if you can see the X axis
here; in the x axis, we have different h by t ratios going all the way from 0 to 50. Which
means, I am basically looking at different geometrical configurations of height and the
cross-sectional dimension t of the wall.
So, I have an entire range from 0 to 50 and in those walls I am changing the eccentricity
ratio from 0 no eccentricity of load to an eccentricity of 0.4t. I will be able to estimate
the Pcritical for each wall right. I have an entire matrix now. Different values of h/t,
different values of e/t and for each of those I estimate what is the Pcritical. Some of them
will fail by instability being reached, some of them will fail by the crushing of the cross
section, but I have now the entire set of values of Pcritical and if I normalize Pcritical by Pu.
Pu being nothing but the compressive strength of the cross section right, the load at
which compressive strength of the cross section is reached.
So, Pu is nothing but fm multiplied by thickness of the wall into length of the wall right. If
I do that, then this is the kind of effect that you would see with increasing eccentricity
ratios, you see that there is a drastic drop in the critical load at which failure to
compression is happening with respect to the material strength defined by Pu right. So,
this is one graph, where you are looking at both the effect of the eccentricity ratio and the
231
effect of and the effect of the slenderness ratio. And you will appreciate that the effect of
the eccentricity ratios quite drastic; you see when you have no eccentricity, the black line
at the top, with moderately increasing eccentricity ratios you get a drastic reduction in
the load carrying capacity of the wall and compression. You are reaching values of 10
percent of the compressive strength of material. So, the second order effects have a very
significant role and have to be accounted for in estimating the value of the vertical load
carrying capacity of the wall itself.
So, I have here a graph that looks at how our code, the IS code presents the reduction
factors. So, what you saw in the previous slide was really the reduction factor that you
must consider, if you have a certain eccentricity ratio of loading e/t or certain h/t ratio the
slenderness of the wall itself. So, these are limiting curves, but mind you these curves are
again from the equations that we have developed based on linear elastic distribution of
stresses in the cross section.
So, with the example of IS 1905 (1987), which is code based on permissible stresses.
The way the design occurs as far as 1905 is by limiting the stresses that will occur in the
masonry for compression due to gravity forces, or compression due to gravity forces plus
lateral forces. So, you have to arrive at, what is the permissible level of compressive
stress. To be able to arrive at the permissible level of compressive, what the code
232
requires is that the estimate of what is referred to as a basic compressive stress and we
will examine this concept in a in future classes as well.
So, basic compressive stress, which is nothing, but the compressive strength of the
material denoted as fb is then multiplied by a factor that accounts for the slenderness ratio
and the eccentricity ratio together right. So, what the code does is it requires that the
slenderness h/t and the eccentricity e/t. Together gives you the factor that you can use as
a stressed stress reduction factor, this stress reduction factor is in IS code referred to as
Ks, you multiply this with the basic compressive stress fb ok.
Now, this is then multiplied with other factors, which we will examine subsequently, but
the point is the basic compressive stress is a factored strength of the material. For
example, if I know that the strength of the masonry is 4 MPa at failure, this being a code
that deals with working stresses will not take the value of 4 MPa. We will probably use a
factor of safety of 4 and say that the basic compressive stress, which is your limiting
compressive stress under working loads is 4 MPa by 4, 1 MPa.
So, 1 MPa would be the basic compressive stress, which is your limiting compressive
stress. That limiting compressive stress is further reduced by what is referred to as a
stress reduction factor and this value of the stress reduction factor is something that you
can arrive at based on the eccentricity ratio of the load and the h by t ratio.
So, if you look at this graph here, this is the graphical representation of a table, table
number 9 which is given in the IS code- IS 1905, which will tell you I know the total
eccentricity ratio of the loads coming onto the wall, I know the slenderness that I am
going to be adopting. What is the case factor, that I am further reduce the working stress,
the basic compressive stress fb by, to account for second order effects.
And you can again see here, that if I am looking at a wall of h/t of 6 that is where we
start, you have a h/t of equal to 6, your correction factor is one. There is no correction
required for a wall which has a slenderness ratio of h/t, 6. So, that is where the
calculation starts from and you see that we reach values of 27 in the code we go up to
value of 27 that is the value here and you see that the stress reduction factors are of the
order of 0.2 and slightly more than 0.2. Which means the permissible stress is going to
be reduced so much already of reduce the permissible stresses to account for the working
stresses and then you further reduce it to account for the second order effects.
233
So, fb in reality and we will come back and examine this later, fb is multiplied by three
factors, a stress reduction factor is what we talked about. There is an area reduction
factor and shape reduction factor which come in later for the time being you can assume
that both are one. Then the only factor that you multiply fb with this Ks and the Ks is
what you get from this graph itself right. Correct so, the you have to make an estimate of
the eccentricity, have an estimate of the eccentricity of the load and that allows you to
estimate the eccentricity ratio e/t.
So, you know e by t you have chosen a certain h/t for the wall construction and then you
look at what the stress reduction factor is. Now, if the stress reduction factor into the
basic compressive stress for the chosen material. Lets say, you have chosen a material
which is of a compressive strength 8 MPa or 8 N/mm2. The fb would be about 1 quarter
of that value, so I have a 2 MPa of basic compressive stress into a stress reduction factor.
Now, let say you arrive at the permissible stress by multiplying Ks into fb, but its far
lower than what you want as the load carrying capacity of the wall. Your only options
are change the wall cross section or change the material by increasing the strength of the
material. So, it gives you a framework within, which you can look at dimensioning of
masonry walls or choosing the strength of the masonry wall itself right. That is as far as
unreinforced masonry design is concerned and the use of these factors to account for
stress reduction itself ok.
234
So, I think I will stop here and look at the rest of the international codes and how this is
adopted. And also the effect of other geometrical effects like wall slab interaction and the
rotation of the joint how it is going to affect your assumptions on the boundary
conditions of the wall and whether that is going to affect the compressive strength or the
load carrying capacity of the wall. See you in the next lecture.
235
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 03
Lecture - 14
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - IV
Good afternoon, we continue with our lecture which was looking at Behaviour of
Masonry under Compression. And we examined the effect of slenderness ratio and the
effect of eccentricity ratio and how we account for these two important geometrical
second order effects in reducing the compression capacity of a masonry wall. So, that is
what we were looking at in the last class.
Of course, the vertical load carrying capacity of a masonry wall is also affected by other
factors; we had briefly looked at some of these factors at the beginning of this module
and we will examine this little closely today before we move on to behaviour in bending
itself.
So, we were looking at how codes represent and that is where the concluded in our last
lecture, how a code would give you design curves that you can use for estimating the
dimensions for a given wall or the design loads for a given combination of geometry and
eccentricity of loading. So, we did see how the IS code 1905 looks at stress reduction
236
factor as a function of what the eccentricity ratio e by t, with t as the wall thickness and h
by t was and we saw those curves. And I did mention to you in the last lecture that we
make our calculations for the adopted approach based on linear elastic analysis- linear
elastic behaviour of the material.
Now, that is going to be conservative and across the world different codes adopt different
approaches: one of the aspects that can see a difference in the way these curves are
presented in different codes is if a non-linear stress strain relationship has been used for
the masonry compression behaviour, then you will see that you get a more accurate
estimate of the second order effects.
So, I am just looking at some other forms in which you will see design curves made
available for masonry design. So, in this particular example that we are seeing, you can
see the normalized load on the y axis, P/Pcritical and on the x axis you have the total
deflection; it includes the eccentricity of the load itself. So, you have yc which is the mid
height displacement that you would get in a pinned-pinned wall plus the eccentricity of
the load itself normalized to the thickness of the wall given as d here.
So, in this set of curves that you see, if we were to consider the column to behave in an
elastic manner even at ultimate and provide the material with tensile resistance, then the
load deflection curves beyond the point where the continuous lines start reducing. If it
were assuming fully elastic condition you will have you would actually follow those
dotted lines there. So, this is another way of representing P/Pcritical to the eccentricity ratio
and this is from work quite a few years ago. Now one aspect that you need to keep in
mind is, it has been observed and most of the analytical forms, most of the design graphs
would account for this aspect, for this phenomenon, the maximum mid height deflection
that you get in the wall because of the second order effect and the initial eccentricity that
is there because of the eccentricity of the load.
So, in this case we are looking at yc as the mid height deflection and ep is the eccentricity
ep
of the load so, when this reaches one half of the section thickness. So, when y c + in
d
this case is equal to 0.5 then you typically get loss of stability, collapse is observed at this
limit and most codes would put a cap beyond this particular value.
237
So, you can see again that at e/d that is total eccentricity plus the mid height deflection
reaches 0.5 you have reduction in the capacity coming right down to 0. Now if the dotted
lines here imply that there is no inelasticity in the cross section and there is tensile
resistance available in the cross section. So, in that case resistance is still there, but in
reality you are looking at very low tensile resistance and plastification. So, once you
assume plastification of the section and you assume that there is no tensile resistance,
crack formation and subsequent plastification of the cross section is occurring which is
what is crossing the reduction in the load carrying capacity.
The stress reduction factor itself, we have seen how with h/t greater than 25 these are
governed by buckling, but less than 25 you start seeing that you can have crushing in the
cross section that can occur because before the instability due to buckling occurs itself.
So, typically the stress reduction factors that we saw for IS 1905 we will compare that in
a moment, but this is the other way in which you would see codes giving you stress
reduction factors that you should be using to account for second order effects again as a
function of h/d and you would use different values for different eccentricity ratios as you
can see. So, at about 25; at h/t of 25 which is the red dotted line with no eccentricity of
the load itself you do not use a stress reduction factor. So, you can see that at h/t of 25
the stress reduction factor with no eccentricity of the load is one.
238
So, there is no reduction that is required and this comes from observations that beyond
h/t of 25 is when failure due to buckling is expected to occur. So, this is what we had
seen and in the IS code we have the values that go up to h/t of about 27 and we do see
some differences, but more or less this is what is how codes would represent the effect of
second order geometrical aspects such as h/t and e/t, ok.
Now, as I had mentioned earlier there are other factors that will come into the picture and
these phenomena particularly the interaction of the wall with the floor slabs and the
rotation at that junction has an important role to play; it actually changes the boundary
conditions and would alter the vertical load carrying capacity of the wall itself. So, that is
an aspect that I would like to look at.
Now, if you were to make an estimate; an accurate estimate of the effect of second order
P-delta in the load carrying wall, you need to consider the fact that beyond the
compressive strength of the material you are going to have plastification of the section
and that needs to be considered; a finite resistance of the material in compression needs
to be considered. You can consider a non-linear constitutive relationship to get a more
accurate estimate of the P-delta effects and the time varying deformations can also be
considered. And your load configuration is going to change because of the deformation
itself and these could also be considered to get a more accurate estimate itself. But
239
boundary conditions getting affected is something that you need to keep in mind and can
be accounted for in arriving at the vertical load carrying capacity of the wall itself.
So, let us examine how the interaction between the wall and the slab is and if one were to
be accounting for wall slab interactions in the vertical load carrying capacity of the wall,
what sort of a framework could you use for this sort of this calculation itself.
So, the floor slab induces the restraining effect on the wall, when the wall is subjected to
bending due to the gravity forces acting eccentrically or even when you have lateral
forces acting on the wall the role of the floor slab is, it basically restrains the
deformations in the wall. So, this slab has a restraining effect and it is essential therefore,
to be able to understand what is this restraint offered by the slab and can this restraint
actually be considered in the vertical load carrying capacity of the wall itself. It
influences the strength of the wall, both particularly in terms of the end rotations and
what the actual eccentricity of the load is on the wall itself.
So, in order to be able to arrive at an analytical form let us look at the deflected shape
and then the eccentricity of the loading to then use then within an analytical expression
itself. Now, as we were discussing earlier, the problem that we looked at and arrived at in
analytical close form solution had first order eccentricity- we assumed that the top and
the bottom eccentricities where equal, but you need not have that sort of a situation, you
might have first different eccentricity to the top and the bottom and this can come from
240
changed boundary conditions at the top and the bottom. So, the top and bottom end
conditions need not necessarily be same, we idealize it as the same.
So, as I said the the first assumption that we have a hinge at the top and the bottom itself
is based on a certain set of conditions of crack formation at the at the interface with the
adjacent material. Now, this could be a situation that has not occurred so, your top and
bottom boundary conditions could be different itself.
So, let us examine a few cases where you might want to make assumptions that are as
appropriate as possible with respect to physical reality. If you were to consider a
continuous reinforced concrete slab as the floor slab or the roof slab and let us assume
that this reinforced concrete slab is embedded into the wall thickness. If wall thickness is
t, then the we are assuming that the slab itself is embedded at least up to two thirds of the
wall thickness and now if the average compression at the interface between the slab and
the masonry wall, the bearing stresses are of the order of 0.3 MPa, 0.3 N/mm2 that can be
assumed to give fixity.
So, if you can make a quick estimate of what is the bearing stress at that interface, if you
have embedment plus a bearing stress of the order of 0.3 MPa or higher, assuming that
the joint is fixed is a reasonable estimate. You might have situations different from this
,if you have a flexible diaphragm, if you have a flexible floor then the situation definitely
changes.
241
Now let us look at if you have a timber floor, which could be a which is a flexible floor
or it could be the reinforced concrete slab that we examined earlier. But now let us say
you do not have a bearing stress level of the order of 0.3 MPa; it is significantly low. In
such a situation the flexible floor, the timber floor or reinforced concrete slab which has
very little bearing stress, significantly low bearing stress, is not going to restrain the joint
and assuming that the wall is hinged is a reasonable estimate. Plus, the other aspect that
you need to know is, this is not just structural typology specific. Within the same
building as you go to higher floors, the stress levels in the axial force levels are going to
be different and therefore, the stress levels can also be different, in the higher floors
compared to the lower floors.
And so, you might not have the bearing stresses that we are talking of, the thumb rule of
0.3 MPa in the higher reaches of the building compared to the lower floors so, this is
something to be considered. If there is good bonding then the out of plane deformations,
the return walls, if there is good bonding, then the return walls are going to be acting as
stiffeners and you would be able to get further contribution as far as lateral restraint is
concerned.
So, you are examining the wall and it is under axial forces, but now if the return walls
are well bonded to the wall under examination there is an additional resistance that is
available to this deformation by the return walls and it depends on how well the wall is
bonded to the return walls. It depends on if you want to consider this effect and whether
the effect are actually having a significant role to play in the vertical load carrying
capacity of the wall, ok.
242
So, if you are able to make an estimate of the end rotations, can that be brought in
analytically? Yes and this has been done, you need a certain amount of idealization, a set
of parametric curves as you can see in this in this graph here have been created based on
analytical formulations which link a certain set of conditions. The end rotations of the
wall, you should be able to make an estimate of the end rotations of the wall the load that
is being applied to the wall and the eccentricity of the load itself.
So, these set of parametric curves from this work that has been quoted here Sahlin
(1971), looks at being able to estimate the stress in the wall, the stress level in the wall
because of a combination of these affects- the end rotation of the wall, the total applied
load and the eccentricity of the load itself. Here, let me make specific reference to the
small figure that is there. λh is the height of the element that you are considering, it is the
height of the load bearing wall of the bearing element from a floor to the nearest
inflection point so, the point of zero moment.
So, it depends on what sort of an idealization of the boundary condition have you made
and h is the total height of the of the wall and then depending on the deflected shape of
the wall between the points of zero moment you have λh, d is the total wall thickness and
b is the width of the cross section that is being considered and σedge is nothing, but the
edge compression we have been using fc in our earlier lectures and that edge compressive
stress is what is given in this graph as sigma edge. So, these curves are actually curves of
constant edge stress; you have constant edge stress curves superimposed on these on the
other curves here.
243
So, depending on the level of rotation that you have, the end rotations are given on the y
axis. You can see that the rotations are here, the end rotations are here, in terms of
h
v which is an estimate of how much of rotation do you have in the wall itself. And
d
(h)2
then on the x axis you have ; E of the masonry and I again the second moment of
EI
area of the cross section.
And the second set of curves that you see here are curves of constant edge stress and that
(h)2
is bdedge . So, the second set of curves that you see are curves of constant edge
EI
stress and they are superposed on this and the curves are calculated for different levels of
eccentricity ratio. So, each curve is for e/d of 0.083 and keeps increasing to about 0.5 and
as we said you will see that this e/d of 0.5 or e/ t of 0.5 is a limiting value in most codes.
So, this is if for a given load the maximum stress in a wall can be known if you can make
an estimate of the end rotations and you go you know the extensity of the load. So, if you
want to limit the maximum compressive stress in the wall let us say you are working
within a permissible stresses approach, then you know what is the maximum permissible
stress that is allowed for the combination of materials that you are looking at. Through
this sort of a graph you will be able to check if for a given load and selected end rotations
and eccentricity would you be able to satisfy the requirements of the allowable stress
itself. So, this is another useful form in which the effect of eccentricity, effect of the end
rotations have been captured in parametric design curves ok.
244
This is a work that has actually seen lot of research; this is an area that has seen a lot of
research. So, there are different ways in which this has been accounted for. So, if you are
looking at a wall which is carrying the vertical load and sitting between floor slabs and if
the rotation the end rotations are designated as phi and e being the eccentricity of the
axial load P, for a wall of height H. There are some other forms that have been developed
in this particular work you can see that the deflected shape.
Now, the deflected shape of the column has been idealized as being close to a parabolic
deflected shape and with that assumption you get an analytical form that you can use and
in this particular situation, in this particular example, if the angle of rotation at the ends
is estimated right. If you can make an estimate of the angle of rotation at the ends, the
bearing capacity (the failure mode), that is in what way is the wall slab interaction
expected to fail and the eccentricity and the end moments can be arrived at.
So, in terms of mode of failure you can either have failure in the section due to the
compressive strength of the material being reached or you could have failure due to
buckling and that depends on the h/t ratios that you are looking at and the relative
strength that is being examined. You can have the entire wall section in the uncracked
situation or the wall partly cracked or fully cracked. So, depending on the cracked
condition in the wall and depending on the mode of failure you have a set of expressions
which have been derived with the assumption of a parabolic deflected shape, for the
column you get the bearing capacity and the eccentricity corresponding to the capacity
245
estimate itself. So, this is another format in which the effect of end rotations has been
considered.
If you actually look at the kind of rotation that you have of the slab with respect to the
rotations in the wall at the interface between the wall and the joint, it is instructive to see
that the total rotation is effected by how much rotation the slab is going to undergo and
how much rotation the wall is going to undergo. So, this is an interesting work that is
been done to arrive at moment rotation relationships for the joint behaviour at the wall
slab interface.
So, if you are assuming that the joint is rigid, if you are assuming that this wall slab
interface is rigid, you are going to basically have a situation where you are assuming that
the wall’s end rotation and the slab’s end rotation are similar, but this is not going to be
the case, you are looking at materials which are definitely of different stiffnesses and
these two values will not be the same.
So, is it possible to make an estimate of these two and if so, can a moment rotation
relationship for the joint behaviour be developed and can that be used for your end
rotation estimates and then use it within those example parametric curves if we were
looking at to estimate, what the vertical load carrying capacity of the wall is going to be.
So, this angle of rotation at failure depends on a few factors, it is how much of axial load
is actually coming on to the joint that is, what is the axial stress level in the joint and also
246
what is this load in relation to the load carrying capacity of the wall itself. So, this angle
of rotation is going to be different at different stages of the loading itself.
So, if you look at the joint, this is basically examining a wall with a slab and the interface
between the wall and the slab, here the rotation of the wall is φv. That is the rotation of
the wall the vertical component the vertical element has a rotation φv, the slab itself
undergoes rotation φh. Now, the difference between φh and φv is really the rotation of the
rotation of the joint itself. So, there is an estimate of the joint rotation that is now
dependent on how much is the slab rotating, how much is the wall rotating and the
difference is going to give you the joint rotation.
So, some work that has been carried out in the past has looked at an elastic-plastic
behaviour where the rotation of the wall is assumed to have a non-linear behaviour - with
increasing load the rotation of the wall is not linear. Whereas, the rotation of the slab is
considered to be linear and this is an acceptable assumption if you are looking at brick
masonry and reinforced concrete as the 2 materials. I am assuming that the reinforced
concrete material is continuing to behave in a linear elastic manner whereas, the wall has
inelasticity coming in and so, the rotations are non-linear and that is a fairly good
assumption.
So, in this graph you can see with increasing P on the y axis you have the different
rotations the rotation of the wall the rotation of the slab and the difference θ. So, you can
make an estimate of what theta is once the total rotation of the slab and the rotation of
the wall is made. And as we were talking as we were discussing earlier in the case of the
reinforced concrete slab, if the pre compression at that joint is about 0.3 MPa or greater
you can assume that you do not get rotations there and it is a fixed joint and this is
actually been seen quite clearly in experimental results that you get almost 80 percent
fixity if you are looking at a compression stress level of about 0.3 MPa.
So, with this you will have an estimate of the rotation and then you can go use curves
which are actually accounting for end rotations as well, to be able to estimate the vertical
load carrying capacity of a wall.
247
Just to show you the behaviour of such interfaces if you have very low level of pre
compression in the wall. Let us say we are looking at a single storage structure and the
roof slab of a single storage structure in reinforced concrete with low pre-compression
levels you will have fracture crack formation as there is as the wall starts deforming.
Whereas, if you have high pre-compression then the interface can see situations where
there is crushing occurring in the brick masonry, these are of course, outcomes of tests
and what you are seeing is that failure conditions.
So, the point is that interface will behave differently with respect to the level of pre
compression. It can either crack or it can crack and rotate or crush and therefore, if it is
crushing then you have the non-linear behaviour of the masonry wall the rotations in the
masonry wall will be different and you cannot assume a linear response then.
So, that brings us to the end of examining masonry under compression we did it at 2
levels, we did it at the masonry cross section level, material compression and the element
compressive behaviour itself. We continue examining different actions, the next that we
will be examining is bending, but out of plane bending.
248
And when we examine out of plane bending, we did discuss this aspect at the beginning
of our section, in the section on material behaviour and how the strength of the joint in
flexural tension becomes important. If you remember we examined flexural tensile
strength normal to the bed joint and flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed joint.
Now, time has come when we start examining the role played by those parameters and
the orthogonal strength ratio that I mentioned to you earlier in the behaviour of the
masonry wall in bending ok.
Now, assuming we are looking at the wall subjected to horizontal distributed loading. So,
now the load is actually acting laterally on the wall and we can examine typically
distributed conditions, because we are interested in looking at the behaviour of the
masonry wall when subjected to either inertial forces; inertial forces generated due to an
earthquake and that is distributed load of course. We can idealize it as a concentrated
force when we do seismic analysis, but basically the inertial forces are distributed forces;
or wind forces (air pressure on a wall). So, we are examining a situation where the wall
is subjected to horizontal distributed loading and this is in the presence of gravity load.
So, we are examining a combination of loads here, the gravity load is present the stresses
due to gravity loads are already present in the wall, but in addition we have the lateral
load acting on the wall. So, before we examine the analysis approaches to consider
different situations it is useful to recollect that we talked of horizontal bending and
vertical bending and you have situations where you have a combination of horizontal
bending and vertical bending. We refer to that as diagonal bending and that is again a
249
case that we will examine and horizontal bending and vertical bending is a differentiation
that we make based on the predominant direction in which the bending is occurring and
that is dictated by the boundary conditions.
So, both horizontal bending vertical bending are referred to as one - way bending,
because you have the predominant bending only in about one axis whereas, in diagonal
bending you will have two axis about which the bending is occurring and that is why we
refer to it as diagonal bending. So, one way vertical bending, you have again the
situation that I am looking at is with rotations at the top and the bottom being possible
and then you see that there is a crack that is formed at the mid height roughly at the mid
height.
So, these are some assumptions that the top and the bottom are free to rotate and you get
a mid height crack also forming. We will examine under what conditions these are true,
but most in most situations when you are looking at distributed load acting on the wall,
lateral load acting on the wall this is the way in which the wall is expected to respond.
So, this is one way vertical bending with a mid height crack at the crack somewhere at
mid height, it can actually be at other locations away from the mid height due to specific
conditions and we will examine that again. So, the maximum displacement could be
delta acting because of the deformation of the wall itself.
Student: Sir here is (Refer Time: 34:53).
The question is the horizontal bending happening here? No there is no horizontal

bending when we when we talk of one way vertical bending it is about the vertical axis
that the bending is happening and you are getting cracking the resistances is offered by a
joint and the flexural tensile strength of the material, normal to the bed joint becomes
critical in one way vertical bending.
When I am talking of one way horizontal bending it is the wall which is actually opening
inwards or outwards with a vertical crack that is formed whereas, in the one way
horizontal bending you get a horizontal crack. That the orientation of the crack might
mislead you to could get confused with the title, one way vertical bending is bending
about the vertical axis, one way horizontal bending is one way is bending about the
horizontal axis. The one way vertical bending ends up with the horizontal crack, the one
250
way horizontal bending ends up with a vertical crack so, that is the fundamental
difference.
Student: Sir.
Ok, so your question is what we have seen is the wall being loaded in the axial direction.
Student: Yes.
In the axial direction. We are talking of a wall which is carrying gravity forces, but is
also subjected to lateral loading and the lateral loading that we examining in this case is
either wind load or inertial load because of an earthquake. So, in this condition you have
the horizontal load and deflections occurring in the wall because of the combination of
the two.
So, you would have a similar situation in one way horizontal bending, now the point that
we need to make is that in one way vertical bending you do have the effect of pre
compression, the positive effect of pre compression on the resistance of the wall itself.
So, if you are looking at a wall which has significant pre compression, then its out of
plane capacity vertical bending capacity is going to be enhanced because of the presence
of the pre compression right and that is obvious because the pre compression is going to
act on the resistance side.
What about a horizontal bending situation? In one way horizontal bending can there be a
beneficial effect of pre compression, if pre compression is there it will give you it will
definitely have a beneficial effect, but would you get the beneficial effect of pre
compression at all in horizontal bending. So, that is something that we will examine. Do
you think you can encounter that sort of a situation? We know the beneficial effect of
compression, pre compression it is available in one way vertical bending, but what about
in one way horizontal bending.
Yes. So, it is available if you have non moving end supports and if there is no gap
between the wall and those supports and if you have basically non-moving supports, the
end constraints can induce pre compression as the wall starts deforming. As the wall
starts deforming you will get clamping forces coming in and those clamping forces will
251
augment the out of plane capacity of the wall. It is called an arching action and we will
examine how one way horizontal bending estimates can be completely different if you
consider arching action; conditions are available for arching action to occur.
So, and that is the reason why I put this here, because while in one case it is obvious, in
the other case it is not obvious and it needs to be accounted for, if conditions are
available for it to occur.
252
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 03
Lecture - 15
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - V
Good morning, we will continue our lecture on the Behavior of Masonry under the action
of out of plane loads, bending of a masonry wall and capacity under out of plane
bending.
So, we were looking at the conditions under which out of plane bending becomes
essential and critical as a resisting mechanism of masonry and we are examining
unreinforced masonry still. So, the case of requirement of resistance when you have
vertical bending, when you have horizontal bending and when you have a combination
of vertical and horizontal bending is the context in which we are going to be examining
the behavior in bending. It is in the presence of gravity forces, so it is actually a
combination of bending and compression induced by the gravity forces.
So, to begin with, let us examine how from conventional bending analysis, assuming
linear elastic behavior of the material, we can put limits on the strengths of the material
and arrive at possible estimate of the lateral load that the wall can carry at critical points
253
of the behavior. So, that is the first thing that we will examine, and of course, move on to
a possible non-linear stress strain relationship that can be assumed in the cross section
and if that becomes our basis, the force displacement coming out of the analysis can be
different, ok. So, we are looking at a wall which has lateral support at the top and it is
sitting on a concrete foundation, it has a foundation and it is a different material, assume
you have a plinth beam there.
So, you will have a different material between your brick masonry and the foundation
material and therefore, it is possible that you can have a rotation at the base if a crack is
already formed at the base. But, let us assume that the crack is not formed now at the
base, and under the condition of just gravity forces acting on the wall you should have
uniform compression at the base of the wall itself with zero eccentricity of the resultant.
So, this is the initiation of the initial condition of loading in the wall and as the lateral
forces act on the wall, you will have a combination of the effects due to the lateral force
and that of the gravity forces.
So, in the first stage if you have slight lateral force acting on the wall, the wall is in
uniform compression, because of the gravity forces and the tensile stresses that can be
induced at the base because of the action of lateral forces get nullified by the uniform
compressive stress due to the weight of the wall itself. So, in the first stage we are
looking at the compressive stress due to the weight of the wall, fa nullifying any tensile
stresses that can come due to the lateral forces acting on the wall, wind forces in this
case.
So, we are assuming that the bottom is fixed at this stage and the top there is a lateral
support, right. Therefore, you are looking at structural situation where it is a prop
cantilever. You can idealize the system as a propped cantilever and look at the analysis,
elastic analysis using this assumption. Then as the wind forces keep increasing, you can
start getting tension at the base, you get a non-uniform distribution of the stresses,
because of the bending plus the axial compression in the wall. We have seen this limiting
case earlier, a limiting case due to the combination leading to zero stresses at the
windward end and maximum stresses assuming a triangular distribution of stresses in
compression at the other end or the leeward end of the wall.
254
So, this, if you consider this as one of the limiting cases, the first limiting case, we are
interested in knowing what wind pressure acting on the wall under the condition of the
wall being loaded in gravity by its self-weight or any superimposed load at what wind
pressure would you reach this limiting triangle distribution of stresses. So, as I was
mentioning, in this condition we are really looking at the wall being idealized as a
propped cantilever.
Implying your maximum bending stresses are going to occur at the fixed base, at the
bottom and of course, there is positive bending occurring somewhere around mid-height
below that. And therefore, since the maximum negative moment is now acting at the
base, if we assume that there is no tensile strength in the material under this condition,
we should start seeing the initiation of cracking at the base of the wall itself. So, with the
assumption that the wall is a propped cantilever, the bending moment corresponding to
this situation, which be the maximum bending moment in the wall is nothing but the
distributed force here, the wind load pb h2/8.
The tensile stress at the base itself is now going to be the bending stress minus the
compressive stress that you have and we said that this being a limiting case the tensile
stress is equal to 0. So, ft in this case is nothing but the bending stress pb h2/8 - fa; that is
already acting at the wall and this is the limiting condition and we have seen this limiting
condition where the eccentricity is at t/6 with respect to the thickness of the wall.
So, if you use tensile strength to be 0, from this we can estimate at what level of lateral
pressure should you get cracking in the wall of you reach this first limiting condition
here S is the section modulus of the cross section.
 8S 
p b =  2  fa
h 
The wind pressure continues to increase and move forward you have partial section
cracked beyond this point and compressive stress is increasing in the cross section, we
could then look at a limiting case where the entire section is cracked, the whole section is
capable of rotating and it is through the hinge that the resultant compression is passing.
So, you have now moved from a propped cantilever kind of situation to a situation where
the wall is pinned at both the ends. So, the boundary conditions change because of the
increasing wind pressure and the maximum bending moment now moves to mid height
255
of the wall, and when that approaches tensile strength of the material you can get
initiation of cracking at mid height.
So, proceeding further stage c is where the crack at the base has now occurred, the
resultant in compression gets pushed towards the leeward edge and it is now acting
almost like an ideal hinge, boundary conditions have started changing to pin from earlier
propped cantilever condition. And now we are interested in looking at maximum bending
stress due to the combination of wind force and the gravity, but now this is going to be
somewhere at the mid height of the wall itself.
So, basically you see a slow progression here. Of course, we have idealized a situation
where the resultant is very close to the leeward edge, but for the entire cross section to
crack, a slow increase in the lateral force is essential. So, this is stage c as the wind load
increases from the limiting condition pb to the situation pc.
256
Further continue in this configuration where now the wall is pinned at both its ends and
we are now interested to estimate at what level would you get the mid height crack,
which is what will initiate its failure, the system failure itself.
So, it is essential at this stage to understand that because of the eccentricities of the self-
weight acting at the centroid of the wall segments and the hinges which are at the
leeward edges. There will be an eccentricity due to the self-weight itself which actually
comes into your resistance calculation and additional load calculations.
So, in this condition you have due to the wind let us take the situation of just the wind
force acting on the wall and then combine it with the situation where the axial load
equilibrium can be considered in the wall and superpose them because you are working
in the regime of elastic analysis. So, due to wind you have now a situation where the wall
is acting like a pinned-pinned structure with the bending moment of M = ph2/8;
uniformly distributed load on a simply supported system.
In this case it is just due to wind we are assuming that the effect of self will be
considered separately. So, add to this you look at the effect of the equilibrium for the
gravity forces. Now due to self weight, because the of the pin-pin situation and the
migration of the hinge towards the leeward edge, there is going to be an eccentricity that
has caused at the bottom and eccentricity which is equal to t/2. Because we are assuming
257
that the wall is now pinned at its leeward end and so, this causes an additional bending
moment and it is essential to consider this additional bending moment.
The additional bending moment here is fa into so, the compressive stress acting at that
point into the net area of cross section available into (t/2)/2. So, into t/4 and you can see
that the reactions of the top and the bottom; the differences in the reaction the top and the
bottom is because of the eccentricity, considered at the base with respect to the hinge
which is where fa x An is actually acting.
So, this additional component will come into our calculations and it is really a
combination of the bending moment due to the lateral forces and the bending moment
cause due to the eccentricity of the self-weight resultant that is now going to be used to
estimate what is the wind pressure at which you will get the ultimate state in the system.
And the ultimate state in the system that we are interested in is when the load
corresponds to a second crack which will form that is the location where the maximum
bending moment is occurring at the mid height of the cross section, and you get a tensile
crack. And we are again looking at the tensile strength of the material normal to the bed
joint ftn which is something that we have examined earlier looking at the material
strengths.
Your question is as cracking propagates at the base of the wall; is it essential to consider
the direction of the movement of the hinge? Yes of course, it is essential, because in this
case we are looking at one side being the windward side and the other side being the
leeward side. So, the natural movement of the hinges towards the leeward edge, right.
So, when you are doing your analysis; of course, there is symmetry in the section, the
symmetry in the loading, but you have to be careful that you know which is the
windward side, the outside part of the wall and the inside part of the wall and so, it is
based on that assumption that we are looking at a migration of the hinge towards the
inner edge. So, it is not something, the axial stress resultant is not acting at the middle of
the section, its acting at the leeward edge. What we are actually doing is, for the
deflected shape, what is the point at which the in the deflected form where is the gravity
force acting and at what eccentricities it with respect to the base cross section, inner edge
of the base cross section. We are actually considering that there is a finite displacement
and it is that deflected shape which is actually leading us to an additional moment
coming because of the migration of the hinge towards the leeward side ok.
258
So, moving forward at this stage the crack initiates at the mid height under this condition
of deflection of the wall due to the lateral force acting on it, the mid height crack is
formed and this is when the tensile strength of the wall at the mid height is reached. So,
the tensile strength at that cross section is reached, this is the tensile strength normal to
the bed joint itself. The maximum moment is assumed to be acting at that cross section
itself.
So, you now have the condition for which we can expect cracking to form where you
have the stress distribution caused by the wind load, the distribution of stresses due to the
eccentricity in the axial force, the second component and this is at mid height of the wall.
And therefore, the total load that you are considering the self way the reconsidering is
one half of the weight of the wall and therefore, the compressive stress is taken as fa/2.
259
So, from this you can then estimate at what p is, at what value of the lateral force is this
condition reached. And in the final condition when you have collapse, we are assuming
that the displacement at mid height increases with increasing wind load and wall is taken
towards instability.
So, the critical points are formation of the base crack, increase in lateral force, formation
of the mid height crack and with that the strength capacity is reached. Beyond that it is
actually some additional displacement of the wall that you will get and the wall would
then lose its stability itself. So, once the mid height crack has formed, it is almost like the
wall is composed of two rigid blocks rotating about the crack that is formed at the mid
height and the crack that is originally formed at the base itself.
260
So, to write down the final expression, if the crack were not going to form at mid height
and the fact is the; this is dependent on several factors; the distribution of load. And
therefore, it is possible that it depends on the distribution of the compression in the wall
itself due to the superimposed loads. So, you could have superimposed loads, you could
have high super impose loads and this actually alters the location of the second crack that
you get. So, it is not always going to be at the mid height, it could vary. So, it is useful to
write this expression assuming that the second crack will form at a height x from the top,
x of h from the top.
So, in this particular case you have a superimposed load acting on the wall and then the
self weight of the wall, self weight of the wall above the crack as the compressive stress
into the net area that is being considered into x/h and the part below which is the rest of
the wall itself. So, you again have the bending moment from the lateral force, the
bending moment due to the eccentricity of the resultant in compression.
And at this stage last stage of loading whether resistance is reached, we could write
down the equilibrium in the sections;
2faA n t
pe =
(h − x)h
261
For p e as a function of x and therefore you get the maximum load that the wall can resist
at this critical stage of loading itself. Of course, if the crack were to occur at mid height
you can simplify the expression x can be replaced as h/2 and that will simplify as
4faA n t
pe =
h2
So, you get by simple elastic bending analysis and expression that will tell you what the
load, the lateral load would be at a critical points of loading till the maximum load is
reached. So, simple framework considering just the equilibrium of the problem at
different stages of loading can help you arrive at a forced displacement relationship right.
Now, of course, we have assumed linear elastic behavior and typically out of plane
bending capacities are not very significant; we have seen that right at the beginning how
the in plane bending capacity and the out of plane bending capacity is so different in an
unreinforced masonry wall. And therefore, a more accurate estimate of the force
displacement behavior and the capacity of the wall in the out of plane direction is
essential, because considering that these are low values in terms of capacity, it will be a
low value in terms of capacity anything that contributes to a more accurate estimate is
better. So, there are two things that we will be looking at; one is to be able to estimate
considering the formation of non-linearity in a cross section.
So, here we have been assuming that the distribution of stresses and compression is
always triangular and there is no plastification even at ultimate conditions. So, that is one
important aspect that, does contribute to additional load carrying capacity and the second
aspect is what we had, what I had mentioned at the beginning which is additional
resistance available due to the clamping at its ends which is called arching action and
that comes, because the wall starts deflecting and gets clamped at the supports. So, that is
the second effect. So, we will examine the first effect and try to modify our expressions
and then examine the second effect and see how these expressions can be modified.
So, that is primarily what we will be doing. Now we did this for vertical bending
analysis, the same set of calculations are valid for horizontal bending analysis where the
wall is subjected primarily to; the lateral force, the axial stresses do not play a role there,
because your cracking is actually vertical crack right. So, if you primarily remove the
axial load; the axial stresses due you to the self weight and any super impose load from
262
these expressions, you should be able to get the loads corresponding to horizontal
bending and crack formation under horizontal bending.
Of course, in that case what matters as material strength is not ftn, the bending strength
flexible bending strength normal to the bed joint, but ftp the flexural tensile strength
parallel to the bed joints. So, that is the fundamental difference between the vertical
bending and the horizontal bending that we will have to assume ok.
So, therefore, let us first look at examining the same problem, but under the assumption
of a non-linear stress strain relationship for the material in compression at the critical
section. So, some section analysis basis is essential. So, let us just discuss that; it is
something that we have seen earlier and then incorporate that within a framework that
will help us get a force displacement, load deflection curves under out of plane bending.
So, if we were to assume that you have a non-linear stress strain curve in compression
then let us examine three critical stages of loading and the distribution of compression in
the cross section.
So, initially when you have low eccentricities, then when you have zero eccentricity you
have the stress being uniform across the cross section.. But as eccentricity of loading
increases, then you have the distribution of stress, compressive stress is not uniform- you
have minimum compressive stress occurring at one edge of the cross section, maximum
compressive stress occurring at the other end of the cross section. Here the eccentricity
263
that we are talking about is the combined effect of the lateral force plus the gravity force.
So, in this condition we still have linear distribution of stresses.
We can assume that it is low eccentricity, the compressive stresses are still linear, the
material is still acting in a linear elastic manner and the entire section is compressed and
basically to account for the effect of the eccentricity. We can look at an estimate of the
maximum compressive stress and the minimum compressive stress in the cross section
considering the effect of the bending caused by the eccentricity.
So, N x et here is nothing, but the bending moment caused due to the eccentricity divided
by the section modulus, lt2/6, , and so it is just N/lt. The axial stress due to the load N
plus or minus moment by the section modulus which is the second part of the expression.
From this we can then take it to the limiting case, where we said that the limiting case is
when you have tension cropping into the cross section.
So, that would occur when you have the load acting at t/6. Therefore, we can get an
expression for M crack limiting the tensile strength of the material to 0 and saying that M
crack is going to occur when the load has an eccentricity t/6. So, Nt/6 will be the
cracking moment in the cross section, where your σmin goes to 0 and σmax is now the
maximum stress in a triangular distribution, ok.
264
Continue the increase in eccentricity which is the resultant eccentricity of the loading the
lateral force and the gravity force acting on the wall, as this increases more cross section
goes into tension and we are neglecting that and we consider only the partial length. So,
the partial length here is, the partial compressed zone is of width x, t being the total
thickness of the cross section and since we are still assuming that the material is linear
elastic, the triangle distribution is acceptable. So, the triangular distribution is continued
at this stage triangle distribution of stresses is still acceptable, because we are still
assuming that the material is linear elastic and from that assumption, we are right in
assuming that the stress resultant, the force is now acting at the centroid of that triangular
distribution and hence we get into our expressions the distance from the edge of the
resultant is going to be x/3.
So, with this condition for our equilibrium we are neglecting the portion which is
basically cracked and we are working on the partial section and in this partial section
from the triangle- the geometry of the triangle, we get an expression of what is the
compressed length of the wall in terms of the total thickness of the wall and the
eccentricity of the load itself. With that it is now possible to look at what will be the
moment at this situation; the equilibrium in the axial force can be written down as N is
equal to sigma max into half into base into height of that triangular distribution into the
length.
So, σmax x/2 into length will be the force equilibrium and since now we have expression
for x and the force equilibrium plugging in x into this expression can give us an
expression for σmax. So, now, we have an estimate of sigma max σmax where all that is
done is x is substituted into this expression for N and I write it in terms σmax. So, now we
have again linear elastic, but we had the first stage limiting where we had zero tensile
strength in the cross section full section compressed, second stage is partial section
compressed and we have an estimate of the maximum compressive stress in both these
cases, its linear elastic behavior of the material.
265
But as we progress, we now are going to be looking at increase in the compressive stress
in the cross section, it is here that it is unrealistic to assume that the material remains
elastic. So, the edge compressive stress will be significantly high and under that situation
you should start getting plastification of the section. So, as discussed earlier it is possible
to assume that the distribution of stresses here at this edge is really parabolic in nature.
Of course, you can use a parabolic stress strain curve and make your calculations. To
simplify things, the rectangular stress block is something that is acceptable for which you
need the equivalent stress block dimensions and here the equivalent stress block is a
factor k, that is multiplied into the ultimate strength in compression; fu is the ultimate
strength and compression of the masonry, it is again the assembly, masonry composite.
So, the parabolic stress distribution is equivalent to rectangular stress block of dimension
a, which is the width of the stress block and k times fu as the height of the stress block is
now going to be used in the expression. Therefore, at ultimate conditions that is what is
going to give you the moment equilibrium in the section and therefore, it is nothing but
the axial load into the eccentricity and now the eccentricity is (t/2) – (a/2) coming from
where the resultant is actually sitting at a/2, half of the rectangular stress block.
So, rewriting this in terms of the stresses you can bring in the force, the force equilibrium
knowing the stress which is kfu and the stress block itself as al, and so here we are
basically bringing in the stresses and writing it for getting an expression in terms of Mu
266
at the ultimate compressive stress condition in the wall itself. So, this is a framework that
we can use instead of just assuming that the cross section is in a linear elastic condition.
Let us look at creating a framework that will help us calculate the force displacement
right from initial loading, lateral force increasing and taking it to failure, but now
considering the section analysis that we have examined you know in the last few slides.
So, I am looking at a wall which is loaded with the self weight and some superimposed
load; N being the superimposed load here and the self weight of the wall W, the lateral
force that is acting on the wall. We could do these calculations irrespective of whether
we are looking at wind forces or inertial forces, right. So, if you are examining wind
forces as wind pressure acting on the wall, you could examine the capacity; where
earthquake forces then you could examine the problem as the inertial force acting on the
wall as the face loaded forces.
So, the pressure is nothing but out of plane forces, distributed forces due to the self
weight of the wall itself. So, that is why M x a (mass into acceleration) is being brought
in. So, the inertial force acting on the wall is, what is the out of plane load acting on the
wall in the presence of the gravity force in the wall itself.
So, in this particular example we have h as the total height of the wall and this
assumption that the wall cracks at mid height is something that we can use to simplify
267
the problem or continue by assuming that the crack can occur at any other location, but
in this particular derivation, let us assume that the mid height is where the crack is going
to occur.
We also commence by assuming that the top and the bottom are free to rotate already,
which means the initial condition of causing the base crack has already occurred,
because we are really interested in looking at the behavior around the peak condition
where the mid height reaches it is capacity; mid height section reaches it is capacity. So,
we are starting with the assumption that the two ends are pinned already in this particular
case.
So, if you are looking at one half of the cross section, you have the lateral force acting on
the wall, lateral force acting on the wall is W which is coming from the inertial mass in
the mass into the acceleration and in this particular case, we are really looking at a
condition where the mid height crack is also propagated and we want to understand at
what level of lateral load is the failure in the section going to occur. So, what we are
really examining is a condition where the triangular distribution of stresses in
compression in the wall has already been reached in the mid height of the wall and then
the load keeps increasing and at what stage do you get the section failure right. So, we
are already assuming that the wall is in the form of two rigid blocks hinged at the mid
height crack itself, right.
So, the section is now partial already you have the resultant which is acting close to the
leeward side as you can see; R being the reaction close to the leeward side. And the
position of the reaction with respect to the center of the cross section is x and at the mid
height of the wall the displacement, the maximum lateral deflection of the wall is delta
and we are assuming that the two blocks are moving in a rigid manner. And therefore,
we can use the geometry of the triangle here and estimate the displacement at any other
location along this half block that we are considering for equilibrium.
So, we have the moment equilibrium about the base reaction in this case; the lateral
force, because of the wind force or the earthquake force acting on the wall as,
h W 
H top = w    +  
2 2 h
268
Now, if we were to examine this enlarge block here and look at the point O and write
down the moment equilibrium about point o,
 wh 2
Rx = N + W +
2 8
So, this expression links Rx into what is on the right hand side, I can rewrite this in terms
of w. So, what I really require is an expression for w as a function of the geometry and
the deflection that is occurring in the wall. So, now you have this expression, the
expression for the lateral load in terms of the geometry of the wall and the you have it in
terms of x and with shifting locations of the reaction you can then get different points on
the force displacement curve.
As you can see when delta becomes equal to x, you will get 0 there for w the expression
gives you the possibility of estimating up to instability what the force displacement
capacity of the wall can be. So, this is an expression; I mean so, this is we are basically
following the following a procedure a simplified procedure for estimating out of plane
capacities- seismic out of plane capacities of wall proposed by Priestley in 1985. So, that
is the basis of the expressions here.
Now, we are going to be examining this case we need the entire forced deflection curve.
So, we basically looking at different situations under increasing or varying value of w.
So, here we need an estimate of the curvatures, we need an estimate of the curvatures
269
again, we are looking at a cracked condition and uncracked condition. So, similar to what
we had done in the earlier case. So, if we can calculate the curvature of the mid height
section and then estimate the moments from the curvature and the displacement at mid
height with certain assumptions on the curvature distribution we can then get all stages
up to failure.
Now, we assume that the crack loading progresses crack opening happens and up to that
it is still with the assumption of the linear elastic distribution, linear distribution of
stresses. So, the condition of crack opening occurring at t x is equal to t/6 still holds. So,
at this stage the compressive stress in the wall is f crack at which with 0 tensile strength
of the material.
The first crack is formed at the mid height the moment at the stage is the reaction into the
eccentricity t/6 at the point when the initiation of crack opening occurs; the stress at this
stage is nothing but 2R/t. And we can estimate the curvature of the section at this time
point as the strain over the compressed length, ε over the compressed length and the
strain written down as fcrack/E as we had done in the P-delta problem earlier and this is at
a condition of x is equal to t/6.
So, from this we basically have an expression for what is the moment carrying capacity
when the first crack is forming in the wall. So, wcrack h2/8 and from which we now, have
again as an expression of wcrack from this itself, which could be one of the critical stages
before the section starts going into plastification. At this stage we are assuming that the
wall is simply supported with a uniformly distributed load. So, the mid span deflection
from early this is again linear elastic distribution.
So, we can assume the elastic analysis and get the maximum deflection and the
maximum deflection at mid height at the point when cracking is expected to initiate as
5wh 2
; so, you now have the load and the deflection at this critical point ok.
384EI
270
So, this from this stage on we start looking at reduced cross section available in
compression till the non-linear distribution of compressive stress in the cross section. So,
if we ask we start assuming that the cross section is going to be replaced as w increases,
we then have the possibility of writing down the compressive stress at the edge section
and the corresponding curvature for the remainder of the section.
So, with that we are basically going to be able to write down what is the moment in the
cross section, supported by the cross section itself. So, in this case again, because the
curvature can be different at different segments, because cracking is not happening
uniformly in all sections. It will be useful to have one estimate of the curvature as a
simplification and we need an estimate of the deflection and therefore, we assume that
the deflection the displacement is proportional to the curvature at the mid height and use
that for the entire height of the wall itself. So, we are using the estimate of the curvature
at the cracked stage when the initiation of crack occurs; use that to proportion the
curvature in the wall itself.
So, this is an assumption which is airing on the conservative side and so, is an acceptable
assumption itself.
271
So, if you really look at the wall looking at one half of the height of the wall and at mid
height, you actually have the cracking that has occurred at the mid height. So, the
estimate of curvature is at the mid height considering the crack condition; however, the
curvature is going to be different in all the other sections, because those are uncracked
sections. So, with this being the reality if we were to assume that the whole height of the
wall has a curvature which is equal to the, which is proportional to the cracked curvature.
You see that the assumed curvature is greater than the true curvature and this is
therefore, an assumption that will make us err on the conservative side.
272
So, this assumption is conservative and at ultimate conditions we can then replace the
stress distribution with the stress block and use the stress block to rewrite the moment
and displacement expression at the failure condition of the wall itself. So, the w
corresponding to a condition, where you have a compression in non-linear, non-linearity
of compression in the cross section is written and the corresponding displacement is
estimated.
So, at different stages, the first expression that we had, is written in terms of the reaction
force and as reaction force depends on where this reaction force is sitting that will
determine what the compressed length is. And so, we get the entire distribution post
cracking up to a condition where x = Δ and you get 0 resistance in the system. So, you
get this non-linear curve, which will then give you the force displacement behavior on
the wall itself. It is true that depending on the geometry of the wall, you can also have
instability before this condition is actually occurring in the wall and fundamentally.
If you have dynamic loading, we are considering this behavior on the static loading; you
can have conditions in dynamic loading, where the displacement may go to a state
corresponding to the limiting condition that this expression gives, but then can spring
back and continue to support the lateral forces.
So, we will examine how the force displacement curve finally, looks, but then basically
we are looking at distribution at cracking in the cross section to estimate the moment and
273
from the moment the force and then when let us say one half of the wall is cracked or
three quarters of the wall is cracked and finally, we look at the condition where the
rectangular stress block is used. And so, the moment at each stage from the geometry is
available to us, which to then be useful to plug in the corresponding values of x and the
corresponding value of the reaction force gives us different points on the force
displacement curve.
So, this is one format that we could use to estimate the lateral force capacity of a
masonry wall, but considering the non-linear behavior of the section that is critical ok.
So, we will continue in the next lecture on this and then look at the effect of clamping in
the section itself due to arching action.
274
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 03
Lecture - 16
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part - VI
Good morning.
We continue with the strength of Masonry, examining out of plane capacity and to sum
up what we have looked at in the previous lecture, where we have been using two
approaches.
One; conventional bending analysis, where we are examining the section behaviour till
ultimate as linear elastic and get the force displacement relationship based on introducing
non-linearity in the way we want in terms of cracking occurring at the base and then
cracking occurring at the mid height, but the section properties continued to remain
linear elastic in compression that was one approach.
The second approach was again bending analysis, conventional bending analysis, but the
section now is non-linear. So, those were the two approaches that we looked at in the last
275
lecture and therefore, to sum up if you were to look at conventional bending analysis
with linear elastic state of stresses till failure.
Then for the case that we considered where we had the base fixed and the top supported,
lateral restraint coming from the supports, if we were to look at the progression of load
resistance till failure, then you see a force displacement; applied lateral load to lateral
deflection at mid height delta to be of this sort. So, let us see the critical points on this
graph, which has been the critical points that we examined at different stages of loading
and formation of inelasticity.
So, stage a, where we are considering only the presence of gravity forces, uniform
compression at the base; the base is fixed and you have the lateral restraint at the top
support. As the lateral forces act on the system, you have tensile stresses initially, these
tensile stresses that develop because of bending are nullified by the compression. As the
stresses due to the out of plane load (distributed load acting on the wall) cause bending in
the wall, cause tension in the cross section, as long as the wind pressure or the lateral
forces is low, they get nullified by the compressive stresses, but then you take it to the
limiting case.
Limiting case where there is still no tensile stress, entire cross section is in compression,
but that gives you limiting case as to what will be the wind pressure corresponding to
entire cross section still being in compression. And as the lateral force continues to
increase, we see the initiation of the first crack right and that is the first in elasticity that
occurs in the system under this assumption and you should therefore, as the load
resistance continues beyond that get a drop in stiffness, reduction in stiffness of the
system.
So, stage c of our loading was when the first crack at the base is initiated and starts
propagating as the lateral force acting on the wall, applied force acting on the wall
increases. So, at this stage we have to start considering the fact that the system stops
working as a propped cantilever and starts working more as a pinned-pinned boundary
condition in the wall. And therefore, the maximum moment will now migrate to the mid
height of the wall and as loading continues you get the crack initiation at the mid height
and that is a stage that corresponds to maximum load carrying capacity of the wall itself.
Because once the crack initiates at mid height it is basically only going to resist with
276
larger deformations, but additional capacity is not available at that stage, reserve capacity
is not available at that stage.
Mind you in this assumption we are still continuing to assume that the linear distribution
of compressive stresses at that cross section, the critical section is linear elastic is linear.
So, the triangular distribution of compressive stresses continuous to be considered at the
stage. And as the lateral force is increased, you will get the complete mechanism
formation in the form of two rigid blocks that are rotating at it ends and about the mid
height and you will have failure when the lateral displacement exceeds at least one half
of the cross section thickness t. So, about 0.5 t you should get failure in the system due to
instability.
So, in this way we have actually looked at considering both inelasticity, but under the
assumption that the distributional stresses is linear elastic. So, what do you have is a non-
linear stress strain a non-linear force displacement relationship ultimately with
conventional bending analysis. So, this is something that we looked at and there are
additional moments that start occurring in the in the wall and that is, because of the
migration of the hinge towards the levered side, causing additional moments to come on
to the wall. So, we have examined those aspects in the previous lecture.
However, if we were to assume that the wall is not bonded at the base that the fixity that
we originally assumed at the base is not available for different conditions, if there is
already a crack existing then it will not follow this route. You do not have have the
formation of the crack at the base which we have looked at from a to c instead you will
have a change in stiffness, once this section starts cracking at the mid height that is that
is the first nonlinearity that we will be basically assuming. If we begin with an
assumption that the wall is hinged-hinged as the boundary conditions in the initial
condition itself.
So, this is the possible difference that you should see the in the first case, you have some
reserve capacity, because of the base fixity in the second. So, the overall energy that it
can dissipate is definitely higher than compared to a situation, where you are assuming
hinged-hinged at the top and the bottom. So, this is the possible difference that we can
assume and examine in the conventional bending analysis with linear elastic distribution
of stresses in compression.
277
However we then examined if we were to estimate the moments and curvature in the
wall based on a an assumption that the distribution of stresses can be considered as non-
linear in the cross section particularly at ultimate, we examined how it is possible to
write down the stresses in the cross section and up to the ultimate stage we follow the
same process. But beyond that we assume a rectangular stress block that is replacing the
parabolic distribution of stresses at ultimate due to softening of the material in
compression. So, this is the other way in which the formulation can be done. In this
particular example we had in this particular approach, we had looked at situation with the
wall was pinned-pinned to begin with.
So, if you were to then examine the force displacement relationship, you will get the
softening and failure in the system and the primary difference being close to the peak.
When the peak capacity is being reached you have the softening behaviour occurring
there which the multi-linear curve that you saw in the other case is the fundamental
difference that you will get, because of the assumption of nonlinearity at ultimate that we
are able to bring in, in the calculations.
So, this is what we have seen so far. What we now will start examining is one
fundamental mechanism that allows for augmentation of the lateral load carrying
capacity in the out of plane direction which is arching action.
278
So, arching action is something that you can consider, under a given set of conditions,
but if those conditions do not exist, it will be erroneous to assume that arching action is
going to occur, because arching action can significantly increase the load carrying
capacity of a masonry wall in out of plane bending.
So, what is really happening, we will examine that figure in detail in a moment. Now, let
us look at a situation where a wall is being loaded by wind forces or inertial forces and in
this particular case we are examining horizontal bending. And therefore, I am interested
in looking at the length of the wall; the total length of the wall l and in the original
situation the wall is straight right. But as the wall starts getting face loaded perpendicular
to the plane or by the out of plane forces, deflections are going to occur on the wall and
as the wall starts deflecting, if the supports are rigid supports ok.
Now, having said that I think it is important to introduce here, what is this concept of a
rigid support right. Now, if you consider a masonry wall itself- an unreinforced masonry
wall with two return walls, you have the main wall that we are examining which is the
out of plane wall and two return walls which are in plane walls, if the connections are
poor and if the return walls are not strong enough to not be able to provide a rigid
support, then you cannot assume that the out of plane wall is actually restrained by the in
plane walls, the two return walls. That is one situation; the other situation is you can
apply this even to infill panels.
279
If you have an infill panel that is sitting between reinforced concrete columns within a
frame, then those could be assumed to be providing rigid support, because they are non-
moving supports. So, an infill wall which is face loaded which is subjected to out of
plane forces inertial forces or wind forces could also develop arching action, because the
reinforced concrete columns could be considered as non-moving supports or rigid
supports.
So, this is a framework that you can use, both for load bearing masonry constructions
and for infill, which are partition walls in moment resisting frames. So, the concept of
the rigid support is something you will have to here, it is ideally shown as fixity at the
two ends, but you have to examine if the conditions prevail for that to be available to
you.
Again to begin with we are examining what is called a rigid arching action and then we
will move on to a concept called gapped arching action and there again if you have no
gap between the out of plane wall and the return walls, then it is possible that you get
arching action right at the beginning and that is referred to as rigid arching action. But in
case there is a gap developing between the return walls and the out of plane wall, that
gap has to be closed before the arching action can develop. And so, we will examine this
arching action under rigid mechanism and the gap mechanism, but first we are
examining the rigid mechanism.
So, what is really happening is as this wall, which is sitting between these non moving
supports rigid supports starts deflecting, because of the action of lateral forces, the wall
will deflect; the wall will deflect of course, depending on the boundary conditions that
you are assuming you can assume fixed fixed boundary conditions, but then the point is
if you assume fixed fixed boundary conditions you will get maximum negative moment
at the fixed ends and crack initiation must occur at that point after which the midspan
crack is going to happen. So, it is about how the propagation of inelasticity is occurring
in the wall and the boundary conditions that you have assumed.
However, let us assume that the wall is rotating at both its ends and the midspan crack is
also occurring, which means it is rotating about its ends and rotating about the mid span.
So, when it starts rotating since, the supports are non-moving supports you start getting
280
clamping forces compression at the locations, where the wall is in contact, the out of
plane wall is in contact with the rigid supports.
Originally, there was uniform contact and as the walls starts deflecting, you develop
these clamping forces right. So, that is the whole the basis with which we are working.
Now, these clamping forces depending on how much the wall is deflecting starts
increasing right. They increase and reach a stage where you can even get crushing of the
masonry at those at those hinged locations and you can get a certain finite length of the
wall, which starts plastifying or crushing in the cross section itself. Therefore, your hinge
itself can go from a point to at the centroid of a length of wall, which is undergoing
compression and crushing, ok.
So, basically bottom line is there are large in plane forces that start developing, in plane
compression forces that start developing when this wall starts deflecting and this is
expected to happen when this out of plane wall is butted against rigid non-moving
supports, that is the bottom line. Let us examine the figure for a moment. So, I have a
wall of length L, subjected to out of plane lateral load, it starts rotating I have two non-
moving supports.
The clamping force that develops as the wall deflects is designated as Pu, it is the
compression and as that increases that section goes into plastification. So, we refer to
that at the ultimate state. The black arrow marks that you see are the resultants sitting at
the centroid of the triangular area that is been considered geometrically, being considered
at the ends of the wall and at the center of the wall, where the contact points are.
So, this is the overall geometry with which we are going to be working. Now, assuming
that the two blocks again a fundamental assumption that is going to make is midspan
crack has formed, the ends are already cracked and free to rotate. So, you basically you
have two rigid blocks, that are rotating. Now, based on that assumption your geometry is
simplified and you can actually work on a simple analytical form that accounts for
additional capacity coming from the arching action. So, if you were to use the
conventional bending analysis in this case, we saw the bending analysis used for the
vertical bending scenario.
If you were to use the same thing for the for the horizontal bending scenario and
compare, you will see that there is a significant increase in the load carrying capacity and
281
that is one of our exercises. You will check what is the kind of augmentation that you
get, if you were to consider rigid arching action as a contributory factor to lateral load
carrying capacity of the out of plane wall. So, we will examine this in detail and develop
a formulation.
These clamping forces are what we are going to be trying to arrive at an expression for
and these clamping forces as I said are actually, sitting at the centroids of the triangular
area that is being considered at the ends of the wall that is a triangular area which is the
one that is getting crushed and the contact area is now, Δ0 there.
You see the length of contact and this length of contact is, because the masonry as the
compression forces increase there is slowly getting plastified. So, as that happens, the
contact changes from being a point to a finite length and that finite length is a delta
naught that we are designating at this point in time, you will have to make some
assumptions on how much that can be. Of course, that is going to be dependent on the
material strength and the material strength that we are talking about here is the strength
of masonry, but at a joint you might not have the unit and the mortar acting together it
might simply be the mortar in a joint. So, it could even be the mortar compressive
strength.
So, we will have to make an assumption on at what stage how much of length is going to
be available as a contact for the wall to develop the maximum clamping force available.
282
Again, the thickness of the wall is considered as t and as you can see we have taken
length L and thickness t in the wall. So, if you can actually examine what is happening in
the wall, you have three hinges that are developed. Two hinges are at the supports, at the
location of the supports with the non-moving ends which are the rigid supports, two
hinges are there and the other hinge is actually at the midspan of the wall.
So, you are seeing formation of a three hinged arch, we are actually seeing the formation
of a three hinged arch and now, it is a three hinged arch of low rise. Of course, the kind
of deflection that you have seen in the wall is an exaggerated deflection and you are not
going to able to see so much of deflection it is going to be a very small amount of
deflection.
We are talking about instability being reached when the wall when the deflection is of
the order of one half of the cross section. So, at about 100 mm you can get failure in the
system. So, this deflection that we are talking about 100 mm over the length of the wall
is small and something that you will not be able to very easily visualize, but the point is
the three hinged arch is an arch of a low rise right.
So, if you are actually looking at what is happening here, you have the formation of an
arch and if you have the formation of a significant arch and that depends on how
resistant the material is going to be, because the material should not crush immediately,
if the material is able to withstand compression significantly, the rise of this arch will
keep increasing. And so, if you can get a significant rise, you will be able to without
failure and without movement of the supports, significant out of plane load can be
carried by the wall itself ok.
283
Now, let us just examine one half of this problem and create close firm solution to
understand, what is happening in this system. So, if you actually go back to the concept
of the three hinged arch, that is forming the compression resultant Pu into the rise of the
arch ru is really the moment resistance that you are getting in the wall. ru is the final rise
of the arch and Pu is the is the clamping force that you are getting and at the ultimate that
we are examining. The Pu x ru is what is the internal couple that is forming to resist the
external moment that is acting on the wall itself.
So, the ultimate moment in this is going to be Pu x ru. So, let me just go back to the figure
and examine the different notations that we are using. So, Pu is the clamping force, we
talked about the clamping force at the two ends, in one half of the wall that we are
examining. We have thickness of the wall which is t; one half of the thickness is t by 2,
the distance that the wall is actually in contact with the support is αt. This contact of the
triangular area with the rigid support is our finite length and that depends on how quickly
the material will start crushing and that distance is taken as αt.
The total deflection the midspan deflection of the wall itself is delta naught. The line
between this line here, at the centre line of the wall is the midspan deflection, the
maximum midspan deflection that you are getting in the wall. So, if you are able to
analytically arrive at an expression for the rise of the arch, then the moment capacity can
be estimated. If you are again able to estimate how much the ultimate compression
284
resultant can be, which I said is based on how much crushing strength you have at that
interface.
So, assuming that from the material strengths, I am able to arrive at an expression for Pu
and from the geometry from the idealized geometry, if I am able to arrive at an
expression for the rise of the arch ru, then I have the moment capacity of the wall itself.
So, ru in this case is going to be the Δ0, which is the total midspan deflection that you are
getting subtracted from the cross section of the wall itself t and again since, we are
assuming that the cross section in contact is not a hinge, but is a finite length.
We need to know where the resultant is sitting at in assumption of a triangular area is

being considered there and therefore, from the edge of the wall, the point at which the
resultant is sitting is y with the axis being considered with respect to the deflected shape
of the wall itself.
So, this y you have to consider twice, because you have got the crushing occurring in
two sections; one at midspan and the other one at the non moving support.
ru = t −  0 − 2y
I take t out and simplify it further and we make an assumption. So, if it is a rigorous
solution that you are looking at you can actually make an estimate of how much this can
be, but you can also assume that this would be about 10 percent of the cross section.
So, this is taken here as about 10 percent of the total cross section; αt/2 as 0.1 t is a fairly
good assumption to work with you might not get something more than that that is that is
a fairly good estimate to work with. Of course, what we are actually assuming in this
case is that as the wall deflects, you know for geometry as the wall deflects the, there is
axial shortening and that axial shortening is going to actually create a problem, because
you have large deflections the axial shortening is more and then the contact is going to
be lost.
Now, the deflections are small and so this axial shortening is not expected to occur
which is a fairly good assumption if the length to thickness ratio, in this case the
slenderness ratio is less than 25. So, this is again an important assumption that we make;
285
if you want to make a rigorous solution you will have to then account for any shortening,
because of the deflected shape.
Student: Sir, I did not get it.
Δ0 is equal to?
Student: Is it equal to αt/2?
Yes, it would be fairly equal to it will be equal to almost equal to αt/2, but; however, if
you actually look at what αt/2 is the contact area; αt/2is the contact area these are
comparable values they are not equal to.
Student: αt/2 is a contact area.
αt/2 is the contact area.
Student: Δ0
Δ0 is the midspan deflection. Δ0 in the figure delta naught is defined between the center
lines of the deflected shape that is Δ0. However, αt is the projection of the contact area
which is this height we are making an estimate of what that is that is being assumed to be
0.1 t in this case. It so happens that for the geometry that we are examining those two are
comparable values ok.
So, with this assumption, if we were to get an estimate of ru, if we assume that ru if you
assume that αt/2 is 0.1 t you can go back to the previous expression and write down αt/2
is about 0.1 t and then get an expression for what the ru is going to be, the rise itself is
going to be.
So, here you get a rise of about 0.933 t based on the geometry that we have assumed. So,
analytically you need an expression for ru and from the material strengths you need an
expression for Pu to be able to estimate what the moment capacity of the wall itself is
going to be ok.
286
We will come back to that and see how some codes do give you the possibility of
accounting for the arching mechanism, most others just depend on the conventional
bending analysis itself ok. So, if we were to assume this initial case, where the non-
moving supports are present, but there is no gap that exists between the wall and the
support.
So, in this particular case we are examining vertical bending and the top and the bottom
are the supports that we are considering now. So, it could be a reinforced concrete slab at
the top and reinforced concrete slab at the bottom and wall is subjected to an out of plane
load. So, you have vertical bending in the wall and a similar mechanism that generates,
you will have the contact points developing and because of the contact points developing
here, here and here you have the arch that forms and resistance with rigid arching
mechanism available for you.
So, in the case of rigid arching mechanism owing to the geometry, what you get is a
symmetric arch; you would get a symmetric arch, also with the assumption that the crack
is occurring at mid height right. So, if you were to examine the free body diagram of the
rigid block above the mid height crack and rigid block below the mid height crack, you
have the resultant of the lateral force acting at the mid height of the top block and mid
height of the bottom block pr here, we are assuming that rigid arching mechanism is
happening. So, lateral load corresponding to rigid arching mechanism pr/(h/2) and
287
pr/(h/2) acting on the two blocks. And now, you have the symmetry, you have the hinge
occurring at the windward edge at the mid height right and at the leeward edge at the top
and the bottom.
So, that is giving you the symmetry in the system and if we take the moments about the
contact point at the top, if you take the equilibrium of moments at point a which is at the
top;
 h  h 
pr     = Pt
 2  4 
8Pt
 pr = 2
h
Again, valid for both horizontal and vertical bending, one way bending. If we were now
going to examine, what is happening with the presence of a gap, you do not have that
symmetry that was previously available in the system right.
So, let us examine what would happen here, let us say there is a small gap at the top
right, formed to do whatever reason, construction defect or shrinkage in the material and
so on.
So, let us assume that there is a small gap which separates the wall and the support.
However, this gap has to be limited, if you have too much of a gap it will never develop
any arching action right. So, it will actually behave as a cantilever wall. However, in this
288
case we will examine what that limiting value of the gap must be, but let us assume, if
we have this sort of situation, the wall must actually rotate and after rotating a certain
finite rotation it will come into contact at the top point right. So, when that happens and
if you were to examine the free body diagram, at the instant when contact is established
and you have the hinges forming, you will have a hinge at the top windward side. A
hinge that is formed at the mid span, at the windward side and one hinge that is formed
on the leeward side, at the bottom right.
Now, you do not have the symmetry that was earlier available and you have an
unsymmetric arch that develops in this case. If you were to look at the free body diagram
again, the wind induced reactions here pgh/2, the subscript g is here for the gapped
arching action pgh/2. You have two hinges on the windward side and therefore, the
reactions pg h/4 and pg h/4 are on the hinge that is on the windward side, the bottom
block will also have pg h/4 on the windward side.
Whereas, you have only one contact point on the hinge on the levered side and therefore,
by equilibrium;
 h  h   h  h 
pg     + pg     = Pt
 4  2   2  4 
4Pt
 pg = 2
h
And this is in comparison to the previous case about 50 percent lower. You, in the
previous case we got for the rigid arching action 8Pt/h2 square. Here, with these
assumptions that we have made in this particular case two fundamental assumptions that
the crack is happening at mid height and the second assumption that we are making is
simplified analysis, where we are assuming that the hinge itself is occurring that the area
in compression is a point and that is a perfect hinge ah. So, this is another assumption,
but plastification of the cross section is actually to be expected, but this simplified
assumption tells us that if you have gapped arching and beyond the gap if you are able to
mobilize clamping, then a 50 percent reduction is what you would see if there is a gap
right ok.
289
So, the gapped arching mechanism again, because of the simplified geometry that we are
looking at needs to have some limit on the gap that is that is available. So, if you can
make an estimate of the gap or say that is the maximum gap that you can have so that
arching action develops.Geometrically, you can arrive at what is that limiting gap that
you can permit, in case of a vertical bending situation or horizontal bending situation. So,
you want the wall to be able to rotate and come in to contact, but if the gap is too much it
is just going to rotate and you will lose contact. So, what is the maximum gap, so that
you avoid rotation of the wall with the simple geometry.
If the if the wall that we are looking at is of length L and we have two gaps the rigid
nonmoving supports are the black boxes that you see at the two ends. If you have two
gaps each assuming again that the gaps are equal g/2 and g/2, you can arrive at what this
maximum g is going to be by simple geometry. Assumption here is that the block is
moving as a rigid block once, the crack is formed itself ok. And this crack is actually
going to be closed only on deflection; the crack is going to be closed only on deflection
right.
So, how much should the wall deflect? Again, you can make an approximate estimate of
how much should the midspan deflection be; which will ensure that contact is established
and then the capacity can be estimated accounting for the gapped arching action.
290
So, for that let us assume that the gap itself is g/2 at each end, how much deflection at
midspan is required so that you close the gap and again from geometry you can make an
approximate estimate that this is about gL/4t from the geometry of the deflection itself.
So, simplified assumptions, but quick checks that you can do to ensure gapping can, the
gap can be closed and arching action can be used for estimating the capacity
enhancement of the capacity of the wall itself. So, you can have more rigorous, more
detail calculations, but this is a simple framework that you could use.
So, if you were to go back to the original set of expressions that we developed, if there is
a gap and we have seen that the gap will lead to a reduction in the load carrying capacity
of the wall right. Arching action is already enhancing the load carrying capacity of the
wall in the out of plane direction, but if you have a gap with respect to the rigid arching
case, you are going to get a drop in the load carrying capacity. Can an estimate of that we
made? The answer is yes. So, we were earlier, making an estimate of an analytical
estimate of what the rise of the arch was, we know that the gapping is going to lead to a
reduction in the rise of the arch right.
So, in the same the expression that we were using earlier, we had the component that
looked at the contact area, in that if we introduce the gap that needs to be closed or the
gap that creates a loss in the rise, we can bring an gL/4t into the expression here. And
then expanding that have the total rise of the arch as a rise that is going to be
291
compromised by the deflection that is required to close the gap right. The wall must
deflect to close the gap; the wall must deflect by gL/4t that we saw earlier to be able to
close the gap, but in doing that you are losing the original rise ru and that rise is now
compromised by gL/4t. So, your overall ru in this case can be the original 0.933 t that we
arrived at with the assumptions made, there further reduced by gL/4t.
So, here you get an estimate of ru and then go back to the moment capacity Mu being Pu
into ru and see how much of reduction in the load carrying capacity you are getting,
because of the, because of the presence of the gap. So, to interpret the gap as something
that reduces the height of the arch that is available is the physical representation of the
gapped arching mechanism itself and of course, Mu is going to be lower in this particular
case.
So, as I said it will be instructive to see how do codes account for this sort of a
phenomenon that you can beneficially utilize in estimating the load carrying capacity of
the wall in your design. So, the British code actually has a set of expressions that
simplifies and helps in accounting for the arching action. It is BS 5628 that has this
expression.
So, you are calculating the thrust force depending on vertical bending or horizontal
bending as thrust force, the Pu is the thrust force per unit height or the length of the wall
the thrust forces is the clamping force that we were looking at the Pu. So, the code is
292
estimating this in terms of the compressive strength of the mortar ok. As I was
mentioning earlier, at the interface between the non-moving support and the brick wall
its masonry; however, that interface actually the weaker material there is the mortar joint.
So, it is reasonable and probably better to make use of the strength of the weaker
material, which is the mortar and hence, the expression in the British code actually
makes use of the compressive strength of the mortar joint which is present at the contact
itself and this is a conservative estimate. You can actually, if you have integral action of
the composite masonry mortar and the masonry unit, you might get a higher compressive
strength, but conservatively you are assuming the lower of the two and the code gives an
expression 0.85fj' ( 0.1t ) . So, let us just examine how that is arrived at.
So, now instead of assuming that the hinge is forming at the at a point, we are assuming
a finite length and of finite length over which there is plastification of the material. So,
the same expression that we saw earlier, but now that is not a perfect hinge, but over a
finite length. And so, if you have examined the stress block in that location basically,
bring in stress block parameters in the compression, in the mortar at ultimate. So, the
stress block there is a finite length about 0.1 t is the contact area that we have also been
assuming in the previous set of expressions.
So, 10 percent of the total cross section is the width of the stress block and softening of
the material and therefore, we assume 85 percent of the compressive strength of mortar
and with that stress block if you write down the moment equilibrium in this in the in the
figure that we have assumed earlier, with the moment at the top hinge there a p into it
could be h or L depending on vertical bending or horizontal bending.
 L  L 
( )
p    = 0.1t 0.85fj' ( 0.9t )
 2  4 
2
t
 p = 0.61f  
'
j
L
So, this is the way of accounting for your in one way bending action vertical or
horizontal at the clamping forces that can come, because of arching mechanism available
in masonry. I will stop here and we will start examining two way bending in the next
class as the last aspect to be considered in out of plane bending.
293
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 03
Lecture - 17
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part – VII
Good afternoon. We will continue with the behavior under out-of-plane bending. We
looked at formulations that were developed based on a linear elastic behavior of the cross
section and a non-linear behavior of the cross section. And we also looked at how the
arching mechanism can be beneficially used for the out of plane load bearing capacity of
a masonry wall.
Now, we again within that, assumed that the rigid arching mechanism is possible, which
is there is no gap between the wall and supports, so arching mechanism is available right
from the beginning. But if that is not the case and there is a gap between the lateral
supports or between the top support and the wall, then arching mechanism occurs with a
certain delay and that leads to a loss in the out of plane flexural capacity. So, this is what
we have examined so far.
So, to sum up horizontal bending and vertical bending one way and then moving on to
two way bending, we will examine in the next set of course content. So, as far as one
294
way horizontal flexure, we have been examining expressions under one way horizontal
or vertical flexure, but the question is would you get purely horizontal flexure. It is an
idealization, right. You will always have some effect of the bottom restraint at least if not
if not both the bottom and the top restraint. So, assuming that you are going to get a
condition of pure horizontal flexure is an idealization. And we saw that when we first
looked at the wall as a propped cantilever and then looked at the wall as being hinged-
hinged. So, very often this situation is going to be restraint available at the bottom, right.
So, if you are using a purely horizontal flexural formulation it is an idealization and it
could be conservatively so, just keep that in your mind. We did look at this figure when
we examined the material behavior and the material strengths that we have to consider,
particularly with horizontal bending or with one way vertical bending; the factors that
material factors that start playing a role, so the head-joint flexure and the bed-joint
torsion in a wall start becoming important as far as one way bending is concerned and
typically to understand how failure will propagate it is the relative strengths that finally
matter.
So, we will examine how a total progression of the failure happens in the systems. So,
the tensile strength of the bond, the head-joint itself is typically the one which is the
weakest link in a masonry wall, primarily because there is no consolidation of the head-
joint, otherwise referred to as the perpend joints.
So, this is often neglected in our calculations or if you consider this will be lesser than
most of the other tensile strengths or most of the other strengths in the masonry wall. So,
the tensile bond strength as far as the head-joint is concerned is lower than the flexural
tensile strength of the unit, right. So, if the course is subject to bending then the head-
joint will should give up first even before the unit fails in tension.
So, this is something that we are agreeable upon. Plus, if you were to consider the two
joints now the head-joint and the bed-joint, again the bed joint is far superior in terms its
bond strength and that is of because of the consolidation under precompression under the
dead weight of the wall itself and the head-joint will continue to be the weakest as far the
strengths of all the constituents are concerned and the interfaces are concerned in the
masonry wall itself, ok.
295
And we have seen that we use an elastic theory to estimate the capacity. So, knowing the
in this particular case what becomes important is the bed-joint torsion which means the
bed-joint is subjected to shear stresses and since the bed-joint is subjected to shear
stresses, the tension in the joint is acting parallel to the joint and therefore, the tensile
strength of the joint with tension parallel to joint or ftp becomes a parameter that is
important for us. With an estimate of the flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed-joint
available which is from a modified bond wrench test or a wall test we will be able to
estimate what is the minimum capacity that is available in the wall before failure
propagates, ok.
So, if I were to examine what is the load deflection behavior in such a wall, when do you
get critical points occurring and can you then make an estimate of the capacity at that
point. So, initially you have the head-joints, you have the whole wall that is now
bending. The head-joints and the units are subjected to bending, right. Cracks will start
propagating at the head-joints. So, the head-joints give away first.
Now, since there is a vertical stagger of the joint, the head-joint should start opening in
alternate courses, that is something we would expect unless a vertical stagger is not
given, which is not the case because all bonds will ensure that you get a vertical stagger.
So, the head-joints will start cracking under flexure in the alternate joints. Now, once the
head-joints have given away, in the alternate courses it is the unit now which is taking
296
the flexure, right. And so moment will be resisted now by the units which will start
acting under bending. But the point is you have now completely lost the role played by
the head-joints, but the unit to transfer the moment from one layer to the other will now
depend on the bed-joint itself, right; and that is when the torsion in the bed-joints starts
becoming important or the strength ftp that we were talking about starts becoming
important.
So, as you start loading everything elastic, the whole system is responding but then you
get cracking as the first phenomenon in the head-joints and this will occur in the alternate
courses.
As the applied lateral force increases, you will start seeing that after the head-joints have
cracked the wall has to have a mechanism of resistance and that is where the moment is
now been carried by the units, the units start bending, but layer to layer it is the torsion in
the bed-joint which is going to be transferring and having load resistance.
We will examine what then is going to govern the capacity of the wall itself once this
once this softening in the load deflection behavior occurs, at after the branch ab and
when you are on the branch that goes b towards failure what governs is something
interesting to look at. So, what sort of failure modes can occur? Let us say the head-
joints have cracked and now the units and the bed-joint are participating in the load
297
resistance. Can you have different failure mechanisms? If you have different failure
mechanisms what governs that failure mechanism is important to examine, ok.
Now, if the torsional resistance, if the torsional resistance at the bed-joint is higher than
the strength of the unit in tension, you now having a situation where the unit is going into
tension and the bed-joint is going into torsion. If the bed-joint gives way then the failure
will occur along the joint, but in the process of the unit gives way which is the tensile
strength of the unit is weak in tension, then the torsional strength being higher in the joint
resists, but the unit gives way, right.
So, the pattern will depend on whether the unit tensile strength is higher or the bed-joint
torsional strength or the bed-joint strength which we have characterized as ftp is higher.
So, you will get what is called a toothed failure if the joint is weak, right. If bonding
between the unit and the mortar is not good then the unit tensile strength will be higher,
you will get the crack follow a pattern which is a toothed pattern between the alternate
courses.
So, this is referred to as toothed failure. So, on this branch, after the head-joints are
cracked and when we are on the branch b towards failure, the next phenomenon will be
and that is the end of the capacity of the wall is when the joint gives way and the
horizontal propagation of the crack occurs and comes to the next layer, right. So, toothed
failure is expected to occur in this manner.
But when you have a situation where the bed-joint torsional strength is lower than the
unit tensile strength, then if you have precompression, if the wall has heavy
superimposed loads that will act beneficially in resisting the out of plane forces of the
lateral forces, right. You understand. That, what is critical now is the horizontal bed-joint
failing, but that can be prevented to an extent if you have heavy precompression.
So, this sort of a failure mechanism to the toothed failure mechanism is very sensitive to
how much of precompression is available and therefore, you see that the branch b d now,
the branch that we have we are we are talking about we are on the around the second
branch, it could fail at a certain point or continue to resist depending on the
precompression level that is available in the wall.
298
So, if it is a top floor wall which has low superimposed loads versus a wall which is on
the ground floor of a multi storied building, you will have additional resistance coming
because of the precompression. So, this is how you would expect the formation of the
final crack which is the horizontal crack and continuation of the head-joint failure which
already occurred in the previous stage.
So, once this phenomenon that we are talking about is either occurring at d or occurring
at c, where the bed-joint has cracked. So, once we are at point c or d beyond that there is
going to be some residual capacity in the wall, that residual capacity in the wall is purely
coming from the bed-joint friction.
If you remember when we were talking about the shear strength of a joint, when we
talked about the shear strength of the joint you had two components, one component was
cohesion and the other component was the joint friction, the frictional resistance that is
available. Cohesion is nothing, but the bond. So, once the bond is overcome you have the
formation of a crack. But still you have resistance because there is some precompression
always, could be low or it could be high and therefore, the resistance after the bond has
failed is coming from friction.
So, how is the post peak behavior beyond c to e or beyond d to f will really depend on
how much precompression is there and therefore, it will affect; it will affect the frictional
resistance. If you have good frictional strength good frictional friction coefficient and
high precompression, you could get a rather stiff behavior in the post peak region.
299
So, this is something that is going to be affected by the level of precompression due to
two effects. One in the pre peak just before the peak depending on how the bed-joints
failure can be delayed one or after failure how much of peak precompression is available
and how much is the frictional resistance and the slope in the post peak is going to be
affected by how much of frictional resistance is available in the set up.
So, if you where to now examine the other situation. We talked about the torsional
strength of the bed-joint being lower than the unit tensile strength, right. That was the
first case and we ended up with a toothed failure. However, if you have the reverse of the
situation that the unit tensile strength is really poor and the bed-joint strength in torsion is
fairly good, or ftp is good then you will have what is called a line failure where the unit is
going to be split, right.
So, in this particular case, if you are talking of weak units and as I have been reiterating,
if you know the compressive strength of the unit all other material properties of the
masonry can be linked to it. So, if the compressive strength of the unit is significantly
low, is poor the unit tensile strength is also going to be low.
So, let us say you have weak units. If you have weak units it would typically follow a
force displacement relationship, a force displacement trend a b and then sudden failure,
because after b the unit is the one that is going to be resisting the flexure, but it fails even
before the joint can give away. So, you would have the first possibility denoted by this
300
certain sudden drop, sudden vertical loss of strength that you see if you have very weak
units.
However, if the units are not so poor and there is some finite strength in tension in the
unit which the wall can actually depend on, then as you are on branch b c the unit is
resisting moment the bed-joint torsion is active now. But before the bed-joint can fail in
torsion the unit splits in tension and you will get and this is much more brittle failure
where there is a sudden loss of capacity, almost complete loss of capacity of the system
because you do not have any more plane that is counteracting a gravity forces.
In the previous case, because of the toothed failure the horizontal joints at the interface
of failure were still active and carrying the gravity force, right. And so, you had some
you had some residual resistance there. You had some residual resistance that is always
going to be available till loss of contact happens. But in this case since the failure is a
line failure, there is no capacity left in the system itself. So, beyond point c or beyond
point b what you see is a vertical drop in the capacity and the line failure completes the
mechanism itself.
And in this case whether the wall is provided with heavy superimposed loads or low
superimposed loads, low precompression or high precompression it really does not
matter, because you are not tapping into the bed-joint resistances the unit is so weak that
in gives way and then the level of precompression in the bed-joint to augment friction is
not available.
So, this is the fundamental difference between the two failure modes that one can capture
as far as horizontal flexure is concerned. So, you have to be careful about two aspects the
unit tensile strength and the ftp or the bed-joint torsional strength that is available in the
material in the composite itself, ok.
301
And we have made capacity estimates, but we have not in the calculations assumed a
difference at the section at the micro level, we have not really in our linear elastic
assumption or the non-linear stress strain assumption made a distinction between unit
and the joint.
We did not do that. If you remember, we used a homogenized cross section and we said
that this stress strain curve of the cross section can be linear elastic in compression till
failure or non-linear at failure at ultimate. So, we actually used a homogenized section a
homogenized material model to make those estimates. But if you were to actually use
some strengths to make this sort of an estimate between line failure, and a toothed
failure, codes internationally give you some possibility of making an estimate of the
capacity of walls.
So, this relationship that I have talked about in one of our previous classes is the tensile
strength, the flexural tensile strength normal to the bed-joint to the flexural tensile
strength parallel to the bed-joint, ftn and ftp, normal and parallel; and the bond wrench
test, the modified bond wrench test as the as the test that you can use to estimate these. If
this is known, if you have an estimate of these values use the lower of the two values to
make the estimate of the capacities and mind you, variability is something that you
cannot do away with.
302
So, if you have toothed failure and if the flexural tensile strength of the bed-joint, normal
to the bed-joint is greater than about 0.15 MPa which is which is giving you a threshold
and telling you look if it is a very low flexural tensile strength, normal to the bed-joint
you cannot be using this expression.
So, if it is over and above about 0.15 MPa the flexural tensile strength normal to the bed-
joint you can make an estimate of what is the flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed-
joint with the knowledge of the flexural tensile strength normal to the bend joint, right.
This ratio between the flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed-joint and normal to the
bed-joint is observed constantly and depending on the material properties, depending on
the bond that can be established and the type of units you are using this ratio, can vary.
But rather constant ratio is observed between ftn and ftp.
So, ftp or the test to get ftp being more complicated, the modified bond strength test
because you have to use those half bricks or the wallete test we have to create
significantly large specimen, the flexural tensile strength parallel to the bed-joint test
may not be very easy to carry out in the laboratory. It may be easier for you to do a bond
strength test and get ftn, right.
So, if you know ftn and if the ftn works out to be greater than the number 0.15 MPa you
can make an empirical estimate of how much the value of ftp is, right; and of course, in
that expression you also see fa, which is going to the unit compressive strength the unit
compressive strength is again made use of.
So, this is an empirical estimate. It is not an analytical, purely analytical form. It is an

empirical estimate this expression fits the behavior. You could use that value of ftp and
estimate what is the one way flexural, one way horizontal bending capacity of the wall if
toothed failure is happening because you need the bed-joint torsional strength. But if line
failure were to happen you see that the line failure is just using capacities which is the
unit tensile strength and the bed-joint tensile strength, right.
So, in case you have doubts on how strong the joint is going to be then you should expect
a line failure to occur and you see that see in the estimate of the capacity with respect to
line failure we use a rather, again an empirical relationship that is based on the unit
tensile strength and the flexural tensile strength of the bed-joint, normal to the bed-joint.
303
So, you can you can arrive at a value for ftp, use that value of ftp to make an estimate of
the out-of-plane bending capacity of the wall itself. This again varies from code to code
and this is calibrated on some experimental tests. So, we use them with. If we have a
good knowledge of the type of masonry that we are working with, you should use them.
You should not use them blindly the across different types of masonry, ok.
That brings me to two-way flexure, right and that is something so far we have not
examined and it is a complex mechanism that actually works in a two-way flexure, and
strictly speaking this is what should be happening in most cases that there are lateral
restraints, there are top and bottom restraints. So, most probably the wall is being
restrained on 3 sides at least or all 4 sides, right.
So, it is an idealization that we said we are getting one way flexure in vertical bending or
horizontal bending. So, most walls are going to be supported on 3 sides or 4 sides and we
have seen that in this situation the wall under diagonal bending is going to be subjected
to bed-joint torsion, head-joint torsion, bed-joint flexure and head-joint flexure. So, this
is the kind of situation that we will be experiencing in a wall that is actually undergoing a
proper diagonal bending itself. So, it is really a combination of horizontal and vertical
bending.
So, the phenomenon is quite complex as I said and it is also be seen that if you were to
take the horizontal bending capacity and the vertical bending capacity superpose them
304
the diagonal bending capacity is not close to a mere addition of these two capacities,
which means it is not something that is that easy to estimate; needs a lot of material
parameters.
And hence, codes internationally have attempted to look at empirical methods of

estimate, except for very few codes that actually give you rigorous analytical forms.
Most codes actually give you an empirical approach where they say let us split the wall
into two equivalent strips, a horizontal strip and a vertical strip based on the boundary
conditions and estimate the capacity of the vertical strip in vertical bending and the
horizontal strip in horizontal bending and add these two equivalent capacities and arrive
at the overall bending capacity.
So, there are different ways in which this has been addressed in the past and the
fundamental reason is there is indeterminacy in the in the problem and that closed form
solutions are challenging to arrive at in this particular case.
We have talked about this earlier that the bed-joint tensile strength parallel to the bed-
joint is typically higher than the bed-joint tensile strength normal to the bed-joint, right.
So, tension causing bond failure when tension is acting parallel to the joint is something
that is going to give you a higher strength than bed-joint tensile strength normal to the
bed-joint and that is also because of that directions of strain gradient that you have in one
versus the other.
305
So, if you were to examine two-way flexure, this is a mechanism that is affected
significantly by boundary conditions. But the type of boundary conditions that you have,
the number of boundary conditions that you have and the aspect ratio of the wall, right.
Depending on the aspect ratio of the wall the relative capacities in normal to the bed-
joint, tensile strength normal to the bed-joint and parallel to the bed-joint start playing
with the aspect ratio of the wall itself. So, let us examine first a wall supported on 3
sides, understand possible failure mechanism and then look at a wall supported on 4
sides.
So, wind pressure or inertial force acting on the wall and you have supports on the two
lateral edges and the bottom of the wall. As the loading progresses the wall is acting like
a plate now, elastically deforming and then when the crack, when the tensile stress due to
the combination of the gravity load and the out of plane load reaches the tensile strength
of masonry you should see the formation of the crack and typically, when you have a
wall that is longer than it is tall, you would have a crack pattern that runs from
somewhere at about 40 percent length of the wall at the top to the corner itself, right
So, the wall is trying to bend outwards, it is supported on 3 sides and it is trying to open
out in a way forming these two. These cracks are not 45 degree cracks, these cracks
would be about depending on the boundary condition would vary between 30 and 45
degrees, depending on the aspect ratio would vary and in this particular wall where the
length is significantly larger than the height of the wall. This is how you would expect
the failure pattern to look like.
Even if you where to look at if you were to look at a wall which has height to length ratio
which is one or the height is more than the length and again supported on 3 sides the
crack pattern would look like what you can see in this figure below, where again you
have those almost diagonal cracks that begin. But then the mid span deflection is quite
significant the top is free. Since the mid span deflection is significant you get a vertical
crack, but then that vertical crack cannot propagate completely and split the wall to get
the diagonal crack coming from the corners.
So, if you are actually look at it in the two figures the crack pattern above is actually a
magnification of the crack pattern that you see below, because of the changing aspect
ratio of the wall. So, what is really happening here is a wall is acting like plate now,
306
right; and the failure pattern very much matches with the kind of yield line failure that
you get in a reinforced concrete slabs.
So, big difference being that in one you are talking of a reinforced system, here you are
talking of a brittle system; you do not have the reinforcement. Therefore, one way of
dealing with one of way of dealing with diagonal bending has been to use the yield line
analysis which is actually being developed for reinforced concrete slabs to estimate a
capacity for out of plane walls subjected to diagonal bending or subjected to two way
bending. So, some codes actually adopt a yield line criterion to estimate the capacity of
walls in two-way flexure.
Again, it is instructive to examine, ok. Then if we were to examine the wall supported on
4 sides, it is again a mirror of what you saw for the wall with 3 sides. Now, the diagonal
crack will propagate from all four corners and not from the bottom corners alone because
the top is also supported.
So, let us examine a case, one case because as I said depending on the boundary
condition if the boundaries are fixed if the boundaries are free to rotate if the aspect ratio
is of a certain range such that the length of the wall is lesser than the height of the wall
versus an aspect ratio where the length of the wall is significant, you can have
differences. So, in the slides that you are seeing we are actually examining the behavior
of a wall whose length is significant in comparison to the height probably almost twice.
307
So, as the wall starts deflecting elastically with increasing lateral force we are on the first
branch of the load deflection curve, elastic behavior and all mechanism that we talked
about earlier in terms of head-joint flexure, bed-joint flexure, head-joint torsion, bed-
joint torsion are all being requested by the wall to actually resist the out of plane load
itself, ok.
When the bed-joint capacity is reached, ok; now, we will mind you are examining of
wall whose length is significant in comparison to the height, so it starts getting around
the mid span around the mid span, not closer to the edges, around the mid span the bed-
joint tensile strength normal to the bed-joint is reached, right. So, you have a situation for
formation of a horizontal crack around mid span.
Now, once, so the once the flexural tensile stresses reach ftn you should start getting the
first crack which is a horizontal crack in the wall itself. So, that is your first, that is the
first non-linearity that you should expect and then change in stiffness. So, you can see
how we now come down either to branch b c or continue further depending on depending
on the different capacities in different values of f tn and ftp and precompression itself.
Now, beyond this point beyond b how is the propagation of failure going to be depends
completely on the orthogonal strength ratio that we talked about, right. And as I said the
orthogonal strength ratios ftp over ftn; in some codes it is given the other way around, so
you just have to be careful what is on the numerator what is on the denominator, but the
point is this will be uniform for a given typology of masonry. So, depending on this
relative capacity of ftn, ftp to ftn, we will see beyond this point b how does the force
displacement curve go.
308
So, let us examine that. In case ftn is equal to ftp which is rather rare, that you do not have
any reserve capacity. Most often ftp will be higher than ftn. So, in this case, it simply
means that the moment the bed-joint has cracked. It has to, the wall has to redistribute
the demand that is coming to the other location. So, once the bed-joint has cracked it will
expect that moment to be resisted more by the head-joints. But if the head-joints are
going to crack at same level of flexural tension then you get a sudden propagation of the
failure mechanism through the joints, right.
So, you we were initially along this and then we looked at coming down where do we
come down to see and look at full failure mechanism getting propagated in the wall or
depending on the orthogonal strength ratio is there is reserve capacity in the wall. So, let
us say if there is situation of ftn being equal to ftp, meaning there is no reserve strength
available in the wall per se, you get a sudden mechanism formation.
And what you observe now is that the horizontal crack has fully developed, it is now
expecting the other mechanisms to start carrying the load, but you do not have reserve
strength provided by the flexural tensile strength parallel to bed-joint that gives away and
you get the diagonal crack that propagates to the four corners and again as you see this is
very similar to the yield line mechanism that you would get in a simply supported
reinforced concrete slab; very similar to it. However, here in this case you will have one
crack or one low distributed cracking is to be expected in this particular case.
309
So, what you see here if you follow the branch a to b and then a sudden drop from b to c,
and c to d and you have a residual, you can see that there is a certain residual capacity.
Again this residual capacity where is it coming from? That simply coming because of the
diagonal crack at the joints means that the hinging and the movement is happening on the
bed-joint.
So, you have a horizontal surface which is actually carrying the load and this is
depending this depends on the precompression level. So, you will always get a certain
residual capacity because of friction. So, that lower branch is basically going to be
available to you, but for all practical purposes the capacity is lost in the wall. The
mechanism has propagated.
Now, if ftp is greater than ftn and the question is by how much because it depends on what
this orthogonal strength ratio ftp by ftn is. Then, you will get a stabilization in the load
carrying mechanism. The horizontal crack has propagated, but before the propagation of
the diagonal cracks you will still have additional resistance in the wall you will go
beyond b in terms of the load carrying capacity and therefore, wall stabilizes, it is able to
resist till the formation of the mechanism when f tp is reached and at this stage you really
will have to look at what the ratio ftp to ftn is.
310
So, this propagates; basically you will have the sub panels that are formed because of the
cracking that is happening and there is residual capacity till failure. So, let us just look at
what then happens.
We did look at the overall failure mechanism, but if I were to increase the ratio that f tp
is say twice the f tn or 2 and half, 3 times and so on you will basically go from a to b,
from b stabilize to e and depending on the orthogonal strength ratio either keep going up
this for further capacity and then once the bed-joints are, once the bed-joints are failed
because of the tensile stress reaching ftp you get the diagonal cracks initiating and you get
failure. And so you would either go a b e f g or a b e f h and i that depends on the
orthogonal strength ratio. So, this is, this is the expected propagation of failure.
Again, mind you the bed-joint is cracking, ftn occurs on a joint, whereas, the diagonal
crack can be a line crack or can be a tooth crack. So, again as far as the propagation of
failure mechanism, the last branch capacity of the unit in tension versus the torsional
strength of the joint matters, right.
So, this is the actual mechanism of failure propagation in the two-way flexure case and
as I said few codes actually have a closed form analytical solution to make an estimate of
this, but the demand is that you have an estimate of the tensile strength, the unit tensile
strength, the joint strengths and is heavy on required mechanical parameters.
However, you will examine some of these methods in the assignment that is based on
this segment of the module 3; with that we close out-of-plane bending.
311
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 03
Lecture - 18
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part-VIII
So, very good morning we will get on to the next component of material strengths of
masonry, Behavior of Masonry before we get to design.
So, that is behavior primarily under shear, but we are not going to be examining shear in
isolation because that is really not a practical state. Pure shear is an interesting state in
mechanics, but very rarely would you get a pure shear state. So, it is always going to be
in the presence of compression- axial compression when we are looking at load bearing
constructions.
So, it is about axial compression coming from gravity and shear coming typically from
and the lateral forces. Our focus primarily is going to be on lateral forces coming from
earthquake effects. And therefore, it is in-plane shear because we are looking at load
bearing shear walls in masonry in the presence of gravity. Now, the axial compression
levels can vary and therefore, it is useful to examine the kind of interaction that you get
between axial compression and shear.
312
So, the next three lectures would be dedicated to getting an understanding of this
interaction leading to a biaxial state of stresses at the material level- masonry. And then
using that basis to understand in terms of resultant forces; will we be able to define these
interactions which then become the basis for design, you have shear governed behavior,
a flexure governed behavior both in plane.
So, this becomes really the basis of what we are going to be looking at in design for
shear walls. So, we are looking at the combination of shear and compression, but we are
looking at in-plane action now. So, in the previous set of lectures that we were
examining, bending that was out of plane bending ok.
So, now we going to be looking at in-plane action, looking at shear wall behavior in
masonry and it is not that is shear is not going to act in the out of plane direction in the
masonry wall. It is just that the failure mechanism because of shear in the out of plane
direction is not something that is expected to occur; though you might have some shear
stress. But failure is normally expected in bending, flexural compression, rocking failure.
So, it is flexure dominated rather than shear dominated in the out of plane direction and
in the in-plane direction, we need to consider this interaction between shear and
compression.
So, we need to be examining this state of biaxial stress that develops and it is this which
becomes the basis of the principal stresses which we need to examine and arrive at some
failure criteria. So, we are going to be examining combination of the vertical gravity
forces, superposed and self weight with the lateral forces acting on the wall leading to
biaxial state of stress.
So, what is observed mechanically and experimentally? That there is very clear
directional property that comes into the picture because of the joints; the orientation of
the bed joints. So, depending on how the bed joint is oriented with respect to the stresses,
to the principle stresses or if you want to take it. Further the direction of the applied
forces to the orientation of the bed joints; the plane of orientation of the bed joints
becomes critical ok.
And that is where there is a departure from materials that can easily be considered as
homogeneous materials. So, in reality there is a heterogeneity; there is heterogeneity
because we are looking at the composite, a very well defined composite, units and mortar
313
and interface. And a second issue which is coming from directional properties; that the
strengths are not going to be the same in one direction versus the other. So, this starts
coming into the picture particularly when you have combination of shear and
compression.
So, if we were to work on the concept of homogenization and that assumption of an

isotropic homogeneous material if it were completely acceptable for a material like
mortar masonry, then you could simply work with principal stresses. And when of the
principal stresses reach some of the material strengths you have a failure criterion. But in
this case unless you consider the orientation of the bed joint, you will not be able to
explain the failure mechanisms completely.
So, that is what we are going to be examining and that leads us to how we can consider
the orientation of the bed joint in the failure mechanism. So, this is a set of experiments
that was conducted primarily to show that the failure mechanism is not dependent only
on the principal stresses or the orientation of the principal stresses, but the directional
property of the masonry governed by the orientation of the bed joint starts becoming
extremely significant.
So, Page in 1982; this is in fact, the PhD thesis of Page; carried out a set of experiments
ok. The table that you see there is examining simple wallets in masonry, small walls in
masonry to a state of biaxial stresses. Now, you need to create a state of biaxial stresses;
so if you have shear stresses and axial stresses acting on a planar element; you know that
you can always arrive at an equivalent set of principal stresses σ1 and σ2.
So, here what has been done is that σ1 and σ2 is then used as the state of stress that is
going to be what the panel is subjected to. You keep σ2 zero, then you have only σ1
acting and then σ1 1 itself is oriented differently with respect to the bed joint; so that was
the first set of test. So, if you look at the first; if you look at the first column we have
angles right this first column is looking at angles and that is the angle at which the load is
being applied with respect to the bed joint orientation right. The second column is
referring to uniaxial tension tests. Now, the panel if you have your principal stresses σ11
and σ2; in this first case assumption is σ2 is 0, you only have σ1 tension.
But now the σ1 tension is oriented with respect to the bed joint, goes all the way from 0
degrees, which means the tension uniaxial tension is being applied parallel to the bed
314
joint itself and then keeps changing goes to 22.5 degrees, 45 degrees and so on up to 90
degree. So, in the last of the panels in the first column, you can see that the uniaxial
tension is perpendicular to the bed joint.
In the second case, the principal stress σ2 is not 0; it is a non-zero value. So, you have
actually have a ratio of σ1 to σ2 right; you have σ1 to σ2 and in one direction there is
tension. The other direction there is compression and there is a change in this ratio that is
carried out with changing orientation of the bed joint with respect to σ1 itself.
In the third set of tests, it is assumed that there is only compression; no tension in the
other direction and test is repeated going all the way from an orientation of 0, which is
compression as perpendicular to the bed joint to compression being parallel to the bed
joint. So, this was the overall basis with which these experimental investigations were
carried out and of course, there was one more which we will examine towards the end
which is biaxial compression.
So, in both the directions there was compression and that led to another failure
mechanism. So, it is very interesting for you to observe that in each of the panels; the
thick line that you see is the failure plane; is the failure line, it differs based not only on
the ratio of σ1 to σ2 or whether you have σ1 or σ2 alone. But it also varies depending on
the angle at which the load; angle at which these principal stresses are oriented with
respect to the bed joint.
So, you can see in the first case, you have some stepped failure, the stepped failure
continues. But then by the time it reaches; by the time it reaches 90 degrees for uniaxial
tension, you have a flat line; you have the bed joint failing and even in 67.5; you can see
that it is the bed joint that is failing. As you look at the other cases, you see this changing
depending on the orientation of the plane with respect to the principal stresses.
In compression again you can see, in the first case where the compression is
perpendicular to the bed joint that is angle is 0; you have failure due to the formation of
tensile cracks which are parallel to the direction of the compression itself. To the last
case where compression is parallel to the bed joints and failure is by splitting the bed
joints themselves.
315
So, this framework has been used by several researchers to be able to arrive at failure
surfaces for masonry under biaxial state of stress. Page himself gives a set of curves
which we will see in a few minutes. And appreciate the fact that it is not something that
can be mathematically represented in a simple manner at all ok.
So, different combinations of principal stresses can be developed, that is basically what
is been done with altering ratios of σ1 and σ2 in the orthogonal direction with different
signs as well. So, this the you could ask me how were these tests carried out? It is just
that big panels were constructed and cut at an orientation. So, you get a panel with a joint
which is not perpendicular or parallel to the edges and that is how this is actually been
carried out.
It was observed largely; if you were to if you were to club the different failure
mechanisms observed; two distinct failure mechanisms and one which is a combination
of all these could be observed. You had one failure mechanism where you had debonding
between the mortar and the units. So, the interface was giving away you are debonding
between the mortar and the units either along the bed joints or along the perpend joints.
So, we have been examining these two cases earlier as well; as a line failure or the
toothed failure. This line failure that I am referring to here is not splitting the unit; in this
case the line failure is just following the entire, the total bed joint and you get a line.
Whereas, the toothed pattern is actually following the bed joint-head joint-bed joint-head
316
joint sequence. The other possibility is that the units are fractured in tension and that is
the line failure that we saw earlier.
So, the other possibility is that it is not the debonding between the unit and the mortar,
but also it requires the fracture of the unit. So, the line failure that we have been seeing
earlier is the other type of failure that can occur and the fracture of the brick unit is
required in this case; along with the debonding between the mortar joint and the unit
itself. And it is not that only type 1 or type 2 is occurring in isolation; you have situations
in these examples on the right where you have a combination of the two as well; so it is
as complex as it can get.
So, because of the combined state of loading that we are looking at; you have a
compression-tension state that occurs in the wall. Basically, you can characterize the
wall based on this compression-tension state of stress or it is observed that finally it is
the interaction between the principal stresses and their orientation. What is the
orientation of the principal stresses with respect to the bed joint; this needs to be
captured. If that is not captured, the specific failure mechanism that is observed cannot
be explained. And that is the failure surface, this is based on the test results of Page.
So, what you can actually see in this three dimensional figure is σ1 and σ2 as the two
axis; the y axis and the x axis, σ1 in tension, σ2 in compression. And on the third axis- the
z axis if you want, is the rotation of the load with respect to the bed joint. And you can
317
actually see that each curve is made basically by the failure stresses σ1, σ2; failure
stresses from the panels that were part of the test.
And you can actually see that for each orientation, the failure plane is different; for the
same material. It is exactly the same material in all the tests - the unit and the mortar is
kept common across all the specimens. So, this is the kind of failure surface that are
getting. So, the shape of the failure surface is not unique and then you will definitely
have material properties that will affect the shape of the failure surface. You can have
changes to this based on the compressive strength of the unit, the bond strength, the
tensile strength of the unit and all other specific material properties will contribute to
changing this shape as well; so, the shape is definitely not unique.
The set of experiments that we examined earlier were uniaxial tension; uniaxial
compression and tension-compression as σ1 and σ2. However, when compression-
compression was examined; behavior under compression-compression was examined,
because of the confinement from two sides, the tendency of the masonry wall was to split
along its thickness. You know, it is very difficult to imagine that masonry can fail in this
manner. And it is interesting because you will think in what conditions would you expect
this sort of a compression-compression state occurring in a masonry wall panel.
And we have seen this sort of a failure in a regular load bearing masonry wall, we were
working with a reinforced masonry wall. And when it was subjected to lateral forces and
318
gravity forces in our laboratory; the end block, the toe block where maximum
compression is occurring as the wall is deforming laterally. Because of the confinement
provided by the reinforcement and the hollow block at the edge, there was actually
compression in two directions. There was compression due to the gravity and
compression in the other direction and there was vertical splitting as you see in the end
blocks and this is a possibility in given the multiple materials, multiple strengths and
stiffnesses that we use in masonry.
So, the tension-compression σ1, σ2 three dimensional graph that you saw in the previous
slide; if you were to collapse it, you can see that none of those failure curves actually
overlap or have the same shape. So, that is a difficulty that we will observe and this is a
failure surface, a failure plane for the case of compression-compression.
So, of course in compression you have more energy being absorbed before failure, more
strength in compression is available in the masonry. So, the one on the right versus the
one on the left that is because brittle failure in tension is observed versus; under
compression-compresson, there is more plastification in the material and energy that can
be dissipated.
So, this is where we stand in terms of the complexity of the biaxial state of stresses in
masonry. So, how do we then bring in an analytical form that can help us as far as
analysis and design is concerned? Because, it is fine the complexity is there, but you
319
need a mathematical basis that can help us define failure states under different
combinations, under different conditions.
So, what we are going to be examining initially, this is basically at the state of stresses in
a cross section defining the failure states in a cross section itself is theory that was
developed that Mann Muller in 1982-1985. And here an understanding is developed at a
micro level; that is at the mortar joint and the unit what is actually happening. And then
that understanding is used to link it up to the global states of stresses or an average state
of stress in the wall to define the failure surfaces or the failure criteria itself.
So, you have axial stresses acting on the wall and you have shear stresses that are
occurring due to the lateral forces acting on the wall. But if it is possible for us to
examine the principal stresses, orientation of those principal stresses and then work at the
level of the unit and the mortar and then see if that local state of stress can then in some
way be linked to the global state of stress meaning average states of stress, we have
already a framework that we can adopt.
So, the basis of this experiment is very interesting to see how the physical behavior
under compression and shear; is then being nicely translated to an analytical form
idealized into an analytical form. The expressions that you will see now are developed
with the understanding that both the strength of the mortar and the stiffness of the mortar
is far lesser than the unit itself.
The difference is significant and hence it is ok to assume that the unit is almost a rigid
block with respect to the to the joint material itself. So, that has been an important
assumption in the work itself. So, the mortar joint if it were to be considered to be
analogous to something like rubber; rubber sheet, thin rubber pads. And the brick itself is
rigid; no deformation is observed in the brick. When this experiment was carried out,
you are subjecting the panel made out of very deformable mortar and rigid blocks.
When subjected to shear, you can see that because of the deformability of the mortar, the
unit has a tendency to rotate about its centers; individually rotate about its centers. So, it
is an important test, it is an important demonstration because it then gives you a basis to
say globally if the wall panel is subjected to lateral forces which is shear; in-plane shear,
at the level of the unit, at the micro level of the wall, what is happening to unit is that
because of the unit being stronger and rigid in comparison to the mortar; each unit is
320
individually rotating. So, the rotation of the unit then becomes the basis for formulating
the stress strain relationships at the unit level. And then you need to have to link it up to
average state of stresses in the wall itself and that is why you are linking in up to the
global.
So, this fundamental observation that each unit under the action of the some gravity;
there is some axial compression due to gravity forces and superimposed loads. But then
in the presence of in-plane shear; each individual unit is rotating right. And because of
that rotation and because of the fact that the mortar is the more deformable of the two
materials and the weaker of the two materials; in the mortar joint right, we are examining
some full bricks in some part bricks.
But then if you look at; if you look at the mortar joint that I am shading now right, if you
look at this mortar joint. So, there is a unit at the top and two units at the bottom and if
you look at that mortar joint; you will appreciate immediately that almost half of that
mortar joint will have increased, the deformation increases there, the joint is subjected to
some amount of tension because of the rotation of the unit.
The other half gets compressed right; almost one half of the joint is getting compressed
further, whereas, the other half of the joint is getting relieved by the pre; there is a pre
compression that exists because of the axial stresses. But the rotation of the unit is
causing some of that to be lost; so that becomes the basis for the formulation. So, if you
321
were to examine the joint; there is strain in that joint εb; when the mortar joint is getting
compressed.
εb is when the mortar joint is getting compressed whereas, in the other case where the
mortar joint is opening up; it is more than what it was originally. εa is that quantity of
strain in the joint, where you are getting the reduction in the level of compression
because of the rotation of the unit itself.
So, that is examining if in terms of the strains the deformation of the strains in a mortar
joint. So, this is going to keep happening wherever there are units. If you examine this in
terms of the stresses right; if you were to examine this in terms of the stresses; you have
pre compression stresses in the wall because of the self-weight. And because of these
superimposed loads that average level of pre compression in the wall is σy (minus for
compression); σy is a uniform level.
But due to the action of lateral forces and the rotation of the unit, half the brick joint sees
an increase in the compression and that is -σa. And the other half sees a reduction which
is a which is going to be a level lesser than σy. So, this gives us a certain geometry to
work with and the local effect of a global mechanism itself right.
So, -σa is where the joint is getting compressed one half of the brick unit; the other half
of the brick unit it is -σb because the pre compression is being relieved to a certain extent.
So, with this understanding of what -σy- σa and -σy σb are; we will then try to work on
one unit of a certain dimension and see if that can be used to formulate the local stresses
and the global stresses ok.
322
So, now let us reexamine what we talked about in the previous slide. One single unit is
being considered the size of the unit is, it is a unit of height Δy and length Δx right. Δy by
Δx is the unit itself; y axis along the vertical and x axis along the horizontal and we
looked at the different state of compressive stress because of the action of lateral force
itself.
So, -σy is the uniform; average uniform pre compression in the wall, but due to the
rotation of the unit, you have stress increasing in one part minus sigma a at the bottom,
the other side is what is going to be compressed further. So, -σa; at the top and minus
increased compression at the bottom and -σb is where the level of compression is reduced
ok.
So, we have isolated one single element and if you examine the stresses and the element,
we have actually eliminated anything that is happening on the sides of the unit right. So,
that is an important assumption because we are assuming that the perpend joints are
inactive, we are assuming that the perpend joints are inactive.
We have talked about this earlier that the perpend joints are typically not as well
consolidated as the bed joints and so expecting that to be a participating uniformly
participating resisting mechanism is questionable. And so it is an acceptable assumption
to assume that the head joints or the perpend joints are ineffective and that is why we are
323
not attributing any of the resistance to those two sides. So, that is the other assumption
that goes into the problem.
So, now σa and σb; the maximum compressive stress that you will reach and the
minimum compressive stress that you will reach is over and above the average
compressive stress due to the pre compression; σy ± Δσy which is going to be the
difference in the compression itself. So, within this block, if we were to take moment
equilibrium and we have examined the stresses now; the normal stresses that are acting
on the unit because of the deformation in the wall.
But when this wall deforms, the bed joints are now going to be subjected to a state of
shear right. So, τ at the top bed joint and τ at the bottom bed joint is what is going to be
equilibrating the changed state of normal stresses. So, the moment equilibrium; if we
apply the moment equilibrium to this unit of size Δy by Δx and shear stresses generated
on the top bed joint and bottom bed joint. Because of this changed state of normal
stresses; sigma a and sigma b being equal to σy ± Δσy; we then have a basis to bring in
the shear stress in the wall.
So, we want to get a relationship between the shear stress and the normal stress and the
principal and the resultant average stresses itself. So, our σxy is the; for this block that we
are assuming; σxy is the shear stress τ and considering equilibrium of rotations, it is
possible to relate the geometry to the shear stress and the normal stresses.
So τ into Δy by the equilibrium of rotations is equal to the difference in the normal

stresses, Δσy multiplied by one half of the block over which Δσy is actually acting; so
that is the equilibrium of rotations. Once you write down that, you can use you can write
down an expression for τ. If I take delta y to the other side, then I have τ = is equal to
Δσy into Δx by Δy by 2 there. We are assuming that the difference is Δσy which is; which
is equal, what is increases; there is some conservation within that that is assumed.
Now, the Δσy is then equilibrated by the shear and that is how we are establishing or
relationship between the two. So, taking this expression to our Δσy in the first equation
here where we have what is σa and σb as σy ± Δσy, we plug in delta sigma y into this
expression from here.
324
And you get the final expression, the average compressive stress under the action of both
gravity forces and lateral forces as being the original peak pre compression in the wall
 y 
y    2   . So, this is the average compression in the masonry that we can define.
  x 
Now, this basic form is then going to be used to understand how the level of average
compressive stress becomes a determinant in the failure mechanism itself ok.
So, you have seen the set of experimental investigations based on those investigations;
we can broadly classify three different mechanisms of failure; three different modes of
failure. The first mode of failure is particularly when the pre compression levels are very
low right.
When pre compression levels are very low the resistance is going to depend primarily on
the shear strength of the joint itself right. Pre compression levels are very low, let us say
it is a single storeyed structure or let us say it is a wall, a shear wall on the topmost floor
of a masonry building. Then your values of pre compression sigma y are typically low;
in this case the failure is controlled by the failure of the mortar joint ok. And we will
actually look at this more closely, when we start examining the global failure, we are
now trying to define it at a local state of stress, but we will come back to this.
But what you see in this particular picture here is failure of the joint; can you see how
there is a failure plane that is initiated at the top of the wall? Now, at the top of the wall
325
you will agree that the pre compression levels are going to be minimum. The pre
compression levels are minimum, this wall panel has been subjected to sliding failure
and the failure is about the bed joint itself.
So, in this particular case; classical case of low pre compression, shear failure is
occurring when the joint strength is reached the bed joint strength is reached. So, when
you have failure of the mortar joint; that is one case where you can examine and get a
sort of a closed form expression to understand the value at which failure is expected.
The second case is when the pre compression levels are not too small; the pre
compression levels are moderate levels of pre compression. So, you take a regular
masonry structure 2 storeyed, 3 storeyed masonry structure pre compression levels are
not small. Here the failure is governed by shear-tension right. So, here it is a case where
the shear stresses in comparison to the pre compression; the normal stresses are
significant enough.
And so you will have to start looking at the principal stresses and when the principal
tension approaches the tensile strength of masonry; you will get a failure plane, you will
get a failure or you will get of crack in the wall itself. So, this is a picture which we had
seen earlier; we were talking about the classical x crack. And here what is actually
happening is the pre compression levels are significant; it is a two storeyed structure at
least and you can see that the failure plane is on the ground floor.
So, moderate levels of pre compression is expected, but under the action of lateral forces
and this pre compression; you have the formation of these diagonal cracks. And this is
happening when the principal tension actually approaches the tensile strength of the
masonry. We are examining the behavior now at the level of the unit and mortar and so
the second failure is when the shear tension in the unit is acting occurring; the shear
tension in the unit is occurring right.
The third case is when the pre compression levels are not small, you have got significant
pre compression levels. When you have heavy pre compression level due to this
deformation of the unit, you have increase in the you have increase in the compression
level. We will be looking at Δσy, so you will have an one edge where Δσy can approach
the maximum compression can approach the crushing strength of masonry.
326
If the compression level were to reproach the crushing strength of masonry under the
action of lateral forces and gravity, you will have flexural compression failure right. So,
three very distinct failure mechanisms; the first one is due to failure of the joint sliding
shear. The second is due to shear tension cracking in the unit and the third is due to
compression failure. As you can see, this is a test from our laboratory, you can see how
the edge that is getting compressed due to the lateral force acting that compressed tau is
crushing.
And if that were to crush, then you have reached the maximum lateral load carrying
capacity of the wall. So, you have three distinct failure planes; three distinct failure
mechanisms in the wall itself, we examine one by one to then arrive at an overall failure
plane.
So, let us look at the first one; failure of the mortar joint. So, what we are saying is when
the shear strength of the horizontal bed joint is reached, failure occurs in this units mortar
assembly that we are examining at this state and defining the local states of stresses.
So, it is the shear strength of the bed joint that becomes essential here. If you remember
when we were talking about the shear strength; there are tests to characterize the shear
strength of the joint right. It is not the diagonal compression test, the diagonal
compression test is going to give you the shear strength of masonry and is also referred
327
to as a tensile strength test. Because the failure is occurring under principal tension; this
is actually what we are talking about in this case is the joint failure the joint shear failure.
So, remember the concepts of cohesion and friction coefficient and this, if you are able to
characterize what is the strength of the joint then that value is reached you get failure.
So, earlier we were looking at σa, σb as being delta as being σy ± Δσy. So, we are here
looking at the lower of the two stresses because the pre compression levels are lower
right. So, to be able to use this failure criterion where we define the strength of the
masonry using a criterion that we have examined earlier; the Mohr Coulomb criterion,
where the joint shear strength is equal to cohesion plus the friction coefficient into the
pre compression level in the joint; the normal stress in the joint σj.
So we use this form as the; as the limiting value for arriving at the failure surface. We
apply this at the joint, our assumption, we have been looking at the states of stresses in
the joint only. So, we assume that the σa that we are talking about is really the joint
compression levels and τj is the shear stress in the joint itself.
We make that assumption and we now assume that now use the previous expression that
we had σa is equal to σy, original level of average pre compression, minus; the other term
that we had brought in for the difference in the difference in the compression level as
 y 
2  So, this expression for τj that we have earlier, the Mohr Coulomb criterion, we
 x 
bring that into this expression, the second expression here and have the criterion for
failure when the joint fails. So, basically we are looking at a sort of a reduced friction
coefficient and a reduced cohesion that occurs in that local state itself, where we we are
just introducing this part into the expression. We are bringing in our c + μσj into this
expression for τ here and rewrite it in terms of a reduced cohesion and a reduced friction
coefficient where c and  are coming from the second expression on the page itself.
So, this is how in the first criterion we have the average state of stress; low pre
compression level, failure coming from failure of the joint we bring the Mohr Coulomb
criterion and then have an expression for σa. And in this particular case, the second
expression is helping us arrive at a relationship between the geometry of the unit; the
normal stresses, average normal stresses and the shear stress.
328
And we use that to get the failure criterion in terms of the shear stress at which failure is
expected represented as a sort of a reduced cohesion and a reduced friction coefficient.
Because we are looking at the states of stress at the middle of a joint and then we are
going to the edge of a joint. So, this is the first failure criterion, we will examine the next
two failure criterions and then have an understanding of for the entire range of levels of
pre compression; how does this failure surface look like.
329
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 03
Lecture – 19
Strength and Behavior of Masonry Part -IX
Good morning. We will continue with the lecture on the shear strength under the
consideration of gravity forces in the masonry. We were looking at establishing a set of
expressions that for different levels of axial compression give us a failure surface in
terms of shear mechanisms.
So, we had looked at the first of the cases based on the basic formulation of Mann and
Muller. We are now trying to arrive at the state of stresses, the biaxial state of stresses a
failure surface. So, the first failure criterion that we are examined to summarize was the
failure of the mortar joint itself, where we were to talking of in the real scale of a
structure subjected to lateral forces like an earthquake, you would have the formation of
what is called sliding shear mechanism and that is what you see in the picture.
And this criterion is arrived when the shear strength of the horizontal bed joint is
reached. And therefore, using the criterion the Mohr coulomb criterion, where the shear
strength of the joint is represented as the combination of bond contribution which is
330
cohesion in the joint and the friction coefficient which is affected by the pre-compression
level itself.
So, we use this definition of failure of the joint itself to the set of equations that we have
developed earlier for the Mann-Muller criterion in the case where the level of stress due
to pre-compression is low. So, because of the rotation of the unit, one edge of the
masonry unit is experiencing a reduced compression and that is σa, on the other side of
the unit you have the increased pre-compression σb, the difference being delta Δσy in the
two cases.
So, we use this expression. And with the help of the failure criterion the Mohr coulomb
failure criterion in terms of cohesion and the friction coefficient, describe the failure of
the masonry joint the horizontal bed joint in terms of a reduced cohesion and a reduced
friction coefficient. The reduction occurring because now you have the definition of the
geometry of the joint with respect to the unit, where Δy and Δx are the unit dimensions Δy
along the y axis and Δx the length of the unit itself.
So, we represent it in terms of a reduced cohesion and a reduced friction coefficient as

being the criterion for failure of the horizontal bed joint. As I said this is expected to
occur when the level of pre-compression is low. So, if it is a single-storied structure, and
if the aspect ratio of the wall is such that the horizontal bed joint shear strength criterion
is going to be reached or if it is a wall in the upper most storey where the pre-
compression levels are low.
If the bed joint shear strength the bond strength is not good, good relative to the other
material mechanical parameters of the masonry, you can have this failure criterion, so
that is the first failure criterion under low level of axial compression.
331
We will start we will look at the other two criteria one when the axial stress levels are
intermediate. And you would expect that in a two storied, three storied masonry load
bearing masonry construction in the ground storey and finally, a case where the pre-
compression level is significantly high. So, the second criterion that we were examining
was the shear tension failure in the unit itself.
Again, within this formulation, we are examining the local states of stress and trying to
relate it to the global states of stress, the average pre-compression level in the wall itself.
So, if you remember the second criterion that we were examining is the classical
diagonal tension failure, the classical x-crack that is formed is the failure mechanism that
we are actually referring to when we are examining failure due to shear tension in the
unit.
So, in this particular case, failure is set to have been reached when the principal tension
stress, when the principal tensile stress at the center of the unit reaches this strength of
the brick unit in tension. So, the criterion says that if under a combination of axial
compression and shear stress from the lateral force, the principal tension reaches the
tensile strength of the unit, then you get the failure the crack occurring through the center
of the unit.
So, in this particular criterion, we can then use the Mohr stress definition, the Mohr
circle and define what the tensile stress, the principal tension σ1 is with respect to the
332
state of plane stress the biaxial state of stress τ and σ acting on the wall. σy is the normal
stress acting on the wall, τ is the shear stress acting on the wall. We are considering
condition at the center of the brick unit when the principal tension sigma one due to this
reaches a value of fbt, which is the tensile strength of the unit itself we get failure in the
in the wall in the unit by the tension crack occurring in the unit.
But we have one little aspect to be taken care of which is we are defining the formation
of the tension crack at the center of the unit. However, the earlier set of formulation were
at the bed joint above or below the unit. So, you had a unit of dimension Δy by Δx and
shear stress τ was defined at the top surface or the bottom surface, the bed joint, we were
talking about the failure at the joint.
However, in this criterion, we are talking of tension crack occurring at the center of the
brick unit and therefore, we must account for the translation of that stress now from the
joint to the center of the brick. And this is affected by the geometric proportion of the
unit itself. So, this is one aspect that needs to be considered. And there are simple
numerical methods available to be able to arrive at this value.
So, it is from that this value 2.3 in the bracket that you see there 2.3τ that you see there,
which is basically the magnitude of the shear stress from the joint to the center of the
brick itself. If we now rewrite this expression in terms of τ, because the earlier
expression was written in terms of τ as a function of σy, we again want for the second
criterion the value of shear stress as a function of σy. So, expanding the under-root terms
and rewriting the expression in terms of τ and making use of the failure strength here
which is the tensile strength of the unit itself.
f bt 
= 1+ y
2.3 f bt
The stress at the center of the brick, if you were to examine what is happening at the
center of the brick, the axial compression level σby is σy, we are assuming that the
average normal stress is the value which is at the which is the normal stress acting at the
center of the brick. We are assuming that there is no stress, normal stress acting in the
other orthogonal direction, and the shear stress is 2.3τ and I will be able to provide the
reference available for arriving at this formulation, but it is a simplification of the state of
333
stress at the joint to the center of the brick. So, this has been arrived at considering a
proportion between the unit height and the unit width.
In this case, the unit width is the unit length is taken as 4 times the height of the unit
itself. So, that is going to be geometry it is it is going to be dependent on the geometry.
And therefore, if there is a deviation, if there is a significant deviation in terms of the unit
dimensions, you should that that 2.3 is a number that comes because of the assumption of
the ratio of Δx to Δy ok.
So, this is our second criterion, where we expect the level of average the level of pre-
compression in the wall or the average normal stress in the wall to be of intermediate
range right. It is neither too high nor too low and we expect the failure mechanism in that
range to be because of the formation of tensile cracking due to the combination of at
lateral force, and the axial force itself.
The third criterion that we look at is failure due to crushing of the masonry. And this was
a third criterion that, third failure mechanism that I had mentioned. And here what we
really talking of is under a combination of the lateral force and the high pre-compression
that already exists in a wall, the compressed end of the wall- one end of the wall is
experiencing uplift, whereas the other end of the wall under the action of the in-plane
forces is experiencing increased compression.
334
Under their increased compression if the pre-compression level was originally high, the
chances are that the compression the flexural compression at ultimate reaches a value
closed to the crushing strength of masonry itself, so that becomes the third criterion for
establishing failure in the masonry wall.
So, in this particular case, if you remember the photograph that I had shown you which is
the compressed end of the wall starts experiencing crushing failure. This end is
experiencing crushing failure; it is in flexural compression, it is not direct compression,
but flexural compression and this is the basis that we use for the failure criterion.
Therefore, you need the crushing failure strength of masonry, the crushing strength of
masonry of masonry in this case in the previous criterion we were looking at the failure
of the unit in tension, but here we are looking at the failure strength of masonry in
compression the assembly itself.
So, when now if you remember again from the Mann-Muller criterion, we had σa where
there is reduction in the compression level and σb where there is an increase in the
compression level. We are going to be looking at σb to define what the failure criterion is
when σb reaches the uniaxial compressive strength of masonry fu you have failure
established.
2 y
b =  y +   = fu
x
We rewrite this in terms of τ and we now have the relationship between the average
shear stress related to the average normal stress σy in the wall itself.
x
 = (f u −  y )
2 y
Here the failure criterion is fu, in the previous tensile diagonal tension failure it is fbt, the
tensile strength of the unit, whereas, in the first case it is the shear strength of the joint.
So, there are three material mechanical parameters that we bring in to define the failure
of the system itself ok.
335
Therefore, now we have looked at three different; three different ranges, we had low pre-
compression, intermediate pre-compression and high pre-compression levels. Now, you
can expect a high pre-compression level let us say if the wall is not a very squat wall. If
you have a very slender wall, if you have a relatively slender wall, then the area of cross
section available for equilibrating the lateral forces and the gravity force is smaller in
comparison to a squat wall.
So, in a slender wall with high pre-compression, you can get the flexural crushing
mechanism that can occur in a masonry wall under the action of lateral forces and gravity
forces. So, we are basically looking at all possible geometrical combinations in terms of
the aspect ratio of the wall and in terms of the material strengths.
So, while we are defining this at the level of local stresses and relating it to the global
stresses, this becomes the basis for us even later to establish in terms of stress resultants
what is the lateral force-axial force interaction in a masonry wall right. You are familiar
with axial force bending moment interaction P-M interactions that we use for design in
concrete.
In masonry given that, in plane mechanisms are typically shear dominated mechanisms,
shear capacity is what gets affected significantly by the lateral force and that is what we
need to consider when we examine design of shear walls. And therefore, we will use a
similar basis this is at the level of stresses, but we will be examining the same under the
336
action of resultant forces. We will use the same basis to develop the interaction surface
between shear forces and axial forces.
So, based on the three different failure mechanisms that we have examined so far which
basically cover all possible failure mechanisms in masonry under in-plane actions. We
first looked at failure of the joint. We then looked at failure due to shear tension, the
second zone, the orange zone that you see there. And the third zone with high pre-
compression level failure due to crushing of masonry itself.
So, we developed expressions for each zone based on the Mann-Muller criterion. We
have τ is equal to reduced cohesion plus μ into σy, where μ again is reduced friction
coefficient being the first criterion. If you use that criterion you would get the first set of
dotted lines in the first zone. It can it will basically overlap at some point or become
higher in value in terms of tau with respect to the second criterion right.
What I am talking about is, I am examining this line here I have the expression for τ, I
have the expression. Now, beyond a certain range of σy, the second expression failure
due to shear tension becomes the more critical one that is the lower of the three values
would be for the intermediate ranges of axial compression, the criterion governed by
shear tension failure.
So, you see that in the central zone, the equation represented by
f bt 
= 1+ y
2.3 f bt
That becomes the lowest failure stress shear stress with respect to σy for the intermediate
zone. And for the third zone we have the third line,
x
 = (f u −  y )
2 y
And you see that value becomes the lowest value of shear stress τ as a function of σy.
So, you basically can use these three expressions for the material strengths available to
you for a given case. Draw these three different lines governed by different equations the
lowest of the three will form the failure surface. So, what you see in red overlapping the
337
three black dotted lines is the failure plane. Of course, this failure plane is going to be
affected by the relative strengths that we have considered here, the value of cohesion, the
value of friction coefficient, the value of tensile strength of the unit, the value of failure
crushing strength of masonry and it is also going to be dependent on the ratio Δx by Δy.
So, geometry and material properties are going to affect what the failure plane is for a
given wall or a given failure zone that we are examining in a masonry wall itself. So, this
is the failure domain that is representing the biaxial state of stress under lateral force and
compression due to axial forces dead weight and pre-compression from superimposed
loads. So, this is the extension of the Mann-Muller criterion which is now given as a
basis to get a failure plane, but mind you we are still working at the level of stresses.
We need to do that because there are specific limitations of the Mann-Muller theory.
Primarily, as I said if you were to use this sort of a criterion in design or you were to
examine the states of stresses in a building, every masonry panel at every different point
is going to have a different value of stress right. So, it is actually lot of simplification if
we were to just estimate the failure stress at one point using this in a masonry panel using
this, set of using the failure plane that we have just arrived at.
The other aspect is the state of stress is non-homogenous and therefore, defining failure
planes at the level of stress is a problematic affair. Also considering the fact that we
know that strengths in one direction versus the other direction is going to be different in
338
masonry. We have also seen from the work, the experimental work that I presented of
Page that there is going to be difference in the failure mechanism at different orientations
of the principle stresses with the bed joint. So, you are not looking at a state of stress that
is very easy to capture.
The other problem is Mann-Muller criterion is really not taking into account any
redistribution after crack formation occurs in the masonry panel that is under
examination. So, there is going to be stress redistribution the moment there is some
inelasticity and therefore, the set of expressions that we have assumed are on the basis of
a linear elastic set of calculations. And we are then using failure strength, then using
material strengths to be able to establish criteria. So, this redistribution is something that
is not going to be considered in your in the expressions or the failure plane itself.
And the other important aspect is if you look at the way codes define design procedures,
it is not at the state of stresses that we work. We will it will be easier for us to work on
stress resultants. And therefore, it is useful to have these expressions extended to stress
resultants if possible. So, if you are looking at limit state approach or if you are looking
at a performance based approach and if limit states can be designed both for unreinforced
masonry and reinforced masonry if this then becomes an interesting criterion an
interesting set of expression that you could use to define the interaction.
And I was mentioning the lateral force axial force lateral force H and the axial force N
interaction in masonry walls. We could have that done for unreinforced masonry and
extend the same thing to reinforce masonry as well. So, we will work here after on force
resultants on the wall panels themselves ok.
339
So, to start examining in-plane strength, we are now examining the in-plane strength of a
masonry wall and again in a way similar to the different zones that we examined in the
failure plane which was the end result of application of the Mann-Muller criterion, you
had low pre-compression, moderate or intermediate levels of pre-compression and high
pre-compression.
The same three situations can be considered where the first failure mechanism that we
will try and examine is a flexural dominated mechanism, which means the wall when it
is subjected to deformation, when it undergoes deformation due to the lateral force and in
the presence of axial compression. So, here the geometry comes in, depending on the
aspect ratio, if you are looking at a slender wall in all probability you can get a flexure
dominated mechanism, meaning the you have one region where there is uplift in the wall
and one region where there is increased compression in the wall. So, the increased
compression if the pre-compression levels are high can lead us to flexural crushing
mechanisms, whereas on the other end you are actually getting cracking which is tensile
cracking of under flexure.
So, the first mechanism that we can examine and have overall expressions for is a
flexure, flexure dominated mechanism or in-plane flexure dominate mechanism. And
then we will examine the other two mechanisms which is again the shear sliding
mechanism that we saw where the there is a failure in the joint, which is the shear
340
dominated behavior, and then the formation of the diagonal cracks, the x-cracking which
is again a shear mechanism rather than a flexure mechanism.
And in this clearly there is a role of the aspect ratio of the wall and that something that
you must keep in mind; there is the role of the aspect ratio of the wall first and there is
also the role played by the boundary conditions that exist in the wall, whether you have
rotations free at the top, the wall is cantilevered with respect to its vertical boundary
conditions, it is free to rotate at the top or is it restrained again rotations at the top.
So, two aspects that will come into play as far as the geometry and boundary condition
are the aspect ratio and the whether the wall is free to rotate at the top or are there
restraints to rotation at the top, we will examine a wall which is free to rotate
cantilevered in the lateral deformed shape or shear deformation profile because of the top
rotational restraint.
And then of course, we have already examined the role played by the material strengths.
You can have the relative strengths between the bed joint shear strength, the compression
strength of masonry and the tensile strength of masonry. Earlier we had looked at in the
Mann-Muller criterion, the second criterion was when the tensile strength of the unit was
reached, but now you are not going to examining it in terms of the unit or the mortar, you
are going to be looking at tensile strength of masonry.
So, instead fbt, we will start looking at the tensile strength of masonry and that is where
the diagonal compression test that we looked at earlier as an estimate of the tensile
strength of masonry starts becoming useful. So, let us examine the first criterion. The
first mechanism, the in-plane flexural mechanism and here we really considering a wall
that has boundary conditions at the top and the bottom.
It is free on the two the lateral edges of course, that is an ideal situation you might have a
condition where there is a return wall, the wall is flanged you can have the spandrel of a
wall can also be a lateral boundary condition. However, we are examining an idealized
case, where the wall is free on the lateral edges and is subjected to its self-weight and
there is superimposed gravity loads and there is lateral load acting on the wall.
So, we really examining self-weight of the wall given as P, there is superimposed load,
we can assume that there is depending on the boundary conditions assume that there is
341
some to eccentricity of the superimposed loads, and there is lateral force acting on the
wall designated as H, length of the wall as l and height of the wall is h.
So, if you were to examine the resultant forces that we need to be working on you have
resultant axial force N, you have resultant shear force H, and the moment which is acting
on the wall because of the lateral force and the height of the wall h. So, we are going to
be examining the forces in different segments and we are assuming that the resultant
forces are all contained within the middle plane of the wall itself.
And we can write down the equilibrium equations for the two conditions the vertical
equilibrium and the rotational equilibrium in the system. So, from the vertical
equilibrium, the axial force at the bottom is the summation of the self-weight and the
axial force superimposed at the top. Therefore, it is important for you to be careful where
you are making the estimates of the stress.
If you are making the estimates of the stress distribution in the wall at the mid height,
then be careful about the contribution of the self-weight that is being considered. If you
are at the top there is no contribution of the self-weight, if you are at the bottom you have
a full contribution of the self-weight of the wall, so this you will have to careful and in
what plane are you making the calculations.
So, if you are typically looking at flexural compression failure right, I would be
interested to look at the flexural compression failure at the bottom of the wall because
that is where the flexural compression value is going to be the maximum- at the
compressed edge. But, if you are interested to look at the diagonal tension failure,
diagonal tension failure would typically begin from the mid height of the of the wall
panel itself.
And therefore, for that remember we made the calculations at the center of the brick unit
in a similar manner, so the entire wall panel typically shear cracks, diagonal shear cracks
would start at the mid span because of the maximum shear stress distribution being at the
mid height of the wall itself. And there your calculations are going to be at mid height of
the wall.
And therefore, you should be considering the contribution of axial, the self-weight as
being of one half of the wall itself. So, though we are working on stress resultants, you
342
have to be very careful about where we are defining the failure in the wall itself. The
lateral force into the height of the wall is equilibrated by the moment at the top and the
moment at the bottom.
And here the moment at the top and the moment at the bottom are represented as the
axial force resultant at the top into the eccentricity at the top and the axial stress resultant
at the bottom into eccentricity at the bottom itself ok.
So, we start examining in-plane flexural mechanism. We look at three different stages. I
would first refer to the tensile cracking stage. So, as the wall is being subjected to lateral
forces and gravity, you can have cracking at the base of the wall right. And as cracking
progresses, there is reduction in the area available for equilibrating the combination of
lateral forces and gravity forces. And then finally, at ultimate you have reduced area and
possibly crushing occurring in the wall that is the mechanism that we are examining.
So, stage I of tensile cracking, let us look at a wall which has a thickness of t, length l, it
is subjected to axial force N and a moment M. So, what is actually happening is, at this
stage, we are assuming that the distribution of stresses is linear elastic, triangular
distribution is seen and part of the wall cross section can actually go in to tension
depending on the relative values of M and N.
343
And therefore, if you are assuming that there is significant pre-compression in the wall,
significant lateral forces required for cracking to occur. Let us assume a situation where
tensile stresses have now occurred in the wall, you have a part of the wall cross section
that is subjected to tensile stresses. The rest is in compression, edge compressive stress
sigma, and the eccentricity of the axial force resultant N is e with respect to the centre
line of the wall itself.
Now, here we have the wall is subjected to tension perpendicular to the bed joint and
therefore, we are interested in the tensile strength of the bed joint with tension acting
perpendicular to the bed joint f mt. Now, you could assume that the wall has zero tensile
strength or assume that f mt is a finite value.
If fmt is a finite value, cracking is going to occur only when the tensile stress reaches fmt,
if you assume that the wall has zero tensile strength, then the moment you have tension
when we have the limiting eccentricity, you will start getting cracking in the wall itself.
So, assuming that the bed joint tensile strength here is fmt, the cracking moment can be
written with the knowledge of the tensile strength of the bed joint itself, again
representing the moment as the axial stress resultant, axial force resultant N into the
eccentricity e. And in this case, we are writing it as the axial stress plus the stress coming
from the bending.
And with this additional resistance available which is the tensile strength of the bed joint
f mt non-zero value, we write down the, this is with respect to the this is the section
modulus of the cross section of thickness t of thickness t and length l. Now, if you use
the same expression and take f mt to 0, then you get the classical condition where this
cracking is occurring when eccentricity is equal to l/6.
So, this is the first stage, this is the first stage. So, I think a typical confusion we have
been having with all students doing this particular exercise, this is the first stage of a
three-stage loading. Therefore, this failure mechanism, this failure mechanism is not an
ultimate failure mechanism. This is under serviceability condition. Cracking is occurring
under serviceability conditions, it is not an ultimate limit state.
The ultimate limit state for me is the crushing failure of the wall. What is happened now
is tensile flexure cracking, but that is not an ultimate limit state. It is only a; it is only one
344
of the initial states or at least the serviceability limit state. So, as this progresses the
ultimate limit state is going to be the flexural crushing in the wall itself.
So, what is important is when you are estimating the failure mechanism, the moment
corresponding to the ultimate condition crushing you cannot compare that to M crack.
Mcrack is at a serviceability level, M crack is at a serviceability level, but M u is ultimate

limit state right. We will come back to this point because you cannot compare M crack.
And M u they are not at the same levels of demand they are at very different levels of
demand, one is serviceability, the other is ultimate ok.
Stage II is post-cracking, post-cracking you have reduced cross section and now
equilibrium is on the partial section of the cross section. So, the portion that has
undergone uplift because of the direction of the lateral force, you refer to that as the heel
of the wall, and the other end which is now experiencing higher pre-compression is the
toe of the wall. So, you have toe going towards increased compression levels and can fail
in crushing.
So, we refer to the mechanism as toe crushing, but what is happened that the
serviceability state is heel cracking right. So, heel cracking is when tensile strength of the
bed joint is reached serviceability limits state toe crushing will occur at the ultimate. So,
let us examine this post-cracking phase in the wall, the axial stress levels in the wall at fa,
the vertical stress the average vertical stress in the wall equal to fa. And we are
345
considering now a partial section which is the hatched blue region that is what is
equilibrating the combination of H and the axial load, the superimposed load and the
self-weight of the wall.
However, what you see here is that the distribution of stresses is still considered to be
linear elastic ok. So, we are in the post-cracking phase, but still linear elastic. The
inelasticity that we have assumed is cracking and neglecting the area of cross section in
tension itself. So, in this the set of notations that we are using the compressed length of
the wall is η as a part of l, η is when the wall is not cracked eta is equal to l, but now the
partial length is η given the triangular distribution of the stresses, the stress result the
axial force resultant is sitting at one-third at the centroid of the triangular distribution.
And therefore, η/3 from the compressed edge is where the resultant is sitting and with
respect to the center line of the wall the eccentricity is e. With this triangular distribution,
we have done this earlier for the out of plane flexural mechanism. We can write down
the equilibrium and then get an estimate for the compressed length eta which is the
length over which the combination of lateral force and axial force is being achieved.
So, from the vertical equilibrium, the axial force P is σv into the area of cross section.
And from the rotational equilibrium h lateral force into the height h of the wall is equal
to the axial force P into e, and therefore, we get an estimate of the eccentricity which is
H by P, lateral force by P, ratio of the lateral force to the axial force in to height h.
From this distribution, from the triangular distribution, we get the edge compressive
stress fm, currently the edge compressive stress is fm, it is still within elastic range, but
this will approach fu or the crushing strength of masonry. And this is going to be equal to
2 times P by t into the length of the compressed zone which is the triangular area itself.
2P 4P
fm = =
t  e
3tl  1 − 2 
 l
So, when this edge compressive strength approaches the compressive strength, we have a
we have the limiting value of lateral force for which the failure in crushing is expected.
346
So, we have got this expression now of the edge compressive stress. We go to the third
stage which is the ultimate stage of the demand and the capacity of the wall which is toe
crushing itself. At the compressed toe, you will have crushing of the masonry. And so for
the same condition, we now assume that the distribution of compression at the
compressed segment of the wall is non-linear ok. So, it is only in the last stage that we
assume a non-linear distribution of the stress in the compressed zone, the compressed
zone is now further reduced.
In this case like we did for the case of out of plane bending, we can assume that an
equivalent stress block can be used to represent the parabolic distribution of stresses. We
use equivalent stress block parameters write own the equilibrium in the stress block and
then use that with respect to the crushing strength of masonry to be able to arrive at the
ultimate lateral force or represented in terms of the ultimate moment at which failure is
occurring.
So, stress block parameter is here. We take the value of K here, Kappa here as varying
between 0.75 and 1. And these are values that will actually depend on the type of
material. So, in this case, value between 0.75 and 1 can be assumed depending on the
type of masonry, you are looking at as the height of the stress block. And the dimensions
of the stress block, the length of the stress block itself, ‘a’ being the side dimension of
347
the rectangle divided by x which is the parabolic distribution, length of the parabolic
distribution a by x varying between 0.67 and 0.85 is a good estimate.
So, the average compressive stress is the axial force divided by l into t and from vertical
equilibrium we now have equilibrium provided by the stress block itself.
So, N into this is the eccentricity that we are looking at and therefore, you have the stress
resultant sitting at the center of the rectangular block. So, N(l/2 – a/2), which is where
the resultant is sitting, so that is your e. So, N into e is defined. We have expression for
the value of a, we bring this into this expression and we have a final expression for the
ultimate moment with the knowledge of the axial compressive stress level and the
compressive strength of masonry fmc, this.
Student: Sir, here x is the parabolic distribution, a is?
a is the rectangular stress block, x is the it is the values given here, just give you values
that are used to equate the parabolic stress distribution to an equivalent stress block. And
research suggests that the size of the stress block which depends on the type of masonry
that you are looking at can have values ranging from 0.75 to 1 of f u as the height of the
stress block and the width of the stress block as a ratio of a divided by x between 0.67
and 0.85.
So, you can assume values between these for different types of masonry. And therefore,
now you have an expression for the ultimate moment M u given these given the
knowledge of the axial compression level and the compressive strength of masonry,
basically considering that failure is occurring under a flexure dominated mechanism of
toe crushing itself.
Nl  N  0 l 2 t  0 
Mu =  1 − = 1− 
2    f mc lt  2    f mc 
So, this corresponds to the third failure criterion that we looked at in the Mann-Muller
criterion right.
So, as I said earlier I repeat that M crack and M u are not at the same level. M crack is at the
serviceability condition. So, you cannot assume that M crack is a failure criterion in the
348
wall, it is only a cracking limit state; it is a serviceability limit state; M u is the ultimate
limit state in the wall itself.
There is one there is a special case of this flexural mechanism, which is if the aspect ratio
of the wall is such that the wall is still going to be dominated by flexural mechanisms.
Let us assume the wall is of an aspect ratio such that the height of the wall is much larger
than the length of the wall.
So, it is a slender wall not a squat wall. When it is a slender wall, most often it is going
to be dominated by flexural mechanisms. But what we have looked at in the previous
slides is when the pre-compression levels were significant, but if the pre-compression
level is not significant can you still have a flexural mechanism that is the pre-
compression level was, it was essential that the pre-compression level was high to have
toe crushing in masonry, yes.
Now, if the level of pre-compression is not high, the problem is you might not reach
crushing failure at the toe, which means the wall is going to continue to carry the gravity
forces and not get crushed. This is particularly the case when the level of pre-
compression is very low. So, you have a slender wall, but if you have this is top story
wall or if it is a single storeyed structure and the wall its aspect ratio is such that it is
slender, you can still have a flexure mechanism, but it was it will not fail in crushing, but
it will rock.
349
So, in this particular case, we are really examining a situation of low axial compression.
This axial compression expressed as a ratio with respect to the compressive strength of
masonry. We refer to this as the axial stress ratio, which is pre-compression level sigma
not divided by the crushing strength of masonry fmc. If this value is really low and if it is
a single storeyed structure slender wall, this is going to be a significantly low value.
We are going to be looking at point we are going to be looking about 2 percent of the
compressive strength less than 5 percent of the compressive strength. When we are in
that sort of a situation, it can still be dominated by a flexural mechanism. However,
crushing will not occur, but rigid rocking will occur right. So, this is an extension of the
flexural mechanism, crushing failure is not going to occur, but rocking is going to occur.
So, if the pre-compression level is low, then with even a small amount of lateral force if
the bed joint tensile strength is not high, you can have cracking at the base of the wall. If
the pre-compression level is low and the tensile strength of the joint is low with a little
level of little magnitude of lateral force, you can start getting cracking heel cracking can
occur.
But once heel cracking occurs and continues since the pre-compression levels are low,
you can have significant part of the wall that undergoes cracking. With the condition that
you only have almost a hinge at the other end which is equilibrating right and that is this,
this point O, the level of pre-compression is so low and the bed joint tensile strength is
also low in masonry.
So, with the little bit of lateral force, you can get the heel cracking that is going to be
significant enough with respect to the cross section, leaving only a very small cross
section in compression; still active in compression. Eta value is going to be significantly
small in comparison to the length of the wall.
In the extreme case, it is a point you just have a point. But the level of pre-compression
is so low that and the strength of masonry in compression is if it is good, then at that
edge O you will never get crushing, the wall will continue to simply rock. And so it is
overturning mechanism ultimate failure will be when the stability is reached and you will
get a overturning, but you will not get a cross section failing in crushing in compression.
350
So, this is the special case. So, if we were to look at this rigid block now, the wall panel
acts like a rigid block. It is got a failure plane that has formed at the bottom because of
tensile cracking, but equilibrium is maintained by this hinge at O itself. So, if I take the
equilibrium of the rigid block around O at ultimate the lateral force H u into height h
equilibrated by summation of N and P into length by 2.
And therefore, you can get an expression,
l
H u (N + P)
2h
And you see that this is not governed by any material strength, this is not governed by
any material strength, it is purely geometry. You can get rocking mechanism, you can get
over turning mechanism. Under lying assumption is that the material strength in
comparison is significantly high which is true for masonry.
And when you look at low axial compression levels, this value of sigma naught by f mc
can be very low. So, the axial stress ratio being low you can get this special case of
flexural mechanism which is flexural rocking. So, if you were to use the previous
expression in the previous expression, this is going to 0.
This axial stress ratio is going to 0 for us and that goes to 0 your equilibrium comes
merely from the axial force level and the geometry itself, you will get the overturning
mechanism which is a rigid rocking that occurs in the wall. So, this is a special case that
we can consider of flexural mechanism itself. So, if you have slender wall, flexural
mechanism with low pre-compression can undergo overturning of flexural rocking,
otherwise you can see the failure of the compressed toe itself. So, we have examined the
first of the mechanisms and we have two more to examine which we will do in the next
class.
351
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 03
Lecture – 20
Strength and Behavior of Masonry Part – X
So, good afternoon; we will continue examining the different mechanisms; in-plane
mechanisms we looked at as an extension of the Mann Muller criterion which works at
the level of stresses. The extension which looks at resultant forces and we have examined
one of the criteria based on the flexural failure mechanism in the last class.
So, the flexural failure mechanism, when the formulation is made, the formulation is
based on a flexural compression failure occurring at the compressed toe. However, we
also saw that is a special case of that situation; if the axial compression level- the pre
compression levels are low; then you could have rigid rocking of the wall in the in-plane
direction itself. So, that is the special case, the overturning as a failure mechanism is a
special case of the flexural in plane flexural mechanism itself; we will examine the other
two mechanisms.
But before we move on to the shear dominated behavior; it is useful to look at what is the
cyclic response of a wall that is governed by a flexural rocking or a flexural crushing
352
mechanism itself. So, what I am going to be looking at is the hysteretic behavior right.
So, since the elaboration of these capacities and force displacement behavior is being
done primarily with respect to response of masonry; response of unreinforced masonry to
earthquake actions, it is important to examine the hysteretic behavior which is cyclic
behavior; earthquake being reverse cyclic behavior in nature. And therefore, if we were
to examine and compare the in-plane response for the flexural mechanisms and the in-
plane response for shear mechanisms, we get rather good understanding of how
deformation capacities available in a masonry wall. What is the status of energy
dissipation in the masonry wall and where does introducing steel reinforcement and
making un-reinforced masonry to reinforced masonry really contribute.
So, it is in that context we will start examining hysteretic behavior and though some of
you may not be familiar with cyclic response; static cyclic response is what we are trying
to capture here. It is not from dynamic analysis or dynamic behavior, but from a static or
a quasi-static behavior. But it will be useful to look at these graphs to get a better
understanding of how masonry walls respond to reverse cyclic loading.
So, if we were to look at the flexural dominated mechanism, rocking or the rocking
effect ultimately leading to crushing of the compressed toe in a brick masonry wall. I am
looking at laboratory tests because you can examine these in a controlled environment;
you can apply perfect in-plane loads in an earthquake, you have a combination of actions
coming on to a masonry wall because of the randomness of the ground motion itself.
So, we are looking at a laboratory test where the wall panel that you are looking at is a
shear wall; it is subjected to gravity loads. So, the actuators that you see at the top, the
jacks that you see at the top are actually subjecting the wall to a desired level of pre
compression and this is to idealize the gravity forces superimposed on the wall itself.
So, if we were to look at this wall as a ground storey wall in a multi storey building, then
I can regulate the precompression level based on what is the expected precompression
level in the ground storey wall. If it were a single storied wall, you reduce the pre
compression levels such that probably only the weight of the parapet and the slab is the
superimposed load on the wall itself.
So, it is a convenient way of introducing the level of superimposed load and then
subjecting the wall to lateral forces. In this case, you have the you have the actuator in
353
the lateral direction which is applying the in-plane shear forces, trying to simulate the
kind of damage that is expected in an earthquake, but under a quasi static condition of
loading itself.
So, the wall has boundary conditions, you can fix it at the base the top is free to rotate
and so you again are able to mimic the boundary conditions expected in a real building.
If you want to prevent the rotations at the top, then you can create a setup which does not
allow rotations at the top and takes you towards the shear deformation profile of the wall
itself. But those are important choices that have to be made before such a test is carried
out.
So, what you are seeing are tests conducted in our laboratory; you see a masonry wall,
this was constructed using fly ash bricks. And as you see, it is rather slender meaning the
height is more than the the length of the wall itself. And typically, we refer to walls as
slender walls when the height to length ratio is greater and about 1.5.
So, this is a slender wall that we are examining. And as you can see the black lines that
you see at the bottom are actually the cracks that are formed as the wall is subjected to
the lateral force under the presence of gravity forces. And this is reversed cyclic, so you
go from the 0 position to a positive maximum, come back to 0 then you unload and then
to go to the negative maximum and come back.
So, it is cyclic, but reversed cyclic positive and negative cycles and that is why you see
that the crack at the base; the black line that you see at the base on both the ends, the
tension, the heel cracking is happening at both the ends with the reversed cyclic loading.
And if the level of pre compression is low; considering that this is a slender wall, you
can even get the entire cross section that can get cracked. And depending on the pre
compression level, again you might get a shear sliding failure or you might get rocking
of the wall itself.
So, this is a case that underwent rocking and the hysteretic behavior which is captured
from the experiment; you get the cyclic response of the structure of the wall. And then
we look at an envelope curve over all the cycles that the wall is taken through. So, the
thick black line that you see here; the thick black line that you see in the positive
quadrant and the negative quadrant is the envelope curve. That is the envelop of the
overall response and represents the force displacement behavior in the positive cyclic
354
and in the negative cycle. And typically, we look at either both or an average of the two
or the positive curve and the negative curve whichever is the absolute maximum of the
response itself.
So, what we are actually observing here is a wall that has undergone rocking. There are a
few aspects that you need to understand from such a hysteretic curve; what you are
seeing is force versus displacement. So, from the envelope curve at the maximum
displacement versus a sort of a yield displacement that could be defined.
And defining what is the yield displacement of the wall is something that is subjective
empirical; it could vary depending on the method that you use to establish what the yield
displacement is. Because you do not see very clearly like in reinforced concrete systems
or in steel systems, the phenomenon of yielding is not seen so clearly in a material like
masonry. And therefore, it becomes subjective depending on the method that you
choose; the estimate of the yield displacement itself.
If you were to make an estimate of the yield displacement and then look at the maximum
displacement that the wall is capable of resisting. And if I have now ratio of the
maximum displacement to the yield displacement, the ratio gives me the displacement
ductility of the wall itself.
So, from the envelope curve it is possible to get an estimate of the deformation capacity
of the wall, quantified in terms of ductility available in the wall, 2. If you look at each
loop which is the force-displacement excursion in the positive and the negative. And if
you look at one excursion; the area under the curve is representing the energy dissipated
in one cycle.
Of course, in the elastic cycles you do not have energy dissipation and as you start seeing
damage in the wall that is when cracking is occurring and there is energy dissipation. So,
particularly in the elastic cycles; in each force displacement loop in a cycle the area
under the force displacement loop is the energy dissipated.
When you look at flexural rocking mechanisms in comparison to shear dominated

mechanisms, there are two things that are typically observed. One is that significant
deformation capacity is available in the wall. That is since the wall is rocking and if the
pre-compression levels are low, it can continue to undergo rigid rocking. The pre-
355
compression levels are heavy are high, then you can get flexural compression failure at
the compressed toe.
So, in this particular mechanism, because of the rocking behavior deformation capacities
or the ductility that is available in the system is significant. For an unreinforced system;
this is the maximum displacement ductility that you might get. And if you actually
qualitatively look at the graph, you can see that delta max is about 3 to 4 times the yield
displacement, ok.
So, your question was in the case of significant pre-compression levels; failure in a
flexural mechanism is expected by the crushing of the compressed toe. Yes, so what
typically would happen in a reverse cyclic scenario is that one of the toes; one of the toes
would reach crushing failure at the beginning of a cycle that is taking the wall to the
maximum displacement.
So, with that we have to stop the test because we have seen failure in the wall and we do
not bring it back because then it causes instability due to one end already crushed and
symmetry lost in the wall. So, typically that is observed in the figure that we have been
seeing in the other class. You see that the crushing failure is always at one end; so we
stop at that point as far as a test is concerned.
So, what I was mentioning earlier is that if you look at this graph; qualitatively you will
say that the maximum displacement is 3 to 4 or even more than the yield displacement.
So, depending on the typology of masonry; this ratio can vary and we are not
immediately examining this number. But I would like you to keep in mind the fact that
the displacement ductility is significantly higher, when you have flexural rocking
mechanisms in comparison to shear mechanisms.
The second thing that you see is of course, we have not compared this hysteretic
behavior with any other mechanism; any other hysteretic curve particularly dominated by
shear mechanism. But what you observe are these loops of hysteresis are rather narrow
loops ok; are rather narrow loops implying that the area under the loop is going to be
small and the energy dissipated. If you were to estimate what is the area under the loop
for the force displacement curve, you will see that it is small in comparison to other
mechanisms or if you were to reinforce a wall.
356
So, the point is and the reason why it is low; energy dissipation is low is that you get a
tensile heel crack formed in the wall and probably that might extend to about 80, 85
percent of the length of the wall. And if the wall were not going to crush at the
compressed toe; then the wall is simply going to go rocking back and forth.
There is no possibility of energy dissipation in the wall; it is already a pre-formed crack

plane that you have and it is just going, rocking along that crack plane, there is no further
inelasticity occurring in the system to dissipate energy. So, a hysteretic behavior in in-
plane flexural mechanism is typically characterized by good deformation capacity, good
ductility, but low energy dissipation capacity.
And that is a little bit of a paradox because when you have earthquake response when
you want good earthquake response; you want good deformation capacity, but you also
want good energy dissipation. And that is a difficult to achieve if your wall is
unreinforced; once you reinforce your wall, it is then possible for you to achieve the
deformation capacity, but also have good energy dissipation.
So, unreinforced masonry in earthquake applications does not make too much of sense
because you will not be able to achieve these twin requirements for good earthquake
response. Now, energy dissipation is the input energy into a system during an earthquake
has to be dissipated by way of formation of damage, right.
A system is able to absorb the input energy and convert that input energy into something.
Because that energy, if a large energy is input into the structure; it has to find a way of
losing that energy or converting that energy into something. If you have a wall that is
capable of deforming inelastically, but not failing, not reaching any failure mechanism
that is a successful system because you are able to dissipate energy and yet remain stable
for.
Student: Ductility right, sir that is ductility.
That is ductility. So, you have deformation capacity, but deformation capacity alone is
not sufficient. Because there is input energy into a system and you need to be able to
dissipate energy which is the earthquake energy that is input into the system from the
ground.
357
Now, rocking is good but if you look at the hysteretic curve for rocking; it is typically a
thin curve. You are not able to dissipate energy by rocking alone. You are able to get the
displacement capacity the displacement good displacement behavior, but you are not
able to dissipate energy, you need to achieve both yeah. So let us keep this in mind and
comeback when we examine the shear deformation behavior itself.
Let us move on to the in-plane shear mechanisms and the in plane shear mechanisms of
interest to us in plane direction. There are two major shear failure modes that can be
identified as independent shear failure modes. However, life is not so straight forward,
we can have a combination of failure modes and that is a problem. Because it can start
making it difficult to have clean closed form solution from each mechanism; when you
have combined modes it becomes a problem to work with these expressions; however,
this is a good starting point.
So, the two shear failure modes are the diagonal cracking mode; in the Mann Muller
criterion we have examined this which is the formation of the tension cracks, the
diagonal tension cracks in the center of the brick. And we used a formulation based on
when the principal tension reaches the tensile strength of the unit. It is based on a similar
approach diagonal cracking is occurring when the principal tension reaches the tensile
strength of masonry. So, that is your first mechanism of shear failure.
358
The second mechanism of shear failure is what we have seen earlier, the shear sliding
failure which way which is expected to occur at a bed joint. There will be a critical bed
joint and typically we are looking at the bed joint; which has the maximum pre -
compression level. Typically, where the maximum demand is also coming and therefore,
it could be the first bed joint layer level or the second bed joint level or so on.
So, shear sliding is the second criterion; now this criterion is what you would, this failure
mode is what you would link with in the Mann Muller criterion where we had the failure
of the mortar joint. We had a formulation based on the Mohr Coulomb criterion where
the failure of the mortar joint was one of the failure modes. In fact, the first failure mode
that we looked at that was a Mohr Coulomb criterion; tau is equal to cohesion plus mu
into sigma. The shear sliding criterion can be defined with respect to that sort of a basis.
So, these two failure modes of course, as I said mixed modes are possible. And you will
see a body of literature that tries to understand how to capture the capacity and the
failure mechanism; if you have a combination of modes. You will typically have a
combination of modes, it does not mean that right from the beginning of the lateral force
displacement; force displacement behavior of the wall; that is always going to be shear
sliding dominated or diagonal cracking dominated or flexural dominated.
It might begin in one; you might get tensile heal cracking, area of cross section reduces
because of the cracking of the critical section. And then depending on the axial stress
levels, you can also see a change in the behavior of the wall. So, this is quite possible
that you get mixed modes.
However, with respect to the diagonal tension failure, again you can have two
mechanisms; if the crack is actually splitting the stone, splitting the brick; you can have
the line crack. And then if you have the crack not splitting the stone, but actually
following the joint; you will have the stepped failure. And here the criterion that matters
is the the bed joint strength versus the unit strength in tension itself. So, this is a further
aspect that needs to considered as far as the diagonal cracking mechanism is concerned.
So, extending the Mann Muller theory and then using it with respect to these force
resultants; the criteria to define and have a closed form expression for the two shear
failure modes are the maximum principal stress criterion; where we are saying that the
maximum principal tension, when it approaches the tensile strength of masonry you get
359
diagonal cracks. And the other failure criterion is based on the Mohr Coulomb criterion
for explaining the joint sliding that is occurring in the masonry wall.
So, we will examine the formulations based on these two criteria.
The first one being the maximum tensile stress criterion; here if you look at masonry
panels that are subjected to both shear and compression. It has been demonstrated that
the shear strength of the panel is reached when diagonal cracks are formed. And diagonal
cracks are formed typically from the center and again I make reference to the Mann
Muller criterion, where they were looking at the tension cracks in the brick unit forming
at the center. And we have to take into account the dimension of the brick to be able to
change the shear stress defined at the joint, to the shear stress at the center of the brick
unit.
So, similarly here typically this sort of a failure mechanism sees the onset of diagonal
cracks at the center of the panel. And these are diagonal tension cracks, they are due to
shear tension which means we can actually we use a principal tension criterion to
estimate the lateral force required to cross this sort of a failure mechanism.
So, we are talking of a combination of shear stress developed because of the lateral force
in the presence of a normal stress an average normal stress in the wall σz and τxz
assuming we are talking of the xz plane itself. The hypothesis in this particular criterion
360
is that shear failure is occurring, when the principle tensile stress reaches a value of the
tensile strength of masonry.
Now, again with respect to the Mann Muller criterion; for the Mann Muller criterion we
were talking of the tensile strength of the brick unit. But here we are interested in the
tensile strength of the masonry, right. Now, what is the tensile strength of the masonry
that is relevant in this context, we are talking of a value that can be established with the
test like the diagonal compression test.
The diagonal compression test was used to estimate the shear strength of masonry, but in
that context, I was mentioning that the strength ftu that you estimate from the diagonal
compression test is also referred to as the conventional or referential tensile strength of
masonry right. So, this is the sort of value, an estimate of the tensile strength of masonry
that we are talking of because the failure is in the principal tension itself.
So, with this; in this context if you examine the Mohr circle; the state of stress in the wall
τxz versus σz; τxz in the shear stress and sigma z the normal stress gives us the principal
stresses σc and σt principal compression principal tension. This estimate of sigma t is
what we require we equate to the tensile strength of masonry and we have a criterion.
So, the principal tensile stress itself here σt is the principal tension form the Mohr circle,
you can estimate what is the actual value of σt itself; knowing the value of the shear
stress and knowing the value of the average normal stress acting on the wall. This is then
equated to ftu that is the tensile strength of masonry; the assembly masonry itself. So, this
is the criterion that we use.
361
Now, of course, the previous expression was defined in terms of stresses. But we are
talking of being able to do this in terms of force resultants. And therefore, we need to
now transfer from the state of stress to the force resultants especially to define what is
the ultimate lateral force capacity of the wall; if it were to fail in a diagonal tension
criterion. So, since this crack occurs at the center of the panel; we are interested in
looking at the stresses defined at the center of the panel. The normal stress at the panel;
N being the superimposed load divided by the area of cross section l into t and the shear
stress.
Now, the shear stress is going to be affected; you know that the shear stress distribution
in any cross section along the height is not uniform. It reaches a maximum, if you take a
rectangular cross section in a beam that is subjected to vertical shear itself; you get a
parabolic distribution with the peak shear stress being at the neutral axis.
So, the shear stress distribution is not going to be uniform. So, working with the average
stress is tricky because the average shear stress might not be able to give you a value that
is close to the value for which cracking is going to occur. So, this is observed to be
affected significantly by the aspect ratio of the wall.
So, we introduce an estimate of the shear stress corrected by a factor that actually takes
into account what the aspect ratio of the wall is; what is the role of the aspect ratio of the
wall is. So, while the average normal stress is adopted as it is for the shear stress, we
362
make a correction based on the aspect ratio of the wall. And you know the aspect ratio of
a wall has a role to play in whether it is going to be dominated by flexural mechanisms
or whether it is going to be dominated by shear mechanisms.
So, here τ0 is the average shear stress and you see that the average shear stress is nothing,
but H/lt. So, that is going to give you the average shear stress, but there is a deviation
from this average shear stress to be able to estimate what is the maximum shear stress we
use this aspect ratio. We; we bring in the aspect ratio in the form of this constant term b
and I will explain what is this constant term in a moment.
So, go back to the previous expression; now (τxz)2 that was there in the second part of the
under root is replaced with bτ. Now this factor is directly dependent on the aspect ratio of
the wall; H being the height of the wall and l being the length of the wall. And it is
observed that it is not possible to get an analytical form of what these should be. And
researchers worked on this subject have proposed empirical expressions that take care
rather well the effect of the geometry on the state of shear stress causing failure itself.
So, we are looking at this criterion developed in 1984; where the value of b ranges
between 1 and 1.5. When you are looking at slender walls with an aspect ratio greater
than 1.5, you take the value as 1.5; so, b will have a maximum value of 1.5. When you
are looking at Squat walls, where h by l is less than 1; the wall is longer than it is taller in
such a wall; it is a Squat wall, you limit value of b as 1; so b varies from 1 to 1.5. And in
the range 1 to 1.5; I mean in the range of h by l 1 to 1.5; the value of h by l will be taken
as b itself. So, in the range b 1 to 1.5, it will depend directly on the value of h by l.
So, with this expression, with this value that you can adopt based on the aspect ratio of
the wall for b; you will have a number times τ in the under root term. And you can use
the average stress; average normal stress value and the average shear stress value, in this
expression and write down the expression in terms of H which is what we require.
In the first expression for the failure governing the failure governed by the toe crushing;
we had the expression in terms of the ultimate moment. But knowing the height of the
wall you can estimate what is the lateral force corresponding to the ultimate moment. In
this expression again we bring in H into the expression and therefore, you can write
down the final expression in terms of H; simplifying the expression in the under root,
entire expression.
363
ftu lt 
Hu = 1+ 0
b ftu
So, you know the average axial stress, you know the area of cross section of the wall,
you know the tensile strength of masonry and you have an estimate based on the aspect
ratio of the wall h by l. And you can estimate at what value of lateral force is the
mechanism of diagonal tension cracking expected, ok.
So, that is the second mechanism. So, in this case the hysteretic behavior in the
discussion that we had for the flexural mechanism; let us extend it and examine what
happens in the shear mechanism. We typically see two important things; this is again a
test that was conducted by one of our masters students; the wall was made out of blocks,
it was concrete blocks. So, you can a shear failure mechanism in the wall, but the two
things that you will observe are first the deformation capacity is significantly lower than
in the wall which is governed by flexural rocking.
So, the deformation capacity; the fact that which shear you going to get brittle response
is true to an extent; you will get almost one half of the displacement capacity or the
ductility that you were getting with a wall that is governed by flexural rocking
mechanism; that is the first point. The second aspect is you do get energy dissipation
which is more than what you would get for flexural rocking.
364
Now, if it an unreinforced wall; you are going to have one signal crack that propagates
and becomes the surface on which the sliding is going to occur and can dissipate a
limited amount of energy. With reinforcement you can have multiple cracks, multiple
shear cracks that can actually help dissipate more energy.
So, the point that you need to note is with respect to the in-plane flexural rocking
mechanisms, displacement capacity is lower for shear dominated mechanisms one.
Almost one half is what you would get and the energy dissipation is comparatively
higher in this mechanism compared to the rigid rocking mechanism of in-plane behavior.
The behavior is therefore, brittle in this particular case, ok.
Let us examine the third criterion, the third criterion as I said is an extension of the joint
failure, mortar joint failure criterion that we examined in under the Mann Muller set of
expressions. So, we are examining again the normal stress and the shear stress as average
stresses. But what is important is as far as this criterion is concerned; we have to examine
the shear strength coming from only the compressed zone of the wall which means part
of the wall has already cracked and that may be tensile heel cracking, right.
We were talking of mixed modes. So, it is not like right from the beginning you are
going to have shear sliding occurring in the wall. Given geometry and given the level of
stress axial stress; it is not likely that you have one governing mechanism. So, let us say
you have a wall; which is subjected to lateral forces and axial forces. And as I mentioned
365
yesterday tensile heel cracking is a serviceability criterion right; it is not an ultimate
condition.
So, tensile heel cracking might happen depending on how much axial stress is acting on
the wall. Once that has occurred, the compressed length of the wall that is available for
equilibrating the lateral force and the gravity force is reduced. It is on that, that you will
have to calculate the shear capacity; if you are considering a coulomb type criterion,
right.
And in the earlier situation where we were looking at the diagonal tension failure; the
calculations were being carried out at the mid height of the panel, in the middle of the
panel. We do not have heel cracking at the middle of the panel, we have heel cracking at
the bottom of the panel.
So, this is the criterion where one has to be careful about what is the length of the
compressed zone in your estimate. And to reflect the importance of it I will just show
you that codes, when they look at estimating the shear capacity always work on
neglecting the zone in tension and keep only the compressed zone to estimate the shear
strength of a wall.
So, I am just examining couple of them; the eurocode format which is of course, based
on a different approach, in terms of design with respect to the is code. In the eurocode
the shear strength of an unreinforced force masonry wall is estimated as the shear
strength per unit area of masonry fvk is the notation for the shear strength of the masonry
that is used, multiplied by the estimate of the compressed length of the wall.
So, to check whether a wall has started cracking; you will need an estimate of whether
the combination of the lateral force and the gravity force can cause cracking. And what is
the eccentricity and then how would how much do you reduce the compressed length of
the wall itself.
I am just flagging this off because it is an important aspect as you use these equations to
estimate the strength according to the coulomb type failure criterion. So, code in this
particular case gives the shear strength, the characteristic shear strength of masonry as
being the shear strength per unit area into the length of the compressed zone into
thickness the area of the compressed zone itself.
366
The shear strength itself; just shear strength of masonry itself actually follows nothing,
but the Mohr Coulomb criterion that we have been talking of; even earlier.
fvk = fvk0 + 0.4d
So, this is really of the form shear strength τ = c + μσ.
So, this is really of the form that we have seen earlier tau is equal to C plus mu into
sigma which means fvk0 naught is really the shear strength of the joint; when there is no
axial compression which is nothing, but cohesion itself the bond. So, fvk0 is bound; fvk0 is
nothing but c and then the contribution from the friction depends on the level of pre
compression. So, σd is the average normal stress on the compressed area.
Now, if the compressed area is less than the total length then the stress can increase, the
normal stress can increase. So, the σd is defined on the compressed area and 0.4 is the
value that codes typically used for brick masonry friction coefficient. It can be higher in
reality, but 0.4 is a value that is used in the definition of a characteristic shear strength of
masonry itself.
Of course, codes also put a limit on this value when you might get the higher value of the
shear strength per unit area of the material. But it is the standard practice to limit this
particular value and there are different ways in which this can limited. Some codes go
empirical, some codes link it to the tensile strength the compressive strength of the unit.
In this particular case, you see that it is about 0.065 times the compressive strength of the
brick unit; it is just some information that we will complete the picture here.
367
The IS code; what does the IS code do? Mind you, we working on permissible stresses as
far is 1905 is concerned. So, IS code defines the permissible stress, the permissible shear
stress which you will then compare with the level of shear stress due to the combination
of loads in the structure itself.
And in this particular case the code uses a value of 0.1 + fd/6; in this case. And again you
have a limiting value for the permissible shear stress, but here fd; the value of fd is the
compressive stress due to the dead loads. And this is to be calculated only on compressed
area which means we are neglecting the tension zone. And if you actually look at the
form of the expression again coming from a Mohr Coulomb criterion; fs is τ, 0.1 is the
cohesion.
So, the code is actually giving a number there and saying look we can; we can expect a
bond strength of up to of about 0.1 MPa as cohesion available within a permissible
stresses approach and fd by 6 is the μσ component which means the friction coefficient
assumed here is about one sixth or 0.167 as the friction coefficient available in the
estimate of the permissible shear stress.
So, this is the standard, the Mohr Coulomb type criterion is the standard approach that is
used for shear strength estimate in different codes across the world.
368
So, a little bit about the formulation itself; we need to be able to estimate the compressed
length which is critical. And then it follows the same method that we had used earlier for
the Mann Muller criterion of a reduced cohesion and a reduced friction coefficient at the
joint.
So, we are looking at the wall where the compressed length, lc is less than l. And based
on a linear distribution of stresses; we are not assuming that the distribution of stresses
starts becoming non-linear. Because the failure is happening due to sliding shear and we
are not at a situation where there is plastification at the compressed toe because of
flexural compression.
And so the assumption of the distribution of compressive stresses as a triangular

distribution is a valid assumption here. So, based on the eccentricity of the axial force e
and the estimate of the compressed length, we use the expressions based on the classical
condition for which cracking is expected to begin.
If e/6 is greater than one sixth of the length of the wall itself; then based on the triangular
distribution, based on the geometry itself it is possible to estimate e or the compressed
length itself. We are; mind you using the estimate of moment as axial force in to the
eccentricity N into e that we have seen earlier. So, the moment is N into e is something
that you need to bring in.
369
So, the compressed length is some β times the total length itself. And we have an
expression for the length of the compressed zone; the ratio that we need to multiply the
length itself with which is this part that we have written down l/2 – e/2. And then you see
that this can be expressed eccentricity e itself as I said; the moment is written as N into e.
So, bringing in an expression for e as M by N into this equation; we are able to get an
expression which now depends on the aspect ratio of the wall. So, the shear span of the
wall is brought in here; here αv is nothing, but the shear span of the wall itself. So, M by
H is the moment to shear; shear force ratio divided by l. We write that down as H naught
by l; this M by H the ratio of the bending moment to the shear force expressed as H
naught; H naught by l. And therefore, this expression for lc brings in the shear span ratio;
shear span of the section of the wall itself, the shear ratio of the wall section itself.
l H 
lc = 3  − v   l
2 N 
So, with this estimate of the compressed length; it is on the compressed length that the
joint shear failure criterion is going to be used.
And therefore, if we were to use this within the Coulomb like criterion we ae basically
saying that the ultimate the shear capacity is because of the cohesion available in the
remaining compressed length of the wall. In the rest of the compressed length of the wall
370
cohesion is lost, there is no bond anymore. And so βlt is the area over which cohesion is
still active and of course, you have friction coefficient that is fully available to you and μ
is multiplied into N. So, we see that we are working on forces here unlike the earlier
expression which was in terms of stresses; so elaborating this expression and bringing in
the form of the shear ratio that we had earlier. And you have the expression which brings
in both cohesion and the friction coefficient and the shear ratio of the wall in estimating
the ultimate capacity of the wall.
 
 1.5c +  
H u = lt   0

 1+3 v c 
 0 
 
So, this is sort of a reduced shear strength like we had in the previous case; where the
friction coefficient and the estimate of the cohesion. Because of the geometry from the
center of the block to the top or bottom of the block; required a reduction factor based on
the geometry of the block. Similarly, the expression that we have here is looking at a
reduced strength because of the compressed length being lesser than the overall length of
the wall itself.
So, this criterion typically will always tell you that it is the section that is most
compressed because of the maximum moment occurring at the bottom of the wall is
where the failure is expected to occur. So, this will always be at the bottommost bed joint
either and physically also; when we do a test we see that it is either the interface between
the damp proofing course and the masonry wall or it is one of the first masonry joints
themselves. And this particular criterion can be used only for the shear sliding criterion.
You cannot use this to predict shear strength of a masonry wall if the failure that is
occurred in the wall is of any other type of failure. That is if the wall were to fail by
flexural compression or wall where to fail by the formation of diagonal cracks; this
estimate of Hu using the coulomb type criterion is not appropriate.
So, and the reason why I am raising this word of caution is many codes give only this
expression to estimate the shear capacity of a wall. But the shear capacity of a wall
depends on the mechanism of failure and using it across mechanisms; using this
expression across mechanisms will give you erroneous results.
371
So, I just flag that off and then close by therefore, looking at having examine three
different failure mechanisms; what is the shear force, axial force interaction for a given
masonry wall for different levels of axial force acting on the wall.
So, like we had the Mann Muller criterion, then find; then used to define the failure
domain as far as shear stress normal stress was concerned. We do the same thing for
lateral force H and axial force N and you actually have three different zones; the sliding
shear zone, the diagonal cracking zone and the flexural failure zone.
And you do see that the sliding shear is typically expected when the level of pre
compression is low. Diagonal cracking is typically expected when you have intermediate
levels of axial compression and flexural failure is expected, when you have significant
pre compression in the wall. So, the three expression that we had developed the Hu for
sliding; Hu for diagonal; so that is the Hu for sliding, Hu for diagonal compression and
that is the big curve that you see there is Hu for flexure and they dominate in different
zones.
So, if you were given a single panel of a known aspect ratio h by l known boundary
conditions because now when we are talking of αv; αv directly brings in the effect of
whether the wall is going to be bending in single bending; cantilevered profile or double
bending shear profile. Because the shear ratio the shear span is going to be change; h0
372
will change; the bending moment to lateral force ratio will change depending on whether
your shear deformation profile or a cantilevered profile.
So, if I know the overall dimensions and then estimate h by l; I know the thickness of the
wall, I know the boundary conditions; so I know whether it is going to be in double
bending or single bending. And then if I have material properties like compressive
strength of the masonry, tensile strength of the masonry, cohesion and friction coefficient
and I know the level of axial stress; average axial stress, I have a closed form way of
estimating in what mechanism should the wall fail and at what value.
So, I come to this interaction where axial force is increasing on the x axis. If I know the
axial force corresponding to the average level of axial stress; I will be able to estimate
ok, if I am somewhere there I can go and estimate that the axial the shear capacity of the
wall is so much kilonewtons and the failure is expected to be in diagonal cracking.
You could also be somewhere in between the two, you might lie somewhere there or you
might lie somewhere there, but which means that your estimates can actually overlap you
are not very sure whether it is going to be one mechanism or the other. You can have
those boundary issues, but you can also have mixed modes, but this gives you like we
would use a PM interaction for a problem of bending compression in RC design, here
you have something that is shear compression that you can play around with in design
and for assessment.
So, with that we come to the end of shear capacity for in plane actions and we will be
looking at PM interactions that can be developed for the unreinforced masonry; which
will be of use for us later in design of reinforced masonry walls. So, I will stop here.
373
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 03
Lecture - 21
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Part – XI
So, good morning. We will examine the last segment of the module that deals with
Strength and Behaviour of Masonry Components.
And in the last lecture we were examining the interaction surface between shear force
and axial compression, in-plane shear force and axial compression. And we looked at
this interaction in terms of the 3 criteria that we used to develop the failure domain, we
developed expressions for each of these. And if you remember the expression dealing
with the flexural compression mechanism is estimated based on the ultimate moment
capacity and then knowing the geometry of the wall you can express it in terms of the
lateral force, ultimate lateral force H required for developing the flexural mechanism.
The other two mechanisms are shear mechanisms which is based on the diagonal tension
failure and then the sliding shear failure. So, once this is estimated for all values of axial
force, you get the interaction surface which is the lowest shear force for a given
374
mechanism, the lowest shear force of the 3 mechanisms which then gives you the failure
domain itself.
Now, this is for in-plane capacities, in-plane behaviour and we have expressed it in terms
of shear capacity versus the axial force. This can also be represented in terms of the
moment versus the axial force, so the same can be represented in terms of moment and
axial force which then becomes an interaction surface in moment and axial force. So,
since the in-plane behaviour is governed by shear, the masonry load bearing wall acts as
a shear wall we have had to resort to the shear mechanisms to get a full understanding of
the behaviour of masonry under different levels of axial force.
In a similar manner, we can also look at the axial force-moment interaction. As I said in
the previous case though it is shear force versus axial force, you can represent it in terms
of bending moment versus axial force. For in-plane mechanisms that is not so common.
We tend to represent it more in terms of shear force versus axial force.
However, for out-of-plane mechanisms shear is not a dominating mechanism, shear is

not the mechanism which for which you expect failure to occur. The out-of-plane
mechanism is typically governed by flexural compression and so, P-M interaction curves
can be developed for out-of-plane bending. And this is based on what we have looked at
earlier. We looked at the effect of out-of-plane bending the response of a wall in the out-
of-plane direction due to lateral forces. But here we are looking at the axial force to the
375
bending interaction, and an interaction surface can be created assuming linear elastic
distribution of stresses or assuming a non-linear distribution stresses at the at the ultimate
atleast.
So, if you look at the interaction surface here, we are looking at a normalized interaction
surface for a wall bending out-of-plane and the load acting is the axial force with a
certain eccentricity. So, it is different from the lateral force based failure mechanisms
that we have been looking on looking at in terms of the out-of-plane capacities. This is
different representation because the action on the wall is different.
So, we are looking at normalized axes, P/P0 on the y axis and M/M0 the moment capacity
on the x axis. And here P0 is nothing, but the compressive strength of the masonry into
the area of cross section with the length of the wall into the thickness. So,
P0 = fm bt
fm bt 2
M0 =
6
So, we are making use of the section modulus to arrive at the value of moment capacity
and it helps us represent the x and y axis in a normalized manner.
So, this can be developed based on 3 important zones in the interaction surface. The first
one being where the entire section is in compression and we have developed these
equations earlier prior to cracking which is the straight line that you see from a value of
P/P0 equal to 1, that is from this point all the way up to when the wall starts cracking.
So, we are looking at a situation where the eccentricity of the axial force is less than t/6.
The classical expressions that we have seen earlier, so that is the that is the level of
eccentricity in the wall between 0 eccentricity when you get the full axial force capacity
of the wall which is P0, all the way up to when cracking commences at eccentricity equal
to t/6. At that point you can see that you get a moment capacity of 1 in the wall whereas,
the axial force capacity drops to one-half and that is because of the triangular distribution
that we have assumed in the distribution of compressive stresses in the wall.
So, beyond that point this critical point that you see here where the moment capacity is 1,
the axial force capacity is 50 percent of the capacity P0 the wall starts cracking. Once the
376
wall starts cracking, we are looking at the post cracking phase, but in the post cracking
phase we are still continuing with an elastic distribution linear distribution of stresses.
So, it is only at the ultimate that we would like to bring in, if you are using a non-linear
approach the softening under compression with the use of a stress block parabolic, stress
block replaced with an equivalent rectangular stress block. So, beyond that point we are
looking at a cracked cross section and you do now work on the compressed thickness of
the wall which is less than t after this point. So, in this case, you really looking at
eccentricities that range from the critical eccentricity at which cracking commences t/6 to
about 50 percent, eccentricity equal to about 50 percent of the cross section itself.
So, you can then estimate the moment capacities for the remaining section, but as you go
close to a section which is very small in comparison to the thickness of the cross section,
you can assume that the when the value of the compressive stress approaches the
compressive strength of masonry you can start assuming for the ultimate condition that a
rectangular stress block is present. And that is what is going to give you the moment
capacity in the in the wall and the axial load capacity.
So, this is a basic framework with which you can work to develop the axial force
bending moment interaction. You can fix the level of axial stress to be equal to f m and
look at different eccentricities from 0 eccentricity to the cracking eccentricity. And then
beyond that, start reducing the cross section then you come to the second phase of the
cross section and its bending moment capacity and axial force capacity, and then you
come to the final stage where you will want to replace the force resultant with that which
corresponds to the rectangular stress block.
So, this is a simple framework that you can use to develop the axial force bending
moment interaction surface which can then be used for design. Of course, here we have
looked at an unreinforced masonry wall cross section. If you were to reinforce this wall
cross section with one or two reinforcement bars then you will agree that it is only in the
cracked phase, once the steel bar start experiencing tension you will have improved
moment capacity which is in the lower half, in the lower one-third of the of the
interaction surface itself.
So, with reinforcement, if reinforcement is to be added in the cross section we are

actually going to be looking at the improvement of moment capacity in this zone
377
depending on how much steel reinforcement you are bringing in you will have improved
moment capacity in the post cracking phase of the interaction curve. You will be using
for the reinforced masonry, interaction curves both for in-plane bending moment to axial
force interaction and out-of-plane moment to axial force interactions. So, this is one last
part in terms of the strength, behaviour and strength of masonry that I wanted to touch
upon. There is one component that remains which again links us to design and that is
really deformations.
Now, deformations and stiffnessess I would say, because you need an estimate of
stiffness, you need to know what deformations you will get in a masonry wall to be able
to estimate what is the demand that certain masonry component is going to experience.
You need an estimate of the stiffnesses. So, let us look at a basic framework to
understand how different elements in masonry interact with each other and how
stiffness’s can be estimated, what are the assumptions that you need to make at a
component level to be able to estimate stiffnesses which is essential for distribution of
forces.
So, that is the last part of the of this particular module, where we are really examining
distribution of lateral force, ok. The intricacies in terms of different methods that you
will have at the scale of an entire wall we will examine as we start doing design
problems. But, the overall framework for how lateral force distribution occurs in a
378
masonry building all the way up to a masonry panel or masonry component is important
to understand, because there are there are assumptions that you have to make on the
behaviour of each of these elements and the system as a whole.
And my focus is primarily from the point of view of earthquake response of these of
these structures of masonry structures. So, when I say distribution of lateral force I am
making particular reference to earthquake forces, base shear that you can estimate under
the action of an earthquake. And how this shear demand is going to be distributed right
from the building the base shear demand that the building would experience all the way
up to what shear force a single component is going to be experiencing. So, that that
trajectory is what I am really looking at.
So, we will get into seismic design aspects, but the transition from the system level to the
component level becomes important. We will be able to establish with the basic force is
equal to mass into acceleration format of expressions that the code would have for
estimating base shear. Once the base shear is estimated for a given building this base
shear is then distributed along the height of a structure.
So, if you have a single storey structure all the base shear is equilibrated by the walls that
are present in the single storey, in the ground storey structure itself. But if you have
multiple floors then the storey shear, this shear force corresponding to each storey has to
be estimated from the overall base shear, and that depends on a certain distribution that
you will assume along the height. Codes give us simplified ways of doing this. You can
assume a triangular distribution along the height you can use mode shapes to do that
distribution. But that is one aspect that we will examine we will start examining when we
do actual seismic design.
So, the first transition is once the base shear is established; you need to know what the
storey shear is. Once the storey shear is established that storey shear has then to be
distributed among the different walls in a given storey. So, you need to know the
distribution of the walls. And this distribution is affected by several parameters.
You can have a situation where there is total symmetry in the plan layout of the structure.
The center of mass of that storey and the center of stiffness of the distribution of the
walls match. And, in such a situation if you have lateral force acting along the x direction
or lateral force acting along the y direction you are going to be looking at direct shear
379
components acting on the walls themselves. But in case if you have an eccentricity
between the center of mass and the center of stiffness you have the possibility of torsion.
And with the possibility of torsion, apart from the direct shear component coming from
earthquake force acting in one direction or the other you have an additional torsional
shear component that comes into the picture.
So, at the level of a storey it becomes important to first establish; what is the center of
mass, what is the center of stiffness, and examine if there is an eccentricity between the
center of mass and the center of stiffness. This eccentricity can be broken down into x
eccentricity and y eccentricity based on the geometry and the Cartesian coordinates
within which you are working.
So, this storey shear based on whether or not there is eccentricity in the plan between the
center of mass and center of stiffness will then have to distributed between the walls.
And this distribution of the storey shear to each of the walls. The plan that you can see
here has long wall along the x direction at the top, a short wall along the x direction at
the bottom and then it also has walls along the y direction of different lengths.
Now, in the x direction and the y direction, the shear force depending on the direction in
which you are assuming the earthquake force to act and the direction in which you are
doing the analysis you will have to distribute the shear force between these walls. So let
me assume that, the earthquake force is acting along the x direction. And, if there is no
eccentricity between the center of mass and center of stiffness that earthquake force now
has to be distributed to the two walls: one wall at the bottom and one wall at the top in
the x direction as direct shear components. If there is eccentricity, then apart from the
direct shear components there is going to be a torsional shear component.
In the y direction similarly: I have two walls, so the shear force the storey shear and the y
direction is then distributed between the two walls at the two extremities in the y
direction of the building itself. This distribution from the storey shear to the wall shear
force is affected by some assumptions and actual physical conditions of the structure
itself. And what are they? This distribution is going to be on the basis of the relative
stiffness or strength of the walls themselves. So, you need to know an estimate; you need
to have an estimate of the stiffnesses of the walls in a given storey. It is based on this
stiffness that the distribution is going to happen.
380
Strength is something you have already been able to estimate based on the you will be
able to estimate based on the previous lectures which focused primarily on strength. But
this shear force demand on to a storey is going to be distributed to the walls based on
their relative stiffnesses. So, you need an estimate of the stiffness of each wall in a
storey.;
However, this is affected completely going to be effected by whether or not you have
diaphragm action in the structure. Diaphragm action meaning: the floor slab or the roof
slab, if it is acting as an ideal diaphragm implying that you have the slab acting in a rigid
manner because of which the displacements at any point on the slab are equal due to the
lateral force. That is within the slab there is going to be no relative deformations.
Therefore, if two points on the slab cannot deform relative to each other; deform relative
to each other they will displace, but they cannot deform relative to each other then the
slab can be assumed to be ideally rigid. And you have diaphragm action. If you have
diaphragm action then the distribution of forces is going to be based on the relative
stiffnesss. If you do not have diaphragm action the distribution cannot be based on the
stiffnesss. So, the diaphragm action has a very crucial role in how the demand is going to
be distributed to the individual walls in a given storey in a given direction.
Now, once let us say you have completed this stage of distributing the base shear along
the height of a structure and established your storey shears; the storey shears have now
been distributed among the walls in a given storey in a given direction. You established a
wall shears the wall itself need not necessarily be one single component, you can have a
blank wall. And that is one single masonry panel. However, if you have openings then it
is not one single panel. You have different elements there and what are those elements.
So, the next stage is after I have established what the wall shear is, and here the wall
shear is let us say H acting on the wall and if this is the wall which has openings. Then I
have two openings here: there is one large opening at the end between this pier and this
pier here, and another door opening between the first two piers, right. So, I have pier 1,
pier 2, and pier 3. We call them piers because they are the vertical elements; they are the
gravity load carrying elements, and they are the once who are going to be resisting the
lateral force.
381
So, the piers are defined as lateral load resisting vertical elements, and they form the
most important parts of a load bearing masonry structure under the lateral action. So, I
have 3 piers here, but you can see that the deformation of the pier under lateral forces is
going to be affected by the size of the openings. So, the wall here is the entire wall along
one direction, along one of the axis the resisting elements are the piers. And here we are
talking of a perforated wall.
Now, one it is going to be affected by what is a size of the openings, and two, what is the
coupling element between these piers. And when I talk of a coupling element what is
there I am referring to? In a regular frame the coupling element is a beam, right. In a
moment resisting frame, in a reinforced concrete structure you have columns as the
lateral load resisting vertical elements, but in a masonry wall when we are talking of
these coupling elements we are referring to the spandrels and these are horizontally
aligned the elements of different aspect ratio and their primary role is transfer of forces
between the piers when there is lateral action.
Under gravity they are basically distributing the load the loads or the forces coming from
the floor to the piers and have to be provided with lintels, so that if it is unreinforced they
do not crack. So, the second element that we are talking about is the spandrel itself, right.
Now, depending on the strength of the spandrel in relation to the strength of the pier
itself the distribution of shear forces in the wall can be effected.
Now, at the boundary between the piers and the spandrels you have something that is
comparable to a beam column joint. In a moment resisting frame you would have
between the columns and the beams beam column joint. In this case, in a similar manner
between the spandrel which is the horizontally aligned element and the vertically aligned
element which is the pier you have the beam column joint or what is referred to as a zone
of low deformation and often that is idealized as a rigid node like a beam column joint in
a moment resisting frame.
So, there are 3 elements that really interact with each other. One is the vertical lateral
load resisting element the pier, the horizontal lateral load resisting element which does
not carry gravity strictly speaking that is the spandrel and the joint between the spandrel
and the pier. Depending on the strength and stiffness of the spandrel the boundary
condition of the pier is established. So, a pier can actually have a cantilevered
382
deformation profile under the lateral forces or can have a shear deformation profile under
the action of lateral forces and this depends on the role played by the spandrel itself, ok.
So, once you have established wall shear, you have to now start looking at distributing
the wall shear to the vertical lateral load carrying elements. So, the wall shear has to be
distributed to the 3 piers in the figure here H has to be distributed among H1, H2 and H3
assuming that we have rigid diaphragm action. And here in this particular case 3 vertical
lateral load carrying elements are present you need a way of distributing the shear force
to these 3 and that is done based on the relative stiffnesss.
So, you need an estimate of the relative stiffness of the pier in a wall and you need the
overall stiffness of the wall to be able to establish what is the proportion of the storey
shear that the wall will attract, right. So, that is where you really need to be able to make
an estimate of deformations and stiffnesss in masonry panels. And this is affected by
spandrels. If you have an opening with a coupling element or if you have a blank wall
with no openings there is a difference in the way the wall will deform under lateral
forces, but it also as I said depends on how strong and how stiff the spandrel itself is.
And the reason why it is isolated as a different element is a pier is a vertical lateral load
carrying element. So, you construct a pier, there is a continuity between, there is a
vertical continuity in a pier and there is pre-compression because of the superimposed
loads and its dead weight and its own dead weight. The spandrel does not have the
benefit of that action. The spandrel does not have pre-compression because it is an
element that is sitting above an opening.
So, you do not have the kind of consolidation and the pre compression that the pier
enjoys in a wall. This is one important difference that changes the way the pier and the
spandrel behave. We will come to specific calculations one once we get into the design.
383
But it is instructive at this stage to look at how can you make an estimate of the stiffness
of a pier because that is where you start, you need an estimate of the stiffness of the pier
and then you need to put them together to be able to estimate the stiffness of the wall
itself.
So, the two conditions under which the stiffness of the pier can be estimated is that the
pier is acting as a cantilevered shear wall. So, if you are looking at a blank wall, if you
looking at a wall without openings the deformed profile of the wall is closer to a
cantilevered wall. You get a cantilevered deformation profile. The moment you have an
opening and you have a spandrel which is the coupling element between the opening the
spandrel can prevent the rotations at the top of the piers and it changes the boundary
condition.
So, in the first case, if you were to consider a cantilevered shear wall of height h, lateral
force H acting on it and length of the wall being L thickness of the wall being t, we are
interested in being able to get an estimate of the lateral deformation delta and with that
we can actually estimate the lateral stiffness of the wall itself. So, simplification, but this
simplification and idealization of the boundary condition is essential for us to be able to
go and estimate the stiffness of an entire wall composed of piers and spandrels.
So, if you look at the lateral deformation when we look at flexural elements when we
look at reinforced concrete frames and we calculate deflections in reinforced concrete
384
members given the slenderness ratios, we typically calculate the flexural deflection, but
as the aspect ratio changes as the h by L ratios change the shear deformations cannot be
neglected. And so, the total lateral deflection of a masonry wall in-plane lateral
deflection has two components the flexural component and the shear component.
When we assume that the deformation profile is a cantilevered deformation profile, the
flexural component is Hh3/3EI , where E here is the masonry overall masonry, modulus
of elasticity. The shear component is the shear force divided by the shear area which is
different from the total area of cross section of the wall divided by the shear modulus
into the height of the wall panel itself.
So, here there are to plug in numbers that are reasonable numbers in terms of the
sectional properties and be able to make an estimate of what the lateral deformation and
lateral stiffness can be an assumption that the shear area is about 5-6th of the total area of
the cross section, gross area of the cross section is an acceptable assumption, Ag here is
thickness into the total length of the wall.
And then the second moment of area of the wall in-plane direction bending along the
major axis tL3/12 and the shear modulus again is assuming that the material is an
isotropic material; we are linking the shear modulus to the Young’s modulus of the
material Em and assumption that the shear modulus is about 40 percent of the Young’s
modulus is a fair estimate for masonry.
So, we have numbers from Av in terms of the gross area, the shear modulus and using
those simplifications and expanding on the total deflection which is the flexural
deflection plus the shear deflection, and simplifying such that we are able to write an
expression purely in terms of the geometry. Simplifications are done here to be able to
express it in terms of the modulus of elasticity of the material the h by L ratio which is
the aspect ratio and the thickness of the wall.
So, lateral force is the quantity that you need to know. You need to know the geometry
of the wall h, L and t and the modulus of elasticity of the masonry you get an expression
for the deflection in a cantilevered wall subjected to in-plane lateral forces. If you want
to write that in terms of the stiffnesss, H/Δ and you get an expression for the lateral
stiffness, if you assume a cantilevered profile of the shear wall. Now, in a similar manner
385
if it is a wall, if it is a pier between openings which then has the interaction of the
spandrel coming into the picture.
So, I am looking at the pier that is sitting between openings, I have an opening on this
side I have another opening on the other side, which means there are spandrels
interacting assume it is a window, if you have a window and then you have a spandrel
above and a spandrel below and those are actually going to work towards preventing the
rotations at the top and the bottom of the masonry pier itself. Earlier, you had a
cantilevered deformation profile top was free to rotate, but when you have a spandrel
which is significant in its geometry and strong then what it can do to the top of the pier is
that it can prevent the rotations.
So, prevention of rotations would mean the pier is subjected to double bending now and
therefore, the estimate of lateral stiffness we will change. So, here again you have a
flexural component and the shear component, but given the fact that the wall is
undergoing double bending I have Hh3/12EI would be the estimate of the deflection due
to flexural mechanism. And we use the same expressions that we used earlier for the
shear area and for the modulus of the shear modulus and again simplifying and writing it
in terms of the aspect ratio h by L, geometry of the wall cross section t and modulus of
elasticity. We have an expression of either in terms of lateral deflection or lateral
stiffness of the wall.
386
So, it is important for you to examine a wall and understand whether a the behaviour of
the pier is closer to a cantilevered profile or a shear profile. And then you now need to
assemble the different piers and the spandrels to be able to estimate, to be able to
establish the lateral stiffness of the entire wall. Then you have several walls there are
relative stiffnesss between these walls is going to help you establish what is the
proportion of shear force that the wall is going to get from the storey shear itself.
It is useful to examine how cantilevered piers and piers with shear deformation profile
would look with respect to the aspect ratio itself. So, if away to look at this stiffness
normalized stiffness on the y axis, I have stiffness k divided by thickness of the wall t
and the modulus of elasticity of masonry normalized. And if I have the aspect ratio h by
L on the x axis you see that for small aspect ratios implying that we looking at squat
walls, the shear deformation prevails.
But as the aspect ratio increases as we go to longer aspect ratios you see that the shear
deformation profile, the shear deformation quantity actually becomes negligible. And in
a slender wall which is slender its aspect ratio such that h by L is greater than 1, the
contribution of the shear deformation keeps reducing. So, for fairly low aspect ratios the
shear deformation is what will govern for both the cantilevered profile and the fixed pier
cases, and that is really because of the of the way the expressions pan out in terms of
what is on the denominator, ok.
387
So, I just wanted this aspect which is a link to our design, where a point where we start
aspects of design to be the concluding portion of this section that looks at strength and
behaviour. So, I think with this we have an overall hold on the different actions and
expected behaviours and therefore, what needs to be taken care of from the design
perspective itself. And we will begin design in the next lecture, ok.
Thank you.
388
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 04
Lecture - 22
Design of Masonry Components and Systems
Part – I
Morning. We are now into the next module. We have completed the part that looks at
analysis of masonry- strength aspects. We concluded by looking at deformations and that
is a starting point for us as far as design aspects are concerned. You need to know the
stiffnesses and that is what we were doing in the last lecture.
So, this module which will be an extended module, which will look at Design of
Masonry Components using the framework of IS 1905 which is the unreinforced
masonry code, followed by the reinforced masonry code. We will go through the design
of components and then address the design of overall systems. So, let us begin this
module.
But we really need to understand the structural design framework that is existing for
masonry structures. So, I repeat what I had started off with in module 1 on the different
codes that are available for masonry structural design and I am making reference to
389
particularly four codes; one other document referred to here is a handbook which is an
explanatory handbook for the design code itself.
So, to begin with I think it is very important to understand how these codes interact with
each other and give us the basic framework for design of masonry structures; considering
probably the most important aspect of structural design which is the Earthquake-
Resistant Design of masonry. So, the first code that we will be looking at is 1905-1987, it
is a code that has been reaffirmed in the recent years. We will come to this code. We will
be dealing with the design the working stress design as per 1905.
But before we go to that, we will examine the interconnection between the different
codes. The handbook that I was referring to is SP 20 which is an explanatory handbook
for design. It also goes into some construction aspects. So, it would be useful for you to
read the clauses of IS 1905-1987 with the commentary that is given in the handbook. It
gives you a better understanding of why certain provisions are the way they are in the
code of practice itself.
The second code which regulates structural design overall structural design is the recent
version of national building code 2016 and I am making specific reference to Part 6 -
Section 4 which deals with Structural Design of Masonry and you will find this
particular section in volume 1 of the National Building Code. Now, this code is
important for us because we do not have a specific code on reinforced masonry right.
The national building code is important for us, because we do not have a dedicated code
on reinforced masonry nor a dedicated code on confined masonry. So, confined masonry
and reinforced masonry appear in the national building code of India. Eventually, we will
see specific codes such as 1905 which deals with unreinforced masonry design to deal
with reinforced masonry design and confined masonry designs. So, for the time being,
we have to refer to the national building code for design aspects of reinforced masonry.
So, we will be working primarily under these two, the clauses of these two codes;
however, as I said a significant part of our design is going to be affected by Earthquake-
Resistant Design and Construction. So, two codes of importance here; the first one being
IS 1893 Part 1 and this is again a recent version, this is 2016 version which gives the
general provisions for buildings. And the criteria for earthquake design is laid down in
390
this code, you have basic principles that have to be followed and the earthquake input
that has to be established based on this code for a seismic design.
So, this code becomes important and finally, we have the code which is a code of
practice for design and construction earthquake resistant design and construction, again a
code that has been updated not too long ago; 5-6 years ago, IS 4326. So, will make
specific reference to IS 4326 and it is within this framework of national building code IS
1893 Part 1 and 4326 that will have to operate ok. So, it is essential that at this stage of
the course, you start familiarizing yourself with different segments of these codes to have
the basis to operate as far as the design is concerned.
So, let me begin by understanding this framework that is laid out for design of structures.
So, before we get into specific aspects, it is important to understand what sort of
framework is available to decide the earthquake input for a design itself right. You need
to deal with shear forces in your earthquake resistant design and those shear forces have
to be established and there is a basis that we need to look at on how these shear forces
are going to be arrived at.
We were discussing how from the base shear of the building to the storey shears to the
wall shear and the pier shear for design, you will have to work; but to establish the base
shear, we have to go back to IS 1893 Part 1 which establishes how would you estimate
the lateral seismic coefficient for a given building. Now, one of the most important
391
factors, we will go into the specifics of how we arrive at the lateral seismic coefficient in
due course; but at this point today, I would like to focus on this concept of the R factors
that some of you would be familiar with.
But is probably the most critical aspect as far as establishing the design forces for a
chosen structural system. So, the table that you see in front of you is a reproduction of
Table 9 of IS 1893 Part 1 and it is in a reduced form that I have actually presented it;
talking of 5 different systems. The table is much more elaborate, but it talks about 5
different systems and there are subsystems and further classifications.
We will go to that in a moment, but I am now looking at the 5 broad classifications as far
as structural systems are concerned for lateral load resistance as far as Indian codes are
concerned and you can see that there are 5 types of systems here, regular Moment
Resisting Frames; moment resisting frames with special regulations as well, Braced
Frame Systems; Structural Wall Systems; Dual Systems; Flat Slab Systems.
So, you have broadly this categorization, moment resisting frames you can immediately
think of reinforced concrete and steel moment resisting frames that we are talking about.
Braced frame systems, we again talking of moment resisting frames, but you have
additional seismic resisting braces. And, then you come to structural wall systems. In
structural wall systems, this is where our load bearing masonry constructions would fall
into right.
And you can immediately see I will point out and we will come back and discuss of
where the R factors for design begin as far as structural wall systems and that 1.5 is
sitting there because we talk about load bearing masonry constructions. Well, it goes all
the way up to 4. We will come back to that in a moment and then, you have dual
systems, where you have a shear wall system, a reinforced concrete shear wall system;
but you also have a moment resisting frame in that system possibly the moment resisting
frame is not designed for the lateral load resistance, but the shear wall is designed for the
lateral load resistance.
That is what a dual system is all about and then, you have flat slab systems and the code
has in it is recent revision in 2016 introduced a separate category which does not show
good earthquake performance as flat slab systems and pulled it out of reinforced concrete
moment resisting frames or dual systems or shear wall systems. So, we are specifically
392
interested in structural wall systems and that is where as I said, load bearing masonry
constructions and shear wall systems would come in; reinforced concrete shear wall
systems would come in.
Since, load bearing masonry constructions depend on masonry walls as shear walls, you
have the location of reinforced masonry or unreinforced masonry under structural wall
systems as far as the R factors are concerned. On the right hand side, you have the ranges
of R factors; the code would give you specific R factors for a typology or a subcategory.
I have just given you the ranges within each of these groups and you can see that the R
factors are typically between 3 and 4 going to a maximum of 5 as far as the special
moment resisting frames are concerned, so on.
So, we define the R factor. The R factor is one number which is linked directly to the
type of lateral load resisting function, choice of structural system provides. And this is
something that actually captures the non-linearity of the system itself. It is not one single
parameter that affects the R factor, but several factors that can affect the number itself
and therefore, it is essential to break it down to understand further what the R factor
actually contains within itself.
It also includes over strength that is available in structural systems and different types of
structural systems and it basically takes into account how much of ductility can the
system provide? It accounts for how much ductility a certain structural system can give
you. If you take an unreinforced masonry structure you are going to have low ductility
available as far as the structural system is concerned for lateral load resistance; whereas,
a moment resisting frame or a shear wall system can give you definitely in reinforced
concrete or steel can actually give you far higher ductility in comparison to an
unreinforced masonry structure.
So, the R factor sums up the non-linearity available in the in the system itself and we
directly apply this R factor to reduce design forces and that is the reason why it is
important to use this carefully. If design force is arrived at given the ductility of system,
you can actually reduce the design forces. Because if the structure can deform
inelastically and still resist the lateral forces, you have good behavior and you should
give points for the fact that the system can have good behavior.
393
So, these R factors directly lead to reduction of your design forces. If that ductility is not
available in the system, you cannot reduce the design forces and that is the reason why
some systems like the masonry structures which do not provide good ductility in the
unreinforced masonry format are not given high response reduction factors or the R
factors.
You still use the elastic design force reduced to a small extent as far as such
constructions are concerned. So, that is what the R factor is doing. So, it is useful for us
to go and examine within these structural wall systems, what distribution do you have as
far as masonry constructions are concerned.
So, 3 a within this table that looks at response reduction factors, looks at load bearing
masonry buildings ok. Then, it starts looking at reinforced concrete shear wall systems,
but I am now interested in looking at the load bearing masonry constructions and as you
can see there are 5 different categories provided under this ok. Let us read each of them.
Unreinforced masonry classified as unreinforced masonry where the design is prescribed
as per IS 1905 ok.
But without horizontal reinforced concrete seismic bands that is the building is devoid of
any earthquake resisting feature that you can think of which is the horizontal seismic
band being the minimum element that is required; a continuous horizontal seismic band
which is a minimum element that is required to provide earthquake resistance if that is
394
also not provided in the structure, then it falls into the unreinforced masonry category
without horizontal seismic bands.
This is the category in the is code which has the lowest value of the response reduction
factor which stands at 1.5 which means you can take your elastic design force and reduce
that upto 1.5 in the denominator. Your elastic design force divided by R value allowed is
1.5. The second category is URM again designed as per IS 1905 with horizontal seismic
bands.
So, now I think you should start appreciating the fact that the horizontal seismic bands in
reinforced concrete are reinforced elements. Their presence in the structure or absence in
the structure still leaves the masonry as an unreinforced masonry construction. So,
whether you provide the horizontal RC seismic band or not, we are referring to
unreinforced masonry right. So, the horizontal RC seismic band is an additional feature.
The moment you give an additional feature like a horizontal seismic band, you see that
the R factor can be enhanced to about 2.
So, the elastic force can be halved the design force to the base shear can be reduced to
one half if an RC band is available. With respect to that if you see the previous number
1.5, this 1.5 is the inherent ductility that is available in masonry. It is not significant, it is
very low and at the most 50 percent is what is more than the elastic behavior is what you
actually get as far as pure earthquake resistance of masonry. But the moment you provide
an a horizontal seismic band, there is some there is some confinement that comes into the
building, there is some tying that comes into the building and you can reduce your design
force by 50 percent by one half.
So, the R factor, we will we will come to the specific of the R factor in a while; but the R
factor is one number that accounts for several parameters together. This uncertainty that
you are referring to could be in terms of over strength as well. That is you design the
structure for a certain requirement, certain strength. But, inherent variability in the
material can actually provide a higher strength ok.
So, that is the uncertainty that the code actually accounts for as far as the R factor is
concerned that the uncertainty that we are talking about. But, what it actually is standing
for is how much of ductility can the system provide post reaching the maximum
395
capacity; after the peak capacity how much of the peak strength capacity, how much of
deformation capacity does the system allow for without losing.
So, what is essential is the peak capacity is retained without drop in the peak capacity;
deformation capacity should be available. So, the R factors actually taking care of post
peak behavior in elasticity and post peak behavior of the system. So, you take the elastic
design force and divide the elastic design force by R. I have not reproduced the code
expressions at this stage because we will be addressing the code expressions as far as
seismic design is concerned.
But the R is a factor that sits in the numerator. So, you have the elastic design force
which helps us establish the lateral seismic coefficient and the base shear for the building
and you divide that by a value greater than 1 which is why you are reducing the design
force if the system can give you a certain ductility. So, we looked at the second category
which is unreinforced masonry buildings with the horizontal seismic band, but now if
you examine structures which have to be designed as per IS 4326.
This code requires that a set of a certain set of categories of buildings have to be
provided both with horizontal RC seismic bands and vertical reinforced concrete
elements, reinforced concrete elements are provided at the intersection of walls and
reinforced concrete elements are provided around the openings in walls like doors and
windows and these vertical bands are tied along with the horizontal seismic bands and
together works as a network to confine the masonry.
So, and provides tension resisting capacity which the unreinforced masonry does not
have. So, if you were looking at categories of unreinforced masonry buildings, again the
vertical and horizontal seismic bands do not make the masonry a reinforced masonry. It
is still an unreinforced masonry load bearing construction, but it is provided with this
sort of a network and if you were to provide horizontal and vertical seismic bands, the
reduction factor goes up as highest 2.5.
And finally, the category that we have recently introduced into the code which is
reinforced masonry. So, strictly speaking reinforced masonry is when the piers and the
spandrels are provided with steel reinforcement, necessary enough to act as flexural
walls or shear walls against a specific design. So, you have a design moment, you have a
design shear force and if you estimate the amount of steel reinforcement that has to be
396
placed in a wall, for those design forces, then you get reinforced masonry. In the 3
previous categories, the provision of a band in reinforced concrete does not make the
masonry reinforced, it is still unreinforced masonry.
So, reinforced masonry, this one number sitting here is not misleading, but we will go to
the specific recommendation of the reinforced masonry code in a moment. The R factor
can go up as high as 4 which is similar to what a reinforced concrete shear wall system
can provide. So, very clearly as far as earthquake resistance is concerned a reinforced
masonry shear wall can behave as well as a reinforced concrete shear wall.
So, you can look at reinforced masonry as a viable safe solution for earthquake resistant
constructions. So, reinforced masonry on an average if you are talking of reinforced
masonry from Part 6 Section 4 of the NBC, then you are talking of an R factor as high as
3, the last category is something that we will address in the end of the course which is
confined masonry which also does not have a code of it is own today has come into the
national building code, again talks of a response reduction factor equal to a reinforced
masonry construction which is in line with the observed behavior of confined masonry
constructions.
Even in high seismic zones where confined masonry is provided, you have excellent
performance of confined masonry constructions. And we are talking of countries like
Chile which has very high earthquake activity, where confined masonry construction is
the natural choice for residential constructions; low rise residential constructions.
So, this is an important statement that a typology, confined masonry which is a typology
which is not as sophisticated as reinforced masonry as far as design is concerned because
the guidelines are provided for confined masonry construction. Design calculations are
kept to the minimum. Confined masonry has been introduced with the expectation that
the construction field is able to absorb a simple system which is safe enough.
So, confined masonry codes across the world are not heavy on design calculations, they
are more prescriptive in terms of what needs to be done for earthquake resistance. So, the
important statement that this code is making is your constructions will remain
unreinforced, if you are only introducing bands; RC bands and the R factors maximum
can go up to 2.5. Once you design you have response reduction factors as high as three
397
you can reduce the elastic design force to one-third if you are designing with reinforced
masonry and so, it is with confined masonry.
So, let me bring into the picture one specific clause which has been introduced now as
far as IS 1893 Part 1 2016 is concerned the code in the note to table, the table which
gives you the R factors very clearly states that if you are using lateral resisting systems
such as reinforced concrete and steel buildings, then, the code requires that in seismic
zones III, IV and V which are moderate to high seismic zones, these reinforced concrete
and steel buildings have to be designed to behave in a ductile manner right.
As a consequence, under the category of structural wall systems, the first category
unreinforced masonry without bands cannot be constructed in seismic zones III, IV and
V as a consequence; because it is not a ductile system at all. So, unreinforced masonry
that category which is devoid of seismic resistance systems is confined to zone II. This is
something that is a landmark introduction as far as our code is concerned in 2016 which
means in zones even of moderate seismic activity such as low to moderate seismic
activity as such as Chennai, we cannot design unreinforced masonry.
You can only design you can only design seismic resisting masonry and we will look at
what a seismic resisting masonry in a moment. So, this is an important clause that you
must keep in mind and the reason why I have reproduced the seismic zone map as it
stands today which hopefully will be reside will be revised to one that is based on a
398
probabilistic approach is to show you zones II, III, IV and V and tell you the above 30
percent to 40 percent of the country is where you can actually design unreinforced
masonry.
So, our code IS 1905 is now getting pushed to only a small part of the country part of the
country, where you know that the earthquake force, earthquake activity is low. So, please
keep this clearly in mind, where IS 1905 stops becoming a regulatory design and
regulatory basis.
However, the 2016 code also requires that any construction that you design be it in zone
II or any other zones has to have a minimum percentage of earthquake lateral force
considered for design right. And, if you look at the numbers of course, these numbers are
going to be lower than what you can establish using the base the lateral force, lateral
seismic coefficient or the base shears and these minimum value is a 0.7 percent of the
seismic weight of the structure. This percentage is as a percentage of the seismic weight
of the structure. In zone II, it is about 0.7 percent; in zone III, 1.1; zone IV, 1.6; zone 5,
2.4.
So, the reason for me bringing in this particular clause of the code clause 7.2.2 is to state
that even if we are talking of IS 1905 in zone II constructions, you have to check that at
least for a lateral force corresponding to 0.7 percent of the seismic weight. So, 0.7
percent of W applied as a lateral force. The structure should be capable of resisting that
399
lateral force in your design. Is that point clear? So, there is a minimum level of lateral
force for which even a zone II building should actually have resistance for. It is a very
small number though. However, it is essential that it is verified against this minimum
requirement of design force itself ok.
We looked at unreinforced masonry category without the horizontal seismic bands, with
horizontal seismic bands and with horizontal seismic bands and vertical reinforced
concrete elements at corners of walls and at around the openings.
So, from that perspective, it is important to understand the categorization of buildings

that IS 4326 does. IS 4326 as far as masonry constructions are concerned categorizes
buildings from A to E ok; category A is today removed from the code. Category A was
zone I building ok. Earlier we had zone I to zone V. Today, you do not have zone I and
therefore, category I would lead to what is called a zone I building.
So, a category A building. So, we do not have that any longer and that is why this table
starts from B and goes all the way to E. So, I think that historical fact is important for
you. However, what this code does is it provides a set of earthquake resistant features
that must be incorporated in the building. If you are designing the load bearing masonry
construction as per 1905, right.
400
So, 1905 does not speak explicitly about the requirements of IS 4326. However, since is
1893 talks about earthquake resistance, minimum earthquake resistance that buildings
must have, 4326 and 1905 have to be looked at together. So, even if you do load bearing
masonry design as per IS 1905, you must ensure that earthquake resisting features are
provided as per IS 4326. So, this is this is extremely important.
So, if you look at the way IS 4326 provides its recommendations it looks at two
important two groups; buildings with an importance factor of 1 and buildings with an
importance factor of 1.5. Now, this importance factor is a factor that goes in to decide the
elastic design force in IS 1893 Part 1. So, you have in the previous version of IS 1893,
two factors two importance factors 1 and 1.5. Today, we have another importance factor
that has come in, we will come to that in a moment. But the earlier version of IS 1893
had two importance factors 1 and 1.5. So, all ordinary buildings would have an
importance factor of 1.
So, residential buildings, commercial buildings would office buildings would actually
have an importance factor of 1; however, if you have what is referred to as an important
building which can be where there is a congregation of a large number of people,
schools, other types of assembly buildings, buildings which become very important
during disasters like police stations, hospitals, telephone exchanges; buildings which
have critical function, bridges which have critical function in keeping these important
functions active when there is a disaster would again fall into importance category of 1.5.
So, the earlier version of IS 1893 categorized buildings into importance factor 1 and 1.5
and based on that categorized buildings, based on the seismic zone in which you are
designing these constructions as category B building, category C building, category D
building and category E building and it is interesting to note that if you have an
important building being designed in seismic zone II that automatically becomes a
category C building which is as good as a regular building or ordinary building being
designed in seismic zone III; yes.
So, C category which is importance factor 1.5 seismic zone II. So, an important building
in seismic zone II is considered on par with an ordinary building in seismic zone III right
and so on. Regular building in seismic zone IV is on par with an important building in
seismic zone III and regular building in seismic zone V is on par with an important
401
building in seismic zone IV and of course, we stopped with E and go to important
building in seismic zone V as well. Now, what then the code then tells you that if it is in
category B, these are the earthquake resistant features that must be there. We talked
about the horizontal seismic band, we talked about vertical steel.
So, these are prescribed depending on the category of the building. So, we will come to
that when we start looking at detailing for earthquake resistance. So, this is the
framework as far as 1905 4326 within seismic design is concerned. Your question is on
seismic weight. When we talk of seismic weight, it is the weight of the building that will
participate in developing inertial forces during an earthquake. So, you are basically
making an estimate of the weight of the structure that will participate in developing
inertial forces.
We also consider part of the live load as being contributory to that estimate. So, it is a
dead and live load combination that we consider as the seismic weight and then, use that
to estimate. I mean it is a easy framework within which we say that since lateral forces
are generated in an earthquake due to the inertial effects. We consider the lateral force
for design as coming from the proportion of the seismic weight of the structure itself.
Your question is an important factor increasing and zone also increasing; is that a double
requirement that comes in as far as design and detailing is concerned. Yes, is that there
are two different things; one is you are going from zone II to zone V. When you are
going from zone II to zone V, your design force is increasing the force which you are
using to design is changing right whereas, when you are going from category one
category to another category, as far as IS 4326 is concerned, these are about additional
seismic resistant features which you need to put in place during execution of the
structure ok.
So, from that consideration one the seismic zonation itself has an effect on how much
seismic force you are going to use. The category of the building and that is the reason
why the code then looks at importance factor and says ok, you design for a given level of
design force. However, if it is a regular building versus an important building, do put in
place additional features that takes into account seismic safety. So, these are coming
from different considerations, have different bases.
402
So, what would actually happen as far as the design is concerned as you are moving from
importance factor 1 to 1.5; as you are moving from importance factor 1 to 1.5, this factor
actually reflects on the lateral seismic force itself. You have the lateral seismic force
estimate multiplied by I and divided by R. We will examine that when we come to
design.
But what is actually happening is your lateral seismic coefficient Ah is given by,
Z I Sa
Ah =  
2 R g
Z : Zone Factor I : Importance Factor
R : Response Reduction Factor Sa : Spectral Acceleration
This is the seismic lateral seismic coefficient. Ah is the lateral seismic coefficient and
your base shear the total base shear on the structure is the seismic weight into Ah that is
how you get your design force.
So, what is actually happening as far as the importance factor is concerned is your design
force is going to increase if you are looking at an important building because if you are
an ordinary building condition I is 1, but if it is an important building already your
design seismic coefficient is increasing by 1.5. Apart from that apart from that depending
on which category you fall in, 4326 has specific recommendations for earthquake
resistant prescriptions.
Student: In effect we are doing it twice.
In effect you are looking at it from different perspectives and why are we doing that
because design force is required for the lateral design of the masonry structure as well.
So, dimensioning of the unreinforced masonry part is also being considered. the
categorization only increases the number of features that you are building in as additional
requirements. So, they are actually operating at different levels.
Ok; however, as I said it is important to understand that we have an additional

importance factor today and we will see how the code particularly 4326 reflects, you see
that 4326 is a 2013 code, but the IS 1893 Part 1 is newer code and actually has brought
in an additional importance factor it is 1.2 now. It is actually thrown a spanner in the
works of this table. But we will see how it will be accommodated.
403
Therefore, if you have ordinary buildings residential commercial, where the occupancy is
more than 200 percent where you have a large congregation of people, it requires that
your importance factor is now no longer 1, but 1.2. So, it is between that 1 and 1.5. So,
third category has actually been brought in as far as importance is concerned which
means with a 1.2 factor your seismic coefficient also changes, your seismic coefficient
will increase. So, keep this in mind and we will see some modifications to IS 4326 to
reflect this particular requirement of IS 1893 Part 1 ok.
Having said that the last thing that I want to consider as far as the R factors is concerned
is what happens as far as the masonry shear wall systems are concerned, that is what
does the code; what does the national building code actually specify as far as reinforced
masonry design is concerned.
So, what the reinforced masonry section of the code actually talks of is 3 types of walls
ok. The first type of wall again is just reinforced is unreinforced masonry, where design
is as per IS 1905 and then, in addition you should provide minimum reinforcement this is
not designed reinforcement, it is minimum reinforcement and a specific clause of the of
the national building code 10.7.2.1 actually starts looking at what is this minimum
reinforcement that you must give, what is the minimum bar diameter, what is the
spacing.
404
And if you provide, if you provide that minimum reinforcement, you can use type A wall
construction design and construction for seismic zones II and III with a response
reduction factor of 2.5 which means earlier what we were talking of in terms of response
reduction factors 1.5 and 2 are out of the picture now in the with reference IS 1893.
Because, you are taking care of minimum reinforcement requirements as per the
reinforced masonry code; if you do that you can use a response reduction factor of R to
get your design forces. The next two categories B and C are the ones which are referred
to as reinforced masonry nothing else qualifies as reinforced masonry is the basic
message.
Reinforced masonry treated as ordinary reinforced masonry or special reinforced

masonry. So, there are two categories here; ordinary reinforced masonry and special
reinforced masonry both zones IV and V, you can have this type of construction and
your response reduction factor varies from III to IV in the special reinforced masonry,
the minimum reinforcement that you provide for special reinforced masonry is much
more than in the ordinary case.
So, this is what we will be looking at in type B and type C, the reinforcement is being
designed; type B and type C, you are designing the reinforcement based on the design
forces. In type A you are not designing the reinforcement; you are putting minimum
reinforcement. So, this is an important difference that you need to keep in mind that you
will be designing walls B and C, but as far as wall with respect to in a national building
code; whereas, wall A you are only going to be designing with respect to IS 1905.
So, this is the overall categorization that I wanted to look at and then, we will commence
by looking at key considerations, design considerations of 1905 in the next two classes
and have the framework for permissible stress design as far as our zone II constructions
or zone III constructions. But, with additional reinforcement that you will provide as per
national building code or national building code or the 4326 recommendations are
concerned.
405
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 04
Lecture - 23
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - II
So, we continue this afternoon our lecture on design and we are examining design with
respect to the code dealing with permissible stress approach for unreinforced masonry, so
that is what we began looking at.
To sum up what we examined in the last class in terms of the overall structural design
framework where we were linking up the seismic code IS 1893 Part 1, the code of
practice for earthquake resistant constructions IS 4326, the national building code which
has segments that deals with structural design of unreinforced masonry, and the new
section on the reinforced masonry. This is what we had looked at in the last class where
based on the importance factor of the buildings, and based on the seismic zone in which
you are designing the structures, we classify them as B, C, D and E categories.
And you see that the importance factor would lead us to a zone 2 building with an
importance factor of 1.5 being a category C building. And, then we will examine the
details under each category at the appropriate time, but the point is category B, C, D and
406
E would mean there are specific prescribed interventions, design interventions to ensure
seismic resistance. And, this is different from the earthquake load that you would define
based on which zone the structure is sitting in and what importance factor it has.
And so based on a question that was raised in the last class, I thought it will be
instructive to look at what is this effect of one on the design side, the implication in
terms of the lateral seismic coefficient that we estimate as the shear force demand on the
structure versus the detailing that is required as per IS 4326. So, I just picked up the
application- I just am just looking at in this slide the application of this particular
requirement in terms of category of building evaluated as far as the design seismic
coefficients are concerned. So, I am just mirroring the table on the top in terms of the
actual values of the seismic coefficients that we will be able to estimate.
So, I am making a distinction here based on the number of stories and that is important
because while buildings are categorized as B, C, D and E, the code IS 4326 further looks
at structures which are 1-2 storied structures or 3 or 4 storied structures, so that
distinction also needs to be brought in. So, I am examining the design seismic coefficient
A h from IS 1893 estimated for a B category building which may be 1 to 3 storied - 1, 2
or 3-storeyed; and C, D or E category buildings 1 or 2 storied of that category, C D and E
category.
So, the design seismic coefficient is estimated as given here.
 Z   Sa 
  
2  g 
Ah =
R
 
 I
You have the zone factor coming from which zone the structure is sitting in. So, Z/2 is
used for the design earthquake multiplied by the spectral ratio Sa/g. And I am assuming
that we are taking the maximum value of the spectral ratio here, 2.5 divided by the
response reduction factor which we talked about yesterday R/I, where I is the importance
factor of the structure that you are designing.
So, if Ah is estimated in this manner then for this particular categorization you have to
use the shear force for design. And, the shear force for design is estimated based on
407
differing R factors, and this is something that you need to look at which means if I am
estimating for such a building sitting in zone 2 importance factor 1, which becomes
category B building 1 to 3-storeyed category B building, I am estimating the seismic
coefficient and so on for each category. However, since we are looking at a category B
building or a category C building where the requirements the earthquake requirement,
the earthquake resistant detailing requirements stop with the horizontal seismic bands.
Since we are talking of unreinforced masonry buildings with horizontal seismic band, the
R factor that needs to be used in this case is an R factor of 2. However, as we move
towards a D category building or an E category building, they are introducing vertical
reinforced concrete elements along with the horizontal seismic bands which means now
for the estimate of the lateral seismic coefficient for these values here, we will actually
be using an R factor of 2.5.
So, while the table itself shows you that these are both C category buildings, these are
both D category buildings, these are both E category buildings, the values of the design
seismic coefficient need not necessarily be the same. Here it is the same; here it is the
same; however, in these two they are the numbers might work out to be slightly different.
But the intention is that on one hand the design forces are estimated based on the correct
use of the R factor based on the type of building that are looking at. On the other hand,
you have the prescriptive requirements of the seismic resistant features that need to come
in based on IS 4326. So, it is essential to examine it carefully as you are designing such a
structure and implementing earthquake resistant features as per 4326.
The same set of calculations now extend it to a 4-storeyed B category building, and a 3
or 4 storied C and D category building. For the E category building, if a building is in
category E which is fives to a zone 5 structure of importance factor 1 or zone 5 structure
of importance factor 1.5 or zone 4 importance factor 1.5. The E category buildings are
typically I mean you have to stop at a 3 storied structure. So, the maximum number of
storeys permitted in the E category is 3 storeys; if you are in category D you can go up to
four storeys.
So, if you are looking at this sort of a condition, where you looking at a four-storied B
category building, or a 3-storeyed C and D category and a 3 storied a category building
then using the same assumptions when you estimate what actually happens is for only
408
these two categories, B and C would you be using an R factor of 2, whereas for the rest
of the calculations you will have to use an R factor of 2.5.
So, this is something that you need to examine carefully based on specific features
coming in as far as B, C, D, E categories are concerned, and what R factors need to be
used therefore, to estimate the design seismic coefficient. So, this is an aspect which you
might have to spend some time such that there is consistency between these three codes
that I started talking about yesterday as far as the structural design framework is
concerned.
So, with that I intend to move into, in the next two lectures, intend to give you a very
broad coverage of what key aspects IS 1905 the design standard for unreinforced
masonry as a structural material, touches upon. Of course, you have the code and you
have the exploratory handbook. As I had mentioned earlier a thorough reading of the two
will give you an overall idea of the several prescriptions that this code makes. I would in
the next two lectures go through only specific aspects, key aspects which form the basis
of the design itself.
So, we have talked about lateral resistance being important as far as masonry
constructions are concerned, and that is really the intent with which I linked up the code
for unreinforced masonry as a structural material, the 4326 recommendations and the
1893 design seismic input requirements. However, as far as 1905 is concerned, it does
409
not explicitly talk about seismic design right. The code does not explicitly talk about
seismic design; however, lateral resistance is something that is given adequate coverage
as far as how you can achieve a minimum amount of lateral resistance in the structure.
So, the IS 1905 the code itself deals with both load bearing walls and non-load bearing
walls and uses the working stress approach. This working stress approach is also
extended to the reinforced masonry clauses and the section in the national building code
of 2016.
So, there is a consistency in the approach to design of masonry as far as Indian standards
are concerned. We are continuing to use the permissible stresses approach, the working
stress approach for the design itself. The code 1905 deals with all types of masonry units.
It is valid for solid masonry units perforated bricks or even hollow bricks if you are using
hollow concrete blocks as well. And again, in terms of materials, it is meant to address
right from the burnt clay bricks to stone concrete blocks, all the modern blocks that you
are looking at. And therefore, the structural design of any type of this material is
governed by the code 1905 ok.
The importance given to lateral load resistance is something that keeps coming back in in
different aspects of the code. The implicit understanding in the code is that by limiting
the slenderness ratio, the slenderness of the masonry elements here we are talking of the
load bearing walls, by limiting the slenderness of the masonry elements you are getting
desirable behavior. So, the idea is to have limits on what is allowed in terms of the
slenderness ratios of the masonry elements and that inherently should be able to provide
lateral stability to the system.
So, while the intent with which slenderness ratios are being discussed in the code is to
prevent buckling under vertical roads, the slenderness ratios if they are limited would
also provide lateral resistance to the wall particularly from preventing out of plane
mechanisms. And for assisting horizontal forces, we talk of wind forces or we talk of
earthquake induced forces. These slenderness limits and the other requirements
particularly on the lateral supports ensure desirable performance of the wall both under
gravity forces and overturning due to lateral forces.
410
So, in two directions, if you are looking at the vertical direction of the of the structure
along the height of the structure, the prescriptions on how should the floors be how
should be, how should the beams rest on walls what sort of anchorage of connections are
required to have desirable performance or if you do not have positive connections
between the floor slabs and the roof slabs, then what sort of an effect does it have on the
lateral stability of the walls is something that is directly considered by the code itself.
In the horizontal direction, in the horizontal direction, the lateral stability of the of the
wall is taken into account by provisions of cross walls to shear walls; provisions of
buttresses of piers were required to ensure that there is lateral stability to two walls. So, I
would just like to for a moment, we have been using the word pier as a masonry panel
that is a lateral load resisting vertical element.
However, the code IS 1905 defines piers in a slightly different manner, and you just have
to be conscious what it is talking about. And we will continue to talk of the masonry
panel as far as shear resistance is concerned as a pier. So, here what the code refers to as
a masonry pier is basically a thickening of the wall that is you have a wall of a certain
thickness t.
But if there is a certain projection in the wall which provides additional lateral resistance,
then that element is called a pier. And this pier has a constant extension along the entire
height of the wall that is if you take tp as the thickness of the wall including the pier and
411
tw as the thickness of the wall, tp - tw remains constant along the entire height of the wall.
Width of the pier again is something that is based on how much of lateral resistance the
wall is provided by the pier itself. So, the pier is considered as an element that provides
additional lateral stability to the wall. However, a buttress is also something that is used
and traditionally used in masonry constructions, but in some cases, you might need
buttressing of walls to provide greater lateral resistance.
The main difference between a buttress and the pier is that the pier does not change in
dimension along the height, whereas a buttress is typically larger at the base and tapers
as it goes towards the top of the structure. So, in terms of terminology, pier is different
from what we have been talking about so far, and a masonry buttress is different from a
masonry pier.
The code requires that each shear wall is provided with sufficient number of cross walls.
So, if you remember our discussion during the initial part of the course, that the lateral
load resistance in modern masonry constructions is by the judicious distribution of walls,
shear walls and cross walls along the entire plan of a structure. Therefore, provision of
cross walls as stiffeners to the main wall is something that is a requirement that ensures
there is lateral stability available to the masonry wall, masonry wall load bearing wall
itself.
So, the code talks about these stiffening walls, and prescribes at what spacing should you
be providing these stiffening walls which in a way regulates what are the plan
dimensions that you can allocate for different rooms, you know you know floor plan at
the architectural design level itself. So, depending on the wall that is going to be
stiffened with a cross wall, and number of storeys that the wall is and the structure is
going to be raised to whether it is 1 to 3 stories or 4 stories.
And depending on the inter storey height, the maximum spacing between these cross
walls to a shear wall is prescribed right. And the thickness of the stiffening wall is also
prescribed. So, the code moves between prescriptive requirements and some design
checks that you need to do. So, this is among some of the important prescriptions which
will ensure you have good lateral stability in the masonry construction itself.
412
Now, when you are making calculations on the slenderness ratio of a wall, when you are
making calculations on stability resistance available to lateral forces, it is useful to
consider the effect of a cross wall onto a load bearing wall. If you have a cross wall
sitting against a shear wall, then instead of merely considering the shear wall as being the
wall that resists the lateral forces in the in-plane direction. You can account for the
advantageous effect of the cross wall as an effective flange.
So, the code allows you to account for an effective flange width as being something that
contributes to the lateral load resistance of the masonry wall. And it gives empirical
limits to which you can actually utilize this effective flange width. So, the shear wall, the
capacity of a shear wall to resist lateral forces can be enhanced if you can account for
these flanges.
So, how do you estimate these flanges, it depends on how the walls are interacting with
each other. Are you looking at are you looking at a h cross section, or are you looking at
an edge cross section where it is a C shaped configuration in plan. So, if it is a h shaped
configuration, if you have two walls and if you have a shear wall in between, then the
walls at the ends can be understood to act as flanges to the shear wall.
And how much of this flange must be considered is what you can see in this particular
figure. So, the flanges at the top and the bottom, there are two edges of the walls. The
maximum overhang lengths that you can consider as being an effective flange width for
413
a T shaped water or a I shaped wall is 12 times the thickness of the wall or H/6, where H
is the inter storey height itself. So, this is something you can use to estimate resistance of
the shear wall to the demand forces itself.
If you have a C shaped wall, of course, you do not have the benefit of the symmetry as
you saw in the previous picture. In this case, we reduce the effect to about 6 times the
wall thickness or the inter story height H/ 6. So, this is this is the range that you can
consider from about 12 times the wall thickness or H/6 is what you actually use as an
effective flange width in the lateral load resistance enhancement of a shear wall if it has
cross walls at its ends ok.
Now, this is an important segment which is, we will be working with the permissible
stresses approach, and to be able to account for all the effects of the geometry and the
loading eccentricities coming in from the loading. We need to be able to establish what is
the slenderness ratio of the wall in the first place and depending on the slenderness ratio
of the wall. We have seen in our segment on strength of masonry that slenderness effects
and eccentricity of the load have a significant role to play in reducing the load carrying
capacity of a wall. You have second order effects coming in and your load carrying
capacity, vertical load carrying capacity can be compromised.
So, what is the framework within which this is considered in IS 1905 to be able to
establish slenderness ratios, you need to be able to look at what is the effective height of
414
the wall, what is the effective length of the wall, what is the effective thickness of the
wall to make an estimate of the slenderness ratio either along the height or the
slenderness ratio along the length of the wall. So, we start examining how effective
height, effective length and effective thickness are defined by the code, and therefore,
that leads us to defining slenderness ratios, and how slenderness ratios and eccentricity
ratios then effect are permissible compressive stress, so that is the tract that I am going to
be looking at in the next few slides.
So, as far as effective length itself is concerned what the code does is, it gives you the
possibility of accounting for the role played by the floor slabs or the roof slabs. So, it is
important that depending on the design requirements, whether you going to have a
reinforced concrete floor, whether you are going to have a light structural floor, like a
timber floor or a steel floor, you would be in a position to understand the kind of
restraints that the floor has at the ends of the walls. And based on that, the effective
length of the wall is bound to change.
So, the code looks at four different categories, and you could have other conditions as
well. The code talks about timber floors, but today timber floors are not that common in
our country. You could have steel floors and then you might want to examine the
potential end conditions induced by the sort of floor itself. So, the code gives you the
possibility of looking at a reinforced concrete roof or a floor slab, timber roof or a floor
slab a timber roof, a timber floor, but with a truss roof at the at the final roof or
freestanding walls.
And then basically we are looking at an estimate of what the effective height can be in
different conditions. Of course, this will be theoretically different from what ideal
boundary conditions, we can assume for our buckling calculations. It accounts for
multiple effects. We have seen that it is not only the boundary condition, the slenderness
and eccentricity, but also the relative stiffnesses between the wall and the floor. So, there
are multiple factors that come in. And therefore, the code prescribed affective heights
will be theoretically different will be different from the theoretical estimates.
So, the code gives you possibilities of looking at full restraint both lateral and rotational
restraint is available at the top and at the bottom. You have lateral restraint lateral
translation and rotational restraint at the top and at the bottom you only have
415
translational restraint meaning you have rotational restraint is removed at the bottom.
You have lateral restraint both of the top in the bottom, translational restraint alone no
rotational restraint.
And a case where there is lateral and rotational restraint translational and rotational
restraint at the bottom, and no restraint at the top which would be the case of a free
standing wall which could be a parapet wall, parapet wall is a non-structural element, but
a parapet, but a regular compound wall for example, would qualify as a freestanding wall
if you were to look at the structural design of such a wall. So, it is essential to know what
sort of the boundary condition is close to the system that you are choosing and choose
the effective height required to make this estimate.
What about columns? So, if you have masonry walls, where the width of the wall is less
than 4 times the thickness of the wall. These are typically classified as columns they are
not treated as walls any longer, they are actually slender elements. So, if the total width
of the masonry wall is less than 4 times the thickness of the wall, you classify them as
columns. And given their slenderness we treat them differently as far as the structural
design is concerned. And it depends on whether this has lateral supports about one axis
or about two axis.
So, typically when you have a masonry column, you might have a masonry column
receiving reinforced concrete beam in one direction or two directions or from all four
416
sides. So, it is important to be able to look at the orientation in which the lateral restraints
to the ends of the column are coming in.
So, you might have a column where like a brick column, where in the x-direction there is
a reinforced concrete beam coming in; and in the y-direction from the from both the
sides you have restraints coming in, you can have different configurations from ranging
from one single reinforced concrete beam coming and resting on the column to a
condition where it is receiving from all the four directions.
Depending on this configuration if there is lateral restraint in a direction, you take the
height as 1 h, where h is the height of the column itself. If there is no restraint, then you
take the effective height as twice the height of the column itself. So, varies between 1 h
and 2 h as far as columns are concerned.
If you have significant openings in a wall, significant opening such as a door opening
and a and a window opening, we have talked about the masonry pier right. And we
talked about how you will have a shear deformation profile in a masonry wall which is
perforated by openings. Now, if this masonry pier is small such that it qualifies as a
column rather than a pier, you will have to be careful about using the effective heights
not that which pertains to the wall, but which pertains to the column. So, typically
between a door opening and a window opening though there are limitations to which you
can reduce that masonry pier size.
417
If it qualifies as a column, you have to be using the right effective, effective factors. So, a
wall between openings can eventually work out to be a masonry column itself. So, if you
are looking at this sort of configuration, then what sort of boundary condition are you
going to give this masonry column along the x-direction and along the y-direction, so
that is something that needs to be evaluated. And, depending on whether you have a
reinforced concrete slab or a light roof or a light floor which is not capable of providing
rotational restraint or translational, translational restraint, you will have to estimate what
the effective height is.
So, if there is full restraint at the top, you look at the perpendicular direction to the wall
plane and the parallel direction to the wall plane and make an estimate of what the
effective height is. So, if there is full restraint, then in the direction perpendicular to the
wall plane which is in the y y direction, you are talking of an effective height of 0.75 H
plus 0.25 H1, where this H1 is referring to the largest opening itself. So, of course, in the
other direction it is assumed that the effective height is the height of the wall itself.
If you do not have a reinforced concrete slab which is able to give you rotational restraint
at the top, good restraint against translation and rotation at the top, then you are looking
at partial restraint. If you have partial restraint, then what happens in the x-direction what
happens in the y-direction. So, this is again something that you should be able to
carefully classify and estimate what the effective height itself is.
The question is whether we are considering the lintel beams meaning in cases where you
have where you have openings in a wall which has openings, and they are provided with
lintel beams. See the point as far as lintel beams are concerned, lintel beams are not
continuous elements ok. Lintel beams as far as load bearing gravity load bearing
masonry design is concerned and not conceived as continuous elements ok. So, these are
basically what we refer to as cut lintels they appear just above the opening itself.
So, the contribution from them is not considered to provide, may marginally affect the
stiffness of the wall in the in plane direction, but is really not a boundary condition, it is
not close to the boundary. Now, even if you have cut lintels, I mean even if you have
continuous lintels which is what is prescribed by IS 4326 that when we talk of a lintel
beam it is at the level of the lintel, and running continuously in the structure. Even this is
a very slender element if you actually look at the cross section we are talking of
418
something that maybe 75 mm or 150 mm with minimum steel. So, these are deformable
elements, relatively deformable elements and they are not sitting exactly at the ends of
the walls, and so their contribution is not considered systematically in the estimate of
stiffness ok.
So, if you are able to make an estimate of the effective height, you then need to work on
effective lengths, because we have seen how lateral forces induce deformations in the
wall in the horizontal bending situation or in the diagonal bending situation. In both these
situations, if the boundary conditions in the ends of the wall, the vertical edges, the
lateral edges of the wall have affects of cross walls have the affects of the return walls
then that will affect the effective length of the wall the deformed profile of the wall itself,
so that needs to be accounted for when you are making slenderness calculations based on
effective length.
So, different situations, you can have a blank wall with no cross walls, you can have a
wall which has cross walls at both its ends; cross wall at one end, big openings you can
have different configurations. So, the code gives you different situations under which the
effective length of the wall can be calculated. So, here are a few with reference to the
cases given in the figure.
If it is continuous, if the wall is continuous and supported by cross walls and no opening
within H/8, H again refers to the height of the wall; H/8 of the cross wall, then you take
419
the effective length to be about 80 percent of the actual length. Wall supported by cross
walls at one end and continuous with wall with cross walls at the other end it is another
case.
If you have a wall supported by cross walls at each end, you have another situation
without openings; and then wall free at one end and continuous with a cross wallet at the
other end 1.5 one of the largest; I mean you have the effect of restraint on one side, no
restraint on the other. And you can have a wall which is completely free at its lateral
edges, and you take the effective length as two times two times of l.
Now, word of caution is if the opening is a large opening, then you can actually assume
that the opening is creating a free end and that is conservatively assuming that the large
opening is actually making the end almost of free end, and the restraint available by the
spandrel, whatever be the depth is not something that is going to be significant. So, you
estimate the effective length.
And then you also need to estimate what is the effective thickness of the wall because if
you are using and if you are estimating slenderness ratio as effective height by effective
thickness, effective length the effective thickness, you need what is an effective
thickness of the wall itself. So, if you are using solid walls, it is the actual thickness. But
here you will be careful that you cannot use the plaster thickness as being part of the wall
420
itself. So, we exclude the plaster thickness of the wall in making the estimate of the wall
thickness itself.
But if you are looking at walls with piers and walls with buttresses, then we need to
account for the contribution of the buttressed element or the buttressing element and the
pier in improving the effective thickness of the wall. So, when you do that, when you do
that, you basically use the, we are making use of the stiffening coefficient along one
direction, you cannot be using the stiffening coefficient along both the directions. We are
typically talking of elements that are vertically aligned. The pier is vertically aligned the
buttress is also vertically aligned; we use this stiffening coefficient in our estimate of the
wall thickness.
But you cannot use this as a contributor to the length of the wall. So, the stiffening
coefficient is estimated as given in this table, where Sp here is the center to center
spacing of the pier or the cross wall how the spacing of the pier itself in the in the wall
either you have piers or you have cross walls. And tp is the thickness of the pier that we
have seen earlier. So, depending on this ratio of the spacing to the thickness of the pier,
you will estimate what the stiffening coefficient is, and you are allowed to interpolate
between the different conditions of ratio of thickness of the pier to the thickness of the
wall.
So, depending on the actual geometry of the pier to the wall, you can estimate what the
value of the stiffening coefficient is going to be. And of course, if it is a cross wall, the
ratio might be much more than 3, but you cap it at 3 and make the estimate. So, it could
be a solid wall with the cross piers. And if it is a cross pier as I said though you might
have a ratio that is more than t p / t w more than 3, you cap it with that t p / t w equal to 3,
and use the stiffening coefficients for estimating the effective thickness of the wall.
421
So, having examined the effective height the way it is considered in the design; effective
length how it is considered in the design and the effective thickness. Once you make an
estimate of these values, you take the two ratios effective height to effective thickness or
effective length to effective thickness, and the lesser of the two slenderness ratios are
taken. The lesser of the two slenderness ratios are taken and this is airing on the
conservative side that the lower of the two values are used in design.
So, you need to make an estimate for every wall of what the two slenderness ratios are,
and make use of the lower of the two values. As far as columns are concerned, you will
look at those of the principal directions, and these values for a column should not be
greater than 12 for a for a wall of the order of 27 is the cap as far as the slenderness ratio
of a masonry wall itself is as far as the design is concerned.
Once slenderness ratios can be established, you need to come to eccentricity. And as far
as eccentricity is concerned, we make our calculations when we when we check
permissible stresses, we typically tend to check the permissible stresses at the base of the
wall. We assume that the critical section of the wall is at the base of the wall.
However, if you actually look at different loading situations, and the most common
loading situation where you have an eccentricity of the load at the top, and fixity in the
wall at the base or the rotational release at the base because of a crack at the base. Then
the critical section that actually should occur because of a combination of the deflection
422
under the load and the eccentricity of the load itself need not necessarily happen at the
base of the wall . This could actually happen at about sixty percent of the height of the
wall that is where you will get the maximum eccentricity. However, we are not going to
be systematically checking in different walls where the critical section is expected to
occur, we make the calculations at the base of the wall.
So, the design guidelines given consider the fact that simplification is necessary, so that
we are on the conservative side, because critical sections may not necessarily happen at
the base of the wall. But in such a situation, it should happen at about 60 percent of the
height of the wall. As far as eccentricity is concerned you will have eccentricity possibly
coming from multiple sources. Because if you take a masonry wall, it may not be a
single load, superimposed load getting transferred onto the wall, you can have multiple
loads coming on to a certain segment of the wall that you are designing.
So, in that situation, you have to estimate what is referred to as a resultant eccentricity
because you cannot be using three different eccentricities to estimate what the slender is,
what the effect of the eccentricity of the load is on the same wall. So, you need to make
an estimate based on the geometry as far as the location of the load itself is concerned,
and the loads themselves a weighted mean of the eccentricities is made to arrive at the
resultant eccentricity.
And so this is the eccentricity that you will use to calculate the eccentricity ratio. If it is a
single load, you are going to use a single load, but if it is multiple loads with different
eccentricities use the resultant eccentricity ok.
423
That brings me to application of these aspects that we have estimated into the design
check itself. So, you need to be able to estimate the permissible compressive stress and
ensure that for the combination of loads that you are looking at, the permissible
compressive stress is not exceeded in a given wall cross section. Now, if the demand
forces are greater than the permissible compressive stress, then the option that you have
is going for a higher strength of brick unit and a higher mortar; and ensure that the
permissible stresses are now pushed further up in demand stresses are lower.
So, how do you estimate what is the permissible compressive stress, and then compare
that that permissible compressive stress to the demand stresses that you are expecting.
So, the way the permissible compressive stress is arrived at is you have to use a basic
compressive stress, and I introduced this, this terminology called the basic compressive
stress. The basic compressive stress is then factored by the different effects one of which
we have talked of extensively, which is reduction in the stress because of slenderness
ratio and eccentricity. A second is because of small areas called the area reduction factor,
and a third referred to as a shape modification factor; all three we will discuss in a
moment.
So, you need the basic compressive stress you need the basic compressive stress to which
you are using these reduction factors. So, what is this, basic compressive stress itself-
you have two ways in which you can you can arrive at the basic compressive stress. So,
424
the basic compressive stress there is a table which provides what should be used as a
basic compressive stress within the working stress approach right. This basic
compressive stress as you see in the table is not the strength of masonry, it is not the
compressive strength of masonry. It is within the working stress approach that we are
using this.
So, table number 8 of IS 1905 gives you the possibility of choosing the basic
compressive stress that you want to work with; meaning depending on the demand
stresses you might want to go for a higher strength or a lower strength unit or a higher
strength or lower strength mortar.
So, you have this matrix which gives you different mortar types in the first column here
H 1 to L 2, and you have the unit strengths going all the way from 3.5 to about 40. So,
what you see as these numbers are the basic compressive stress prescribed for a
combination of a certain strength of unit and a certain strength of mortar. So, you could
either use this value that the code prescribes or if you were to carry out a compressive
strength test in the laboratory using a prism test, then we take 25 percent of the crushing
strength of the masonry.
So, if you are actually carrying out a test in the laboratory, then your basic compressive
stress is one-quarter of the compressive strength of the masonry if you have statistically
sufficient number of samples. f prime in is the crushing strength 28 day and also the
characteristic compressive strength. So, if you have test results, use this. If you do not
have test results, the code gives you an overall basis. It is quite clear to you that the
minimum factor of safety that we are talking about in the working stress approach the
minimum factor of safety commences at 4.
So, if the compressive strength is f m, it is f m by 4 that we are actually keeping as the

basic compressive stress. We are then going to multiply the basic compressive stress
with further factors assuming that the three factors that I am going to be looking at ks, ka
and kp are all 1, then the minimum factor of safety ensured in the permissible stresses
approach is 4. It can go all the way up to numbers that that are going to be quite
shocking.
Yes, because why 25 we have seen that at about 33 percent of a stress strain curve of the
masonry. You start getting deviations from the linear elastic behavior which means some
425
initial cracking has started, and we were limiting ourselves to the estimate of the
modulus of elasticity in the zone of five percent to 33 percent of the compressive
So, we are basically saying that that initial one-third is more or less linear is linear, and it
matches with the fact that the basic compressive stress is taken as the stress within that
elastic region. So, it it makes sense because you are talking of a permissible stresses
approach you do not want the stress level to go into the non-linear range and that is the
and that is the rationale I would think.
So, this table that I have reported here is nothing but the table that is available in
appendix B of IS 1905 which gives you correction factors depending on the height to
thickness ratios that you will use for the prism itself. And we have seen that for block
work and brickwork these values can vary ok.
So, the first factor is a strength reduction factor, the stress reduction factor. And the
stress reduction factor is nothing but the second order effects that we were looking at we
looked at an entire procedure to account for these second order effects, and they are in
terms of the slenderness ratio and the eccentricity ratio; we have seen this table earlier.
So, once you have the slenderness ratio, the lower of the two, H effective by T effective
or L effective /t effective. And the eccentricity ratio the eccentricity ratio again the resultant
426
eccentricity if you have multiple loads, you have eccentricity ratios going from 0 one-
twenty fourth, one-twelfth, one-sixth is that for the linear elastic; the key situation where
you have no tension, but full compression. And then one-quarter and one-third where
you start getting tension in the cross section.
And the slenderness ratios go all the way from 6 to 27. So, you can interpolate between
the values that are reported. You can see that if there if the slenderness ratio is 6, you
have no and for whatever be the eccentricity ratio of the load, you have no reduction in
the stress as you go forward we have seen the graphs that that you can make; the curves
that you can make with this set of expressions. So, the first factor is a stress reduction
factor less than 1, 1 or less than 1.
The second is the area reduction factor. This area reduction factor basically takes into
account the smallness of an area, resisting area of masonry, which means if you are
talking about a full wall, you know if you are talking about a small column; the small
column does not have a resisting area that is comparable to a wall itself. Now, if there is
a defect in the material, if there is a defective brick, the effect of the defective brick in a
small cross section like a column is going to be more severe than the problem of that
poor brick, poor quality brick in an entire wall, in an entire wall cross section.
So, it is a way of accounting for the variability in masonry as having a role to play; it is
critical at sometimes when the area of cross section is small, not critical when the area of
427
cross section is significant. So, it really takes into account the smallness of the area of
cross section and it is applicable only when the cross section is less than 0.2 m2. So, if
you are working with columns you will have that sort of a cross section and the area
reduction factor is estimated empirically as 0.7 + 1.5 A, where A is the area of cross
section itself.
So, as I said it goes by the underlying concept that in a smaller cross section, there is a
greater probability of statistically a greater probability of failure because of a poorer
quality of stone or brick than in a larger cross section, so that is the area reduction factor.
We also have a shape modification factor. And this shape modification factor needs to be
used only if the way in which you are laying the bricks changes right.
We typically place the bricks flat twice. But for some reason particularly when you want
to optimize wall cross sections or you have exposed brickwork, when you have when
you do not plaster brickwork, you have exposed brickwork you want a certain pattern to
be visible on the exterior, then you might place the brick on edge or you might even
place the brick on end rather than placing it flat wise.
So, if there is a change, then the immediate implication is the number of bed joints will
change with respect to flat wise placement of bricks. When you place bricks flat wise,
you will get the maximum number of bed joints. But if you were to place it on end, the
number of bed joints will be lower than in the flat wise case. And if you were to place it
on edge, it will be the minimum the least number of bed joints that you will get. Now, if
you remember what we talked about in terms of the effect of bed joint on the masonry
compressive strength as you reduce the bed joints, you get better strength in masonry.
So, this is where the shape modification factor comes from. And basically, you have the
shape modification factor for different strengths of units. And depending on the height to
width ratio of the unit the way you are laying it in the wall itself. So, it can go from the
ratio itself can go from 0.75 that is how we would actually lay the brick 0.75 in height to
with 175 mm to 100 mm, you will get a ratio of 0.75, you do not use a shape
modification factor at all.
Shape modification factor is 1. But if you change that you, you see that the shape
modification factor increases. By increased you see that these values are greater than 1,
simply because the number of bed joints is reducing now and therefore it has a positive
428
effect on the strength of masonry right there. The other two factors are less than 1, this is
the only factor that is greater than 1 and that is the rationale behind it. It takes care of the
shape of the unit and the height to width ratio as laid, basically echoing the fact that less
of the number of joins greater is the load carrying capacity. So, now, we have an
understanding of how these three factors are multiplied with the basic compressive stress
to establish the permissible compressive stress.
So, we will continue in the next class.
429
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 04
Lecture - 24
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - III
Good morning. So, we continue with design considerations as far as IS 1905 the working
stress approach is concerned. So, in the last class we were actually looking at the basic
compressive stress, I mean we were looking at the permissible compressive stress and
how we arrive at the permissible compressive stress and where we stopped in the last
class was to look at how the basic compressive stress is then factored using three
important factors.
Well, the first factor is the most important factor, the stress reduction factor which
accounts for slenderness ratio and the eccentricity ratio ks followed by the area reduction
factor because of the smallness of the area and finally, the shape modification factor to
account for changes in the number of bed joints that might occur because of the way the
bricks are being laid.
And finally, the permissible compressive stress fc is the basic compressive stress which if
you have test results we are looking at one quarter of the failure strength in compression
430
of masonry or if you would like to choose a certain unit strength and a motor strength,
the basic compressive stress is given to you in table 8 of the code.
So, use the basic compressive stress and reduce the basic compressive stress using the
factors of course, among these ks and ka factors would be less than 1 whereas, the kp
factor would be greater than 1 and you arrive at the permissible compressive stress for
the design that you are adopting. This permissible compressive stress is going to be
different for different walls that is the that is something that you will realize when you
start doing your design because each wall will have a different boundary conditions,
different slenderness ratios.
So, the permissible compressive stress has to be arrived at for each configuration, each
wall. So, that is as far as the permissible compressive stress is concerned. Again,
working within the concept of the working stresses, the tensile stress- the permissible
tensile stress has to be defined similarly; the permissible shear stress has to be defined
and then you have the checks required for design ready.
Now, the permissible compressive stress is increased is augmented under certain

conditions ok. The code gives you the conditions under which you can increase the
permissible compressive stress. One of the most important conditions is when you have
significant eccentricity of the loads that you are considering; the vertical loads that you
are considering.
431
When you have eccentricity, we were talking of a resultant eccentricity of the loads the
compressive stresses are not uniform along the cross section you do not have uniform
compressive stresses, you will have a gradient in the compressive stresses you will have
lesser compressive stresses on one end of the cross section higher compressive stresses
on the other end of the cross section.
So, when you have a gradient in the cross section, the wall cross section not being in
uniform compression would mean that the entire cross section will not fail at the same
instant, but the most compressed fiber the edge, that is most compressed would crush
first whereas, the rest of the sections would have would not have crushed yet.
So, you will have a strain gradient with the edge compression fiber failing first whereas,
rest of the cross section has not reached that value of the compressive stress. So, to
account for this strain gradient effect, we allow for the masonry permissible compressive
stress to be increased and it is increased to about 25 percent maximum. So, it basically
accounts for the fact that under flexural compression masonry should be able to
counteract higher compression loads.
So, masonry can take about 25 percent greater compressive stresses in flexural
compression due to bending rather than due to pure compression. So, that is the first and
probably the foremost reason why increase in permissible stresses is allowed. So, the
strain gradient effect is what is accounted for in doing so, by increasing fc by 1.25; 25
percent itself. Also; this is in a way implicitly accounting for some redistribution that
will actually happen in this in the real case because of cracking and the stresses being
redistributed in the active cross section of the masonry wall itself.
So, the code basically looks at low eccentricities when your eccentricities are less than
about 1 in 24 of the cross section; eccentricities are between 1 in 24 to about one sixth of
the cross section that is a critical limit as you know when you start getting tension
beyond which you start getting tension with cross section and above one sixth of the
cross section.
So, based on these categories when you have when you have the eccentricity greater than
1 in 24 you are allowed to account for increase in permissible stress by 25 percent. So,
your two edge compression stresses have to be estimated edge 1 and edge 2 as f 1 and f 2
432
and then you increase the edge compression stress by 25 percent to account for flexural
compression itself.
The code also allows increase in permissible compressive stress in other conditions, there
is an appendix that is dedicated to different situations under which permissible stresses
can be augmented. Another condition in which this is done is, when you have
concentrated loads versus distributed loads. Concentrated loads, the bearing area being
small the code again allows an increase in the permissible stress if you are working with
concentrated loads as against distributed loads.
So, you can look at appendix C which has these specific conditions under which
permissible stresses can be increased, but the two most important the first one being the
strain gradient effect and the second one being when you have concentrated loads is what
I have touched upon here ok.
With that we also need to define permissible tensile stresses, as you know the masonry
tensile strength is not something that is significant, the bed joint tensile strength is not
something significant.
However, if a finite nonzero estimate of the permissible of the tensile strength is

available you can then use it within your design and these values are small; however, can
be used within the permissible stresses approach. So, if you are using a mortar grade that
433
is M1 or better, M1 H 1 or H 2 grade mortars, then if you are looking at bending in the
vertical direction. So, you are looking at the tension occurring normal to the bed joints
right, when tension is acting normal to the bed joints, then the permissible tensile stress
in the masonry is 0.07 MPa.
Now, in the same situation if you are still using M1 or better grade mortars then the
tensile strength parallel to the bed joint here, you can use a value twice the earlier value.
So, you can see that the tensile strength here that the permissible tensile stress parallel to
the bed joint is kept twice as that of the permissible tensile stress perpendicular to the
bed joint.
So, we were talking of the orthogonal strength ratio of the tensile strength parallel to the
bed joint to the tensile strength perpendicular the bed joint typically being 2 that is still
maintained in the code expressions as well. And you are allowed to use that increase-
twice for the tensile strength parallel to the bed joint only if the unit strength is at least 10
MPa or 10 N/mm2 .
So, that is the maximum permissible tensile stress that you can use, but if you are
looking at weaker mortars, M2 mortar, then the value is typically lesser you are looking
at 0.05 MPa for tension normal to the bed joint and double. And you use that as the only
permissible stress if the mortar is of a lower grade M2 grade mortar.
So, permissible tensile stress is, you can make an estimate and use this. It is a small
quantity and the difficulty in using a zero tensile strength condition is that, you will have
to then ensure you have a cross section, a dimension which ensures the entire cross
section is in compression. So, this small amount of tension that you can account for can
help you overcome situations by small amount of tension is that is coming into your
cross section and you can optimize the cross-section dimension itself.
434
The third item is what we have seen earlier as far as the shear stress is concerned. In
terms of the shear stress again the this is something we had seen when we looked at the
material strengths that the format in which we are considering the shear strength is from
a Mohr coulomb criterion; where the strength comes from the bond strength cohesion
and the internal friction angle or the frictional resistance available given the type of
material that you are using.
So, in this case we have seen earlier that the permissible shear stress in the code is fs =
0.1 + fd/6. Here 0.1 is the value that refers to the cohesion that you can get, the bond that
is there between the unit and the mortar whereas, one-sixth into fd where fd is the
compressive stress due to the dead loads only on the compressed area of the wall cross
section you neglect area which is in tension.
And therefore, if you can actually compare this to the strength equation, we are talking of
a value of frictional resistance, the coefficient of friction of about one sixth which is
really small in comparison to what you will actually get in materials such as masonry 0.4
and above is what you would typically get in real conditions, but we are working within
permissible stresses.
So, 0.1 referring to the cohesion and one-sixth referring to mu and the compressive stress
on the compressed zone of the wall cross section has to be taken into account. So, you
have the permissible compressive stress defined, you have the permissible tensile stress
435
defined and the permissible shear stress defined. And if you see the three different
definitions the permissible compressive stress is going to be different for different walls.
Because the wall configurations length and height would vary, the boundary conditions
would vary and therefore, the slenderness ratios will change and the factor ks can change
from wall to wall. The permissible tensile stresses will not change that is going to remain
standard for the mix that you are looking at. Permissible shear stresses will also change
permissible shear stresses will change because it depends on the compressive stress in
the wall in that location that you are considering.
So, again permissible shear stresses have to be estimated wall by wall as the permissible
compressive stresses. So, with this, you have the framework required for making the
necessary checks to ensure that the stresses are within the permissible stresses for a
combination of gravity and lateral forces acting on the wall acting on the structure itself,
ok. With that there is one other aspect that I want to examine, which is the concept of
arching action which is taken into account in masonry and the masonry code actually
accounts for arching action.
But this arching action is a little different from the arching action that we have seen
earlier. So, we will we will spend a few minutes on this. The arching action that is being
referred to in the code versus what we have seen earlier. We have seen earlier arching
action occurring due to the out of plane deformation of the wall, an arching action
436
allowing for greater out of plane load resistance of the wall. We looked at how due to the
presence of non moving supports or rigid supports as a wall is laterally loaded by wind
loads or inertial loads and when the walls starts deforming depending on whether you
have gap or no gap between the supports and the wall, you can get additional clamping
forces which increase the capacity of the wall; that is the arching action that we have
seen so, far therefore it is in the out of plane direction.
What the code is talking about here is arching action occurring in the in-plane direction
when you have openings in walls, ok. So, we will examine the first case, we will
examine the case which is the in-plane arching action that occurs in masonry. The
concept is more or less the same that you actually have a thrust line that is developing of
the forces of the compressive forces which takes the form of an arch and allows for load
resistance.
So, what really happens is, when you have an opening in a wall which is a vertical load
carrying element, now does not have a continuity in the vertical load path. So, what
happens to the load at that point? The load is then is it going to be completely carried by
a lintel that you are going to provide over the opening or is the load actually going to get
transferred to the sides of the opening? And if it does get transferred to the size of the
opening what guarantees that action is actually what we are examining and the
phenomenon that occurs is the arching action and under what conditions does this occur
is what we are trying to examine.
So, let us look at this situation, we are looking at a wall as I said we are looking at the
plane of the wall. And in the plane of the wall we have an opening, it is a door opening
of a clear span L, and you have a lintel that is provided. So, every opening is typically
provided with a lintel. Now, we will come to the design loads that we consider for the
lintel; however, we look at the opening and the load that is actually present above the
opening.
So, you have the spandrel of the masonry wall, you have the two piers on the two sides
the spandrel of the masonry wall what happens to the load of that spandrel is the
question. Now, if you have sufficient size, sufficient space on the two sides of the
opening and that is an important requirement. If you have sufficient space on the two
sides of an opening the load that is present above the opening can actually get completely
437
transferred by forming a resultant of the vertical forces in the form of an arch and you get
you get the possibility of forming this complete arch.
If this complete arch can be formed, then the load that is actually coming down to the
opening gets diverted to the two sides. However, there are some geometrical constraints
which have to be adhered to if this has to occur or not and that determines how much
will you design the lintel itself for.
So, we are going to be examining that in under different conditions in a few minutes. So,
what we are saying is the load that is sitting above the opening can get transferred to the
sides and the two sides will then carry greater load than it was originally carrying. So, if
you look at these stretches in the figure, these stretches at the bottom of the wall GH and
JK will actually be carrying additional load and additional stresses now, in comparison to
what the wall would have been carrying if the opening was not present right.
If I take the average stresses at the bottom of the wall A B, if there was no opening that
would be lower than what the wall stresses would be in segments GH and JK if then an
opening is present; which means the load now that is above this opening additionally
gets diverted to these two segments GH and JK ok. However, there is a certain constraint
on how much of space is available on the two sides. If you do not have sufficient space
the arch cannot form and then you will not have load being resisted in the in the form of
an arch or the arching action itself cannot be fully, you cannot fully depend on the
arching action in case geometrically you do not have this sort of a configuration.
So, what is really happening is the load that is sitting on top of the opening is getting
diverted and acts as a thrust in the form of an arch to the sides of the sides of the wall.
This if you look at points C and point F those are almost like the springing points of the
arch that is where the arch is formed and you have the springing points of the arch at
those two locations, the additional vertical load which is getting diverted is acting in the
form of a shear force on these two sides.
So, that is going to be the that is going to be taken care of by shear resistance available in
the two sides of the arch itself right. So, you must have sufficient wall area on the two
sides for that shear resistance to be provided for the arching action, for the arch profile
itself to form. So, this is really what is what is happening the two sides of the wall are
actually acting like abutments for a for an arch.
438
So, let us keep that mechanism in mind and examine different situations under which this
can actually happen. So, this region over which the additional load above the opening is
going to get transferred to the size of the wall, an estimate of how over what length are
you going to get additional load and compressive stresses thereof can be estimated. So, if
this length GH and JK are x then, it is approximately lesser of the effective span of the
opening L or L + H (the inter storey height) divided by 2.
So, you can make an estimate over how much area would you see an increase in the
compressive stresses? So, if you if you actually make a finite element model of such a
such a configuration, you will see that region AG in the wall has compressive stresses
almost unaffected by the opening as though it was just the plain wall the GH portion
would have additional compressive stresses and that comes because of the formation of
the arching action itself. It is going to be difficult to estimate from a design perspective
how much is the compressive stress in AG, in GH, in JK and in KB we typically would
then look at the stretch AH and have the compressive stress uniform in that stretch.
So, we approximate the stress in the stretches of the stretches of the wall. So, we
approximate the stress it is not going to be easy to say this part has higher compressive
stress and so, you make a make an estimate of what is the design requirement for that
compressive stress, we approximate the stresses over the entire stretch ok. One important
aspect that I would like to mention at this stage is, if you are looking at the load coming
on the load distribution in a masonry wall from a concentrated load.
Let us assume that you have a beam sitting on a masonry wall, then the load distribution
from the beam to the masonry wall is assumed to occur by a dispersion of 30 degrees
from the vertical right it is an assumption that you take an angle of 30 degrees with the
vertical you have a concentrated load the dispersion is at 30 degrees, 30 plus 30 is what
will be the load dispersion is that concentrated load then becomes a uniformly distributed
load at the at the plane of the masonry in the wall.
So, the code prescribes the use of 30 degrees there are some codes some studies that
would take this value at 45 degrees, but then several studies have shown that it is better
to take a value closer to 30 degrees. So, 30 degrees dispersion is what is typically used to
look at the concentrated load being converted into a uniformly distributed load at the
wall plane itself we use a similar estimate for the masonry load on a lintel as well.
439
We will come to that triangular this equilateral triangle that I am looking at, I will
explain that in a moment. If arching action were actually going to happen; you have the
geometrical condition for arching action to happen- that is sufficiently wide wall on
either sides of the opening is available to you and the spandrel is also sufficiently high
that is if you draw an equilateral triangle above the lintel and within the equilateral
triangle you do not have other loads coming in.
We will look at a situation where there are other loads that that come in let us assume
that the roof slab that is shown here at the top this green roof slab that is shown here at
the top, assume that is really low and if that roof slab we are to interfere with the
equilateral triangle above the opening then you have a disturbed situation.
But assume a situation where the roof slab is significantly away from the triangular from
the apex of the triangle, this apex I mean this equilateral triangle is the only load for
which you will have to design the lintel, the rest of the load above the opening gets
transferred to the sides by arching action right. So, this arching phenomenon gives you
the possibility of defining the load for which you will design the lintel itself yes. And
therefore, if arching action is not occurring because of configuration you should know
what to design the lintel for right. So, that is the criticality of this of this problem itself.
I have this very interesting photograph that tells you what is arching action and what is
the load that the lintel will carry. And this is from one of the site visits this is the Indira
440
Awas Yojana construction 6 meters by 4 meters construction using brick masonry and
reinforced concrete floors you see that there is no lintel. Since there is no lintel you will
have damage and damage in masonry, but it is very clear how the lintel should be
designed only for that triangular load right.
So, if you had a lintel there the rest of the load whatever is coming on to the masonry
above the opening has actually gone down to the sides by the arching action. So, this is
this is arching action demonstrated to you thanks to no lintel being placed there; if there
was a lintel we would not be we would not have been able to demonstrate this. In fact,
very instructively you can actually see that there is a lintel on the other side and there is
no crack there whereas, on this side there is a there is no lintel and there is a crack.
So, I think this picture will remain in your mind that is the load that you must design the
lintel for if the conditions so, permit ok. And therefore, it is useful to examine what are
the conditions that deviate from this and you should be careful in designing the lintel
itself.
So, we look at a few conditions, if you do not have significant length on the two sides of
the wall. If the two sides of the wall if you have an unsymmetric placement of the door
opening or a window opening for that matter, then you should be careful to check how
much of width of wall do you have.
441
And again, this is a prescription that is the length L 1, this length L 1 that we are looking
at L 1 on one side and L 2 on the other should at least be half of the effective span of the
opening itself. I case you have a situation where L 1 is less than half of L, the only option
that you have is make an estimate of all the load that is coming right above the opening
the load that actually is above the opening and design the lintel for all that load.
So, this is the important effect as far as the availability of geometry for arching action to
develop or otherwise. And if you have L 1 and L 2 on the two sides such that L 1 and L 2
is greater than 0.5 L, you will have the possibility of the arching action the resultant arch
forming and you can design the lintel just for the equilateral triangle. You can see that in
the figure in the middle this first figure, the arch cannot form it gets interrupted.
If you try to put an arch there the arch gets interrupted that is the problem you if the arch
gets interrupted you cannot it will not form a symmetrical load transfer mechanism and
therefore, you cannot design the lintel only for the triangular load you have to design it
for all the load sitting above the opening itself ok.
Some other conditions where the region that we are talking of, the equilateral triangular
region that we are talking of can get disturbed. And if it gets disturbed in the sense if
there are other loads that come within that area or under what conditions will you
consider only the equilateral triangular area is what we will examine in a moment. So, let
442
us see a situation where on both the sides of the opening you have significant lengths of
walls. So, L 1 and L 2 are greater than 0.5 L requirement that we have.
So, arching action will develop. But however, arching action since arching action is
developing you are actually looking at the triangular area above the lintel, but if the
triangular area that you are examining is disturbed by certain other loads that come in to
that region, then it is not only the masonry load that fits into the triangular equilateral
triangle, but the additional loads that come into that area.
So, in this particular case you can see that the spandrel above the opening is not
significant in it is dimension and the roof is the floor slab is rather low interest or height
can be low, it can be as low as 2-2.3 meters and some constructions. So, in this particular
case you have the floor load actually interfering with the equilateral triangle. So, once
the equilateral triangle is established you will have to look at what is the magnitude of
the floor load which is again a uniformly distributed load coming from the floor above,
what is the floor load that actually sits within the equilateral triangle.
And design the lintel for that additional load, you then use the uniformly distributed load
that you can see here coming from the floor load and transfer it to the design of the lintel
itself. Again if you have in the floor above in the story above you have an opening that is
occurring and you have masonry below the opening. Let us say you have window
opening you have the masonry below the opening as long as the height of that opening is
such that, the apex of the triangle the apex of the clutter triangle that you are looking at
this point to the opening is 250 mm or more you can consider only the equilateral
triangle.
If instead the opening is close to the apex, you will have to look at other loads as well
coming from the floor and coming from the story above. So, two conditions here, one is
that the floor itself is intercepting the equilateral triangle. So, you will consider the floor
load of the portion intercepting the equilateral triangle as part of the design load for the
lintel and you will consider only the floor load within this portion as long as the opening
if any above is actually 250 mm or more from the apex of this equilateral triangle.
So, what is happening above in the above story is again arching action. You have an
opening and there is arching action on to the size of the opening in the first story. So, if
significant distance between the apex and the opening is not available, there is additional
443
load that will actually come to the equilateral triangle which you are using to design the
lintel in the ground storey.
Another situation where the opening above is also intercepting the equilateral triangle
that you are examining. So, in this particular situation you have both the masonry load
from the upper storey, a part of the load from the wall is actually carried you can see
these arrows here, the masonry load of the upper storey is onto the masonry floor, that
load of the masonry wall and the floor of the upper storey also will be transferred to the
lintel; also will be transferred to the lintel below.
So, the floor load and the masonry wall load from the upper storey will also be
transferred to the lintel and that is the that is the load that you are looking at here which
is the portion that the equilateral triangle is covering as far as the upper story is
concerned and then the part of the equilateral triangle which is in the ground storey itself.
So, you should be able to account for all the loads that would be intercepted by the
equilateral triangle in estimating the load coming on to the lintel.
So, what is important is for you to check whether the apex of the triangle to the bottom
of the opening is within 25 centimeters or more. Again, this is an empirical requirement
that is put. So, you will have to check the geometry to be able to estimate what additional
loads would have to be considered for the design of the lintel itself.
444
Now, you can have situations where in the same story you have additional loads that the
wall is carrying and this actually is disturbing the zone above the opening ok. A simple
case here is let us assume that you have beams reinforced concrete beams or a steel beam
that is placed in the roof of the room, in the roof of the structure as part of the load
carrying system and this beam is then supported on two walls. So, when you have this
sort of a situation the black cross section that you see there is a beam that is coming and
resting in the masonry wall. So, if you have that sort of a situation.
So, here we are considering the cross section and the centerline of this cross section, if
the centerline of that cross section is actually less than 25 centimeters from the apex of
the triangle that we were looking at, then additional loads from this concentrated load
would have to be considered in the design of the lintel right. Now, if you have a distance
more than 25 centimeters, then you need not consider; you will have enough of
dispersion and the masonry will be able to carry the load. But if it is too close to this
equilateral triangle the equilateral triangle area gets affected by the dispersion of the
concentrated load.
So, depending on this gap between the centerline of the beam and the apex of the
triangle, you will consider additional loads coming because of the dispersion of the loads
from the concentrated force. So, the concentrated force needs to be converted to a
uniformly distributed force with an angle of 30 degrees. So, what you see here is this
triangle with the dotted lines is actually the dispersion of the concentrated load coming
from the beam converted into a uniform distributed force.
If the apex of the triangle and the concentrated load are within 25 centimeters then the
shaded region the green shaded region additionally is considered within the design of the
lintel itself. So, this is the other condition which you need to check. So, the design of the
tensile load resisting element, the bending element, the lintel has to be looked at
carefully as far as the design is concerned. I would like to state at this stage that what we
are talking about are cut lintels; just lintels which are provided for the opening with some
bearing on either sides typically about 25 centimeters of bearing on either sides of the
wall.
However, we have seen that it is it is requirement as far as IS 4326 is concerned that you
provide horizontal seismic bands. And horizontal seismic bands at this level are
445
extremely effective in earthquake resistance. So, this cut lintel would actually be
effective not as a cut lintel, but as a continuous lintel running through all the load bearing
walls and connecting them together. There are prescriptions for the cut, there are
prescriptions for the lintel band; the amount of steel that you put in is actually very is
nominal.
You have to be sure that when that lintel comes to a portion of the opening, you take care
to check how much of loads should the lintel above the opening be designed for whereas,
the remaining part of the lintel band the seismic band can have the minimum steel that is
prescribed by IS 4326. You will see when we come to the detailing by IS 4326 that the
steel that is prescribed for the lintel band is quite small; it is actually a tension resisting
type; it is not a flexural element in reinforced concrete.
So, even if you are providing the seismic bands with steel and dimensions as prescribed
in 4326 when it comes to the portions above the openings you would take care that it has
the necessary design resistance to take into account loads in the triangular area above
disturbed or undisturbed ok.
So, with that more or less the overall considerations as far as design with IS 1905 have
been touched upon of course, there are many more intricacies which with some of the
exercises you will be able to appreciate.
446
But I wanted to touch upon one little exercise if you were to design a masonry wall of a
masonry structure, load bearing masonry structure- unreinforced masonry is what we are
considering, let us take zone 2 structure seismic zone 2 structure then what are the steps
that you will follow to arrive at the choice of cross section, choice of material for a wall.
So, this is sequence of steps that we should be following.
Of course, I am assuming that we are looking at gravity forces here, but of course, 1893
would have to be considered if you are also working with earthquake forces and of
course, and the wind load code also has to be considered, but assuming and looking at
design of a single wall for gravity forces, get the estimate of the self-weight, get the
estimate of the superimposed loads for which you might have to take use of prescriptions
that come from the code that deals with loads IS 875 part one for dead loads and part 2
for imposed loads.
So, let us say you have been able to establish the different loads that are acting on the
wall, you begin by making an estimate of course, it may or may not be a single load
acting on the wall. If it is a single load acting on the wall with or without eccentricity that
is a simple case for you, but if you have multiple loads acting on the wall then you will
have to make an estimate of a weighted eccentricity of the load itself.
So, make an estimate of the resultant eccentricity ratio and here you can basically
idealize the different loads acting on the wall with their respective eccentricities and take
the moments about the centerline of the wall to arrive at annex at the resultant
eccentricity. So, you could look at the total load W into the resultant eccentricity e as
being from the moments about the centerline of the wall as W1 one load into its
eccentricity e1 plus W2 into e2 and so, on and arrive at what e cap should be the resultant
eccentricity.
W1e 1 + W2 e 2 + .....
e=
W
Knowing the resultant eccentricity, start working with a cross section which comes from
architectural considerations, let us say you are working with a 230 mm wall or 340 mm
wall, then you have thickness with which you are working and you can get your
eccentricity ratio which in this case would be e /t.
447
So, you have eccentricity ratio established, your initial eccentricity ratio established; with
the eccentricity ratio, with the plan configuration and the elevation of the wall based on
the boundary conditions imposed by the ends the wall along the height and the edges of
the wall in length, you will be able to estimate what the effective height of the wall is,
what the effective length of the wall is and the effective thickness of the wall..
So, we have seen how three of these parameters have to be calculated. Once you make an
estimate of Heffective, Leffective and teffective you need to make an estimate of the slenderness
ratio and the slenderness ratio airing on the conservative side we take the lesser of the
two ratios Heffective by teffective or Leffective by teffective. Once the slenderness ratio is arrived at
you have the eccentricity ratio and the slenderness ratio you can now make an estimate
of the stressed stress reduction factor ks from table 9 that we were looking at earlier.
You estimate the stress reduction factor ks and if applicable the area reduction factor to
account for smallness of the cross section and the shape modification factor if the bricks
are being laid in a different pattern. So, at this stage you have ks, ka and kp. Once you
have these three factors make an estimate of the compressive stress in masonry, because
you know the total load acting on the masonry wall, you know the cross section of the
masonry wall, make an estimate of the compressive stress. You make an estimate of the
compressive stress and if you remember to arrive at the permissible compressive stresses
fs, we took fb and multiplied f b by ks, ka and kp.
Here what you are doing going to do is you are making an estimate of the compressive
stress from the demands acting on the wall and divide that by ks, ka and kp. So, that you
get an estimate of the basic compressive stress because you are designing now. So, make
an estimate of the compressive stress due to the loads divide that value by ks, ka and kp
and get an estimate of what the basic compressive stress you require is in the design f b.
448
So, once you have the basic compressive stress, you need to check if permissible
compressive stress in compression can be augmented particularly if you have a condition
of eccentricity significant eccentricity you will apply an increase in the permissible
compressive stress.
So, here what you would simply do is, you have arrived at the compressive stress divided
by the reduction factors ks, ka and kp you further divide that by in this case, increase in
permissible stress due to eccentricity is allowed up to 25 percent. So, divide the value of
the compressive stress that you get by 1.25 you get the basic compressive stress. So, we
have looked at the permissible stress equation as fs is equal to ks, ka and kp multiplied in
by fb, we are now working the other way around and therefore, the demand stress is
being divided by the stress reduction factors and also the increase in permissible stress
that you can allow.
If it was on the permissible stress side fc, the permissible compressive stress would be
increased by 1.25 it would be fc into 1.25, but now we are working on the other side and
therefore, 1.25 goes to the left hand side of the equation. Once you have arrived that fb
the required basic compressive stress, you have two options you can either go directly to
the table if you are not planning to do some tests in a in a laboratory, you can go to the
code IS 1905, go to table 8.
And then in table 8 you can actually choose, let us say your basic compressive stress
after the application of the stress reduction factors and after the application of the
449
increase in permissible compressive stress works out to be about 1.03. Let us say you are
somewhere there 1.03 MPa N/mm2 then you actually have the possibility of going with
an M2 mortar and a unit of strength 15. But then you have other constraints coming in
there are several constraints one of the first constraints may be depending on the zone in
which you are constructing, the earthquake zone and which are constructing you also
have limitations on the mortar type that you will use.
So, you will you might not be able to choose some mortars you might have to go for
higher mortars. So, then you start working with higher mortars and then see, is that can I
go with 1.09 and then I can go with a 12.5 MPa brick or a 10 MPa brick with a H1
mortar. So, you have the possibility of now playing around because with f b established,
you have this handle with which you will choose the mortar type and the unit strength.
But mind you are making this calculation for one wall; you will be repeating this for
every wall which means you will have to have some rationality in terms of the final
choice of compressive strength of unit and compressive strength of mortar, you cannot
have different values for different parts of the structure. You might have some difference
between what is used for the ground storeys versus what is used for the upper storeys,
but in a given story changing these parameters mortar strength and unit strength is not
practical.
So, you will have constraints coming in one from what the earthquake resistance code
4326 imposes in terms of what mortar you should use in which zone and the second
would be the practical considerations of design as different walls are being designed in
this manner right. So, this is the overall framework with which you will be designing
each wall of course, for the same wall you will also check permissible tensile stress if the
wall cross section is experiencing tension and for a combination of gravity and lateral
forces if shear stresses are expected in the wall, you will also estimate the shear stress in
the wall due to the demand and compare it against the permissible shear stress fs.
So, that would complete the design checks that you make for a given wall itself.
However, it is the compressive stress that will dictate your choice of unit and motor
strength right. So, this brings us to the end of the approach to design as far as 1905 is
concerned; the code does not prescribe anything more, it just gives you this basis with
the requirement that some of the overall geometrical considerations be adhere to and the
450
three stress levels- shear, compression and tension be checked and verified that they are
within the permissible limits ok. I will stop here and we will continue our design
problems in the next lecture.
451
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 04
Lecture - 25
Part - IV
So, good afternoon; we move on to looking at reinforced masonry design and today I
will give you an overview of the reinforced masonry code before we go into specific
aspects particularly the P-M axial force bending moment design, we are looking at the
interaction and shear design of walls. So, we begin by getting an overview of what the
national building code’s recommendations are with respect to reinforced masonry. So,
that is what you are going to be looking at today and the guidelines for reinforced
masonry itself.
So, we are specifically referring to Part 6 Section 4 of the code which is available in
volume one of NBC. So, this deals with reinforced walls both load bearing and non load
bearing walls, but we are as I said working with the permissible stress design. And, this
code is applicable to all types of materials, all types of units particularly the solid units
with cavity walls, so that reinforcement can be placed or perforated walls or hollow brick
walls. So, across the spectrum of materials this code regulates the use of different
452
materials and different types of units for reinforced masonry design itself. There are a
few words which are specific to reinforced masonry which the code has introduced and
therefore, I am just touching upon some of these; it is better we use it specific to how the
code examines these words.
When we talk of joint reinforcement, we are talking of the horizontal bed joint and these
are typically prefabricated joint reinforcement, you have seen the example that I gave
you a lattice type with a truss type or a ladder type. So, this is typically the joint
reinforcement with reference to the bed joint of the wall masonry wall itself. When we
are talking of grouted cavity reinforcement, we are really talking of cavity walls, you
have 2 solid single leaves which are then connected by ties appropriately designed to
keep them together. And, in the cavity you have the horizontal and vertical reinforcement
which is placed.
So, when we talk of grouted cavity reinforced masonry, it is really a cavity wall
construction where reinforcement is placed in the cavity whereas, the wall itself is
constructed using solid units.
The category that we have been looking at earlier in the different typology of masonry
where the hollow blocks are reinforced is referred to as pocket type reinforced masonry;
that is the reinforcement is placed within the pockets that are available within each unit.
So, it is referred to as pocket type reinforcement, pocket type reinforced masonry where
453
you then have to do in-situ concreting in within the pocket. In the previous category, the
cavity wall the entire cavity has to be grouted with concrete in-situ. Quetta bond is the
other type that we had seen and this is typically when you have one and half unit
construction, the thickness of the wall is one and half units. So, the arrangement you
have seen earlier in our second module that you leave vertical pockets and reinforcement
runs through these pockets and this also requires in-situ concreting to hold the
reinforcement in place.
When the word specified compressive strength of masonry is used it is referring to the
minimum compressive strength that the unit or the concrete must have. So, the word
specified compressive strength of masonry with reference to minimum compressive
strength, ok.
With that it is not exhaustive, but these are words that we have not used earlier. There are
specific requirements on the materials that have to be used. There are limits on the
materials that you can use as far as design of reinforced masonry is concerned. The
constituents again, first one is the masonry unit. You require that the masonry unit, the
code requires that the masonry unit has a minimum strength of 7 MPa, right.
So, if you remember the earlier table that we were referring to the strength of masonry
units go as prescribed by the code can go all the way from 3.5 MPa, class 3.5 all the way
up to 35 and 40. However, when you are going to be reinforcing masonry you need to
454
have a minimum compressive strength of 7 MPa and this comes from the requirement
that once you reinforce a masonry wall, the stiffness of the masonry wall is increased.
The shear demand particularly, as far as seismic design is concerned- the shear demand
that can come to the wall actually increases, but when you have large shear demand in a
masonry wall which has low compressive strength of unit, you can have crushing failure
of the masonry units which is a brittle failure mechanism.
The steel will not be, the masonry units will not resist until the steel goes into yielding to
ensure ductile behavior of the wall, you will have a you will have a compression failure
which is a brittle failure mechanism which is to be avoided. And, hence a minimum
strength is required for masonry construction with reinforcement and of course, with clay
bricks you will have a challenge of getting 7 MPa depending on the region where you are
getting bricks from. But, if you are looking at hollow construction, hollow block
construction, it is quite easy to get strengths that are of the order of 10, 12 or 15 MPa and
higher.
So, this is an important requirement. So, low strength units should not be used for
reinforced masonry at all. As far as concrete is concerned, the concrete shall at least be
M20 grade concrete and this is particularly where you are placing reinforcement and this
comes primarily from the durability requirements that protection to the reinforcement is
required from corrosion. So, M20 grade of concrete and as far as the steel is concerned,
you have to have a minimum cover of 15 mm at the top and bottom and 20 millimeters
cover on the sides.
So, this requirement should dictate number of bars you will actually be able to place
within a given pocket itself and choice of bar diameter. So, we are talking of wherever
you are placing reinforcement in a groove, ensure that at the top and the bottom if it is
horizontally placed your 15 mm at the top and the bottom there are 20 mm on the sides
in the cross section as cover provided by concrete to the steel reinforcement. This is far
lesser than what is prescribed as minimum cover for reinforced concrete construction
primarily because we are already placing it within the unit.
The steel reinforcement is placed in the pocket inside the unit and then you are talking of
the cover that the concrete in the pocket is providing to the steel. So, it is already
protected, but this is the second layer of protection. However, the units typically are
455
porous and therefore, there is a requirement that the concrete protects the steel
reinforcement.
If you are placing joint reinforcement you do not have concrete in the joint, you have just
mortar in the joint and you have to use high strength mortars. You are not allowed to use
weak mortars and this is primarily from the point of view of durability; higher the
strength of mortar lower will be the porosity. And therefore, high strength mortars
category H1 and H2 shall be used if you are using bed joint reinforcement, joint
reinforcement itself and as far as steel reinforcement is concerned you are required to use
steel reinforcement Fe 415 or lesser.
Now, that is challenging you do not want high strength steels because higher the strength
more is the demand that is going to go on to the masonry, the masonry part before the
steel can yield and that can imply crushing failure before the steel yields. So, you do not
want a brittle mechanism. So, you are keeping the steel reinforcement limited to 415 or
Fe 415 or lesser.
So, it is important to have compatibility between the strengths that you are examining in
the composite material and this requirement comes from a compatibility point of view
such that yielding in the bar is allowed for and of course, you cannot use rounded bars
you have to use deformed bars for construction.
456
Now, wherever there is a requirement from the design perspective for seismic resistance
for earthquake resistance or need to transmit horizontal forces even wind forces, you
must ensure that the steel reinforcement coming from the wall is adequately anchored to
the floor or the roof diaphragms. The detailing has to be done such that the steel
reinforcement from the walls is adequately anchored to the floor diaphragms or the roof
diaphragms and should be able to anchor itself, enough development length is essential.
So, that transfer of forces between the horizontal elements and the vertical elements is
provided for is allowed for by the construction itself.
A little bit of discussion on effective spans because you are going to be looking at
reinforced masonry beams, reinforced masonry walls and so what is effective span?,
what is the definition of effective span as far as these structural members are concerned
and should we will be looking at different effective spans given the type of boundary
conditions and given the type of member you are looking at. So, if you are looking at a
simply supported member or a continuous member- beam or a wall you use the smaller
of the distance between the supports or the clear distance, a clear span between the
supports plus an effective depth d of the section itself.
However, if you looking at a cantilever you can look at the distance between the end of
the cantilever and the center of the support or the distance between the end of the
cantilever and the face of the support plus half the effective depth whichever is greater.
457
So, these are typical requirements which you see even in reinforced concrete, but when
you are making effective span calculations, you have to be sure about what type of
member you are looking at and what the boundary conditions are. Again when you are
estimating the slenderness ratios with respect to walls when you looking at the ratio of
effective height to the effective thickness of the wall for walls, reinforced masonry walls,
when they are vertically loaded in their plane we are talking of a maximum slenderness
ratio of 27.
So, that is a number you want to keep in mind. The slenderness ratio of the wall for
vertical load carrying capacity is limited to 27; however, if you are looking at designing
columns this number is limited to 20. So, 27 for walls and 20 for columns; however, all
designs of columns must consider a minimum eccentricity of 10 percent of the side
dimensions. So, that is minimum eccentricity in the reinforced masonry; reinforced
concrete code is 5 percent of the side dimensions, here we are looking at 10 percent of
the site dimension. And, that has got to do with workmanship because of the building up
of the wall with blocks which can lead to additional eccentricities as against concrete
construction which can have lesser problems due to the workmanship itself.
If you are looking at a wall, that is subjected to out of plane bending. So, if you are
looking at, first one that we looked at with a limiting value of 27 for the slenderness ratio
was for a vertically loaded wall. But, if you are looking at a wall which is design for
bending to resist lateral forces or if you are looking at a beam which is sitting in a wall
and a subjected to bending in the plane of the wall then you have to use the limits on the
effective span, the maximum effective span to effective depth ratio as prescribed by this
by this table.
And, you can see that depending on the boundary conditions that you are looking at, you
can see that when a wall is being considered for out of plane bending depending on the
boundary conditions simply supported to continuous to bending in 2 directions. We are
accounting for higher slenderness ratios or higher maximum effective span to effective
depth that you can consider for this sort of a wall. Whereas, for beams for in plane
bending the values are comparable to what we have been using for the wall under
vertical loads itself. And, again different boundary conditions simply supported
continuous diagonal bending 2 directions spanning and cantilever walls or cantilever
beams in a wall.
458
The there are a set of requirements that you have as far as reinforcement detailing is
concerned because one of the fundamental reasons because of which reinforced masonry
is not very popular particularly in tropical regions where there is moisture, there is heavy
rainfall humidity levels are high, is the problem of corrosion. So, it is very important that
the workmanship and the materials used do not compromise the durability of these
systems and so there are specific requirements as far as reinforcement and detailing of
reinforcement is concerned and we look at few of them here.
We have been using the working stress approach to design these walls and so, when you
are going to be working on the cross sections we will basically use a transformed section
approach. And, I hope I believe all of you will be familiar with the transformed section
approach although both the codes IS 456 and IS 800 for concrete and steel do not use any
longer a working stress approach. But, you will have to calculate the transformed areas
using modular ratio where the actual area of the cross section which is resisting
compression, which is the masonry area of the brick portion or the area of the unit plus
the transformed area where As is the area of cross section of the steel and m is the
modular ratio between steel and concrete or steel and masonry modulii of elasticity.
So, transformed section approach has to be used for your design calculations and since
we are working within the permissible stresses approach, your stiffness calculations have
to be to be consistent with the limits that we assumed for the working stress, stiffness
459
calculations have to be based on uncracked stiffness you should not be using cracked
stiffness for estimating the flexural stiffness or the stiffness of the walls. In terms of
allowable stresses, as far as the steel is concerned we are talking of depending on the bar
diameter, depending on the type of bar that you are using, specifications of what should
be the allowable stress, mild steel bars of diameters up to 20 millimeters and mild steel
bars beyond 20 millimeter diameter with 140 and 130 MPa allowable stress.
And, if you are using high strength high yield strength deformed bars 230 MPa or you
use 0.55 fy if you are using Fe 500 steel for your construction of reinforced masonry. If
you are looking at compressive stresses because the reinforcement bars can be accounted
for their additional contribution to resisting compression. And, if you are using mild steel
bars you use a compressive stress of 130 MPa as the allowable stress and for HYSD bars
as 190 MPa.
So, these are prescriptions from standard literature and foreign codes on working stress
approach to masonry design. Minimum requirements as far as the size of reinforcement
is concerned and spacing of reinforcement is concerned, the maximum size of
reinforcement bars that is permitted is 25 mm diameter bars because, you are typically
are working with embedding this inside wall cross sections and the wall cross sections
are limited by unit sizes.
460
So, 25 mm bars what are prescribed as maximum size of reinforcement minimum size of
reinforcement should not be less than 8 millimeters. Spacing of reinforcement bars, you
will need to look at the clear distance between parallel bars and the clear distance
between parallel bars should not be less than the diameter of the bars or 25 millimeters
and this is really coming from the requirement that coarse aggregates which should be
able to fill in and not result in honeycombing as you are grouting the pockets with the
steel reinforcement.
And, if you are looking at the bar the spacing between reinforcement while designing
columns and pilasters the clear distance between vertical bars is not to be less than 1.5
times the bar diameter not less than 35 mm. So, you can make that calculation, but these
requirements have to be have to be followed. Again, the development length, we have
been talking about the requirement of continuity of steel reinforcement between the
horizontal diaphragms and the walls. So, development length (Ld) can be estimated as
0.25 into the diameter of the bar into the permissible stress of the steel fs.
L d = 0.25dfs
fs is the permissible tensile stress of the steel, but this cannot be less than 300 mm.
So, minimum 300 mm development length has to be provided or Ld as estimated and you
can provide standard hooks which can take care of the anchorage if you are not able to
provide sufficient development length. And, as we do curtailment of flexural
reinforcement as in reinforced concrete design in beams, you can also do curtailment of
flexural reinforcement in zones where the moment demand is lesser than the maximum
demand. Lap splicing is again something that you will have to take care of because
reinforcement is going to go in the vertical direction all the way through the load bearing
walls. So, lap splicing provisions also have to be accounted for.
461
As far as issues of bond and corrosion protection of the steel are concerned, it is these
reinforcing bars are embedded in these cavities and a minimum clear cover of 10
millimeters in the mortar or a minimum clear cover of 15 millimeters or the bar diameter
whichever is more in the grout has to be provided. And, if you are placing reinforcement
in the mortar bed joint you have to ensure that the minimum distance that you have, if
you are looking at the cross section the minimum distance that you have between the
edge of the reinforcement and the face of the masonry is not less than 15 millimeters. So,
when you are measuring laterally along a cross section between the face of the masonry
and the reinforcement there must be at least 15 millimeters of mortar.
Above and below the mortar joint you should at least have 2 millimeters of material and
today we have high strength mortars which are thin high strength motors. So, you can
actually minimize the bed joint thickness if you are going with flat trust type of flat
lattice type bed joint reinforcement such that you do not increase the bed joint thickness
because you know that higher the bed joint thickness lower is the strength of masonry;
such that you do not compromise with the strength of masonry, you can use high strength
motors in the in the joint and you bring down this cover to almost 2 millimeters for bed
joint reinforcement.
For corrosion resistance, it is prescribed that you can go for stainless steel, but of course,
stainless steel would imply shooting up of prices, the cost of construction. At least
462
galvanized, hot dip galvanized, or epoxy coated steel reinforcement has to be used to
ensure there is protection against corrosion. But you could also have bars which have
regular bars the steel bars, but they are coated with a layer of austenitic stainless steel to
provide corrosion protection.
So, the fact that the code is dedicating section specifically on what provisions you must
take care of for corrosion protection is simply because of this problem being able to
defeat the whole purpose of the typology reinforced masonry particularly in tropical or
high humidity climates.
Some specific guidelines as far as the structural design is concerned; we will we will be
going in examining each design in detail, but what you are going to see in the next few
slides are overall requirements as far as the structural design is concerned. So, if you are
looking at members that are subjected to flexure and axial forces, we would be looking at
treating P-M interactions for reinforced masonry walls in detail, but the code requires
that if the axial stress levels in a wall that has both flexure- bending effects and axial
forces due to gravity.
If the axial stress is less than 10 percent of the compressive strength of the material, you
can treat the wall as a pure bending design; meaning that we are really not depending on
the beneficial effect of compression in the in the wall. So, you are looking at a design for
bending only if the axial stress level is less than 10 percent of the axial stress of this
463
compressive strength of the material masonry and whenever there is continuity of the
wall at the continuous ends where you have tension reinforcement at the supports, there
is a requirement for continuing the tension reinforcement across the support. So, at least
50 percent of the tension steel that is required at the mid span and at least 25 percent of
that should be carried through the support and anchored effectively into either the return
walls or the slabs whatever be the boundary.
When you are looking at columns the minimum percentage of steel that you must
consider for reinforced masonry columns is 0.25 percent or 0.25 percent of the net area,
but not less than 4 bars. So, the minimum number of bars that you should provide in a
reinforced masonry column is 4 bars minimum percentage being 0.25 percent. However,
the maximum percentage of steel that you can provide is 4 percent and that is really on
the higher side you would not be providing anywhere close to that for structures which
are 2 or 3 storied reinforced masonry structures. Lateral ties have to be provided within
columns.
So, your cavities must be sufficient enough to be able to provide lateral ties. These ties
should have a diameter of at least 6 millimeters and with the vertical spacing being the
lesser of either 16 times the diameter of the longitudinal bars or 48 times the diameter of
the ties itself. So, these are very specific requirements that you can check as far as the
spacing of the lateral ties or the least lateral dimension of the column and you are
required to provide 135 degree hooks which are required to ensure that confinement is
not lost to the core concrete before the yield capacity of the steel reinforcement is
reached. And, this is a particular requirement for seismic resistance of masonry and
reinforced concrete constructions.
464
When you are looking at walls or beams which are subjected to shear, it is required that
the reinforcement be considered when you are designing for shear and the minimum area
of shear reinforcement, depending on the direction of loading Av minimum is the shear
force into the spacing divided by fs which is the permissible stress in steel divided by the
distance between the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the steel that you are
placing.
Vs
( A v )required =
fs d
So, Vs/fsd is the minimum area of shear reinforcement that you should be providing and
there is a spacing requirement as well the maximum spacing of shear reinforcement is
the lesser of 0.5d or 1.2 meters and then depending on whether the wall is subjected to
concentrated loads or uniformly distributed loads the either the maximum shear demand
at the point of concentrated loading or you can look at in the case of a wall with UDL or
a beam with UDL the maximum shear at 0.5 d from the support face as long as the
support reaction causes compression in that zone.
And if there is no localized compression providing the beneficial effect of compression

to shear, you cannot use this distance of 0.5 d for estimating the shear demand you will
have to look at the support face itself. So, this distinction between locations we have
concentrated loads versus those with UDL, but not taking the shear force at the support
465
face, but at 0.5d from the support face as long as compression is available at the at the
location where the shear force is being estimated.
Again, broadly we need to define the permissible compressive forces the permissible
shear stresses and the permissible tensile stresses because that is again what you are
going to be checking against. So, if you look at the permissible compressive force, you
have 2 parts of this expression. If you remember the expression for unreinforced
masonry, we used 3 modification factors the shape modification factor, the stress
reduction factor and the area factor.
We are not bringing in the area factor and the shape modification factor anymore
because those are not going to be governing and negligible in terms of their effect if any
and therefore, we are only going to be looking at the second order effects eccentricity
ratio and the slenderness ratio. So, k s as earlier the stress reduction factor continues to be
there in the expression that is your shape that is your slenderness stress reduction factor,
but you have these 2 parts- a part that looks at the resistance to compression or
compressive forces coming from the masonry.
So, you have 0.25 which is a number that is coming back to us if you remember the basic
compressive stress was taken as one quarter of the compressive strength of the masonry.
So, we are limiting the stresses carried by the masonry to one quarter or lesser than the
strength of masonry itself compressive strength of masonry and An is the net area that
466
you can consider; the second part of the expression brings in the permissible compressive
force that the steel can take which is 0.65 fst is the permissible stress in the steel A s is
the area of cross section of the steel itself.
So, you will have to look at the same set of stress reduction factors that we used earlier
for the unreinforced masonry design it is a same table where you look at the eccentricity
ratio as estimated varying between no eccentricity to an eccentricity of one third or even
one quarter, one half and then different slenderness ratio is going all the way from 6 to
27. So, this is something we have seen earlier and will help us estimate what is the
permissible compressive force for a given dimension and for a given combination of
materials of the composite.
So, you can look at depending on whether you have a ungrouted wall or a grouted wall
or partially grouted wall you are actually using the portion which is of masonry cross
section, unit plus the grout as being part which resists the compression that is the left
hand side that is one half of this expression and the other half is just the steel. So, you
account for the presence of the grout when you are making this estimate.
Student: Sir, the grout will have a different compressive.
The grout will have a different compressive stress. So, you depending on the material
depending on whether you are looking at concrete grout in a concrete unit or a concrete
grout sitting in a clay brick unit perforated clay brick unit that distinction would have to
be made in terms of the limiting compressive strengths, but Fm here is actually referring
to the strength of the masonry strength of the masonry unit itself. So, it is strength of the
masonry unit will be either the lower of the 2 or the grout is at least equal to the masonry
compressive strength.
So, if you remember one of the earlier requirements was that the grout material must
have a strength at least equal to the unit strength. So, from that perspective if you can
make an estimate of net area depending on whether you have an ungrouted wall or a
partially grouted wall of fully grouted wall you are accounting for the part that is taking
care of compression and the second part which is resisting tension, but is also
contributing to the compression resistance.
Student: So, it is a slightly conservative value.
467
It is conservative considering the fact that the grout and the unit are required to have at
least the same strength.
In case you are looking at a combination of axial force and bending then you have you
had the earlier possibility of an increase in the permissible compressive stress accounting
for the strain gradient. You could increase the permissible compressive stress for
unreinforced masonry design by 25 percent and that is again permitted in this design way
if you have compressive stress due to a combination of axial force and bending action
then you can increase the permissible stress in compression fa has 1.25 times fa, but if
there is no strain gradient it is fa.
As far as permissible tensile stresses are concerned it continues to be what we used for
the unreinforced masonry code, which is again if you remember varies between point
0.07 to 0.1 MPa in the cross section. As far as permissible shear stress are concerned the
code distinguishes between beams that you might be designing, reinforced beams that
you might be designing and walls and again distinguishes the walls based on whether
you are looking at slender walls or squat walls and allows an estimate of the permissible
shear stresses.
For flexural members; so, if you are looking at out of plane bending of walls or if you are
looking at beams- reinforced beams, if you are placing web reinforcement or if you are
not placing web reinforcement to take care of shear then the limiting value of shear
468
stresses are prescribed, the one with web shear reinforcement being higher. But, varies as
the value varies as the square root of the compressive strength of masonry which is
which is how the shear strength varies with the compressive strength of masonry itself.
So, you have limiting values on this up to 0.25 MPa without web shear reinforcement
and up to 0.75 MPa of shear stress for flexural members with web shear reinforcement.
We will examine the basis behind the expressions for the walls in a more detailed
manner when we come to the design of the walls for shear, but basically you estimate the
permissible stresses, limited by a maximum value Fv for your design, where you are
providing web shear reinforcement and require the web shear reinforcement to be
resisting the shear forces coming onto the wall or without the web shear reinforcement.
But, then this is the classification based on M/Vd ratio which is nothing, but the aspect
ratio of the wall h/l.
So, the aspect ratio of the wall less than one would mean we are looking at squat walls
and aspect ratio greater than 1 would mean we are looking at you looking at slender
walls and so depending on whether we are looking at squat walls or slender walls the
shear behavior starts dominating in a squat wall. And, so the limits on the shear stress is
based on consideration of the aspect ratio you see that M/Vd ratio comes into the comes
into the expression and varies as the square root of the compressive strength of masonry.
469
When you have walls where you are designing web shear web shear reinforcement and
the aspect ratio is greater than one, the maximum value of the maximum value of the
permissible stress is 0.125 square root of fm that is missed out at and limited by 0.4 MPa.
So, you have greater than one situation as well.
Ok. With that so you have the definitions of the permissible compressive stresses, tensile
stresses and shear stresses, but if you are looking at seismic design requirements, we
have seen this in the beginning of the lecture with respect to this module. So, I am just
capping and recapping and then giving you an idea of what these detailing requirements
would be. So, based on the performance level of the shear walls in the masonry structure;
you can designate walls as meant to resist in plane shear and detail the reinforcement
design and detail the reinforcement to different performance levels.
So, the different performance levels of the masonry shear walls that the seismic design
provisions of the reinforced masonry code considers are 3 different categories - type A
type B and type C and type A is what is referred to as unreinforced masonry, but detailed
with minimum steel ok. So, it is detailed unreinforced masonry, they are no longer purely
unreinforced masonry, but the steel is not designed it is merely prescribed based on some
minimum requirements and this is limited to zones 2, and zone 3 and if you are using
this, if you are in this category of shear wall then you can use an R factor of 2.5 whereas,
the next 2 categories B and C are the ones that are referred to as reinforced masonry
470
which means you are actually designing the wall as a flexural wall or a shear wall and
estimating how much of steel reinforcement has to be put in.
While the first one type A wall will still have to be designed as per the requirements why
IS 1905, you will check the shear stress requirement the permissible shear stress
permissible compressive stress and permissible tensile stress and then provide the
minimum reinforcement for it to qualify as a type A wall. Whereas, type B and type C
would have to be designed as per the requirements that you saw in the last few slides on
effect of span and permissible shear stress permissible compressive stress and then
minimum reinforcement has to be taken care of.
So, it is designed and conforms to minimum requirements of reinforcement, type B is

referred to as an ordinary reinforced masonry; type C with more minimum requirements
of steel becomes a special reinforced masonry category with both these categories being
applicable to zones 4 and 5 with R factors 3 and R factor 4. So, what are we talking of in
terms of this minimum requirement. So, when we say reinforced masonry it is the
reinforced masonry design prescriptions as in the national building code for type B and
type C whereas, for type A go back to IS 1905 and the minimum requirement minimum
steel requirement is as prescribed.
So, there are critical zones in which reinforcement has to be provided in the critical
zones in which steel has to be provided with respect to the vertical steel is on either sides
471
of the opening. When you have openings this the sides of the opening is a critical zone
similarly the edges the ends of a wall where you have boundary conditions that is a
location which is again referred to as a critical location. So, vertical steel reinforcement
has to be provided in those critical locations and there is a minimum requirement of how
much steel must be provided in those critical locations and it is prescribed to be at least
100 mm2 in those areas.
Similarly, horizontal steel has to be provided in again critical locations typically where
the wall interacts with the floor slabs. So, at the top and the bottom of the wall a
minimum requirement that you have a bond beam reinforcement. So, you have the lintel
band and the roof band or the plinth band where the steel reinforcement is at 100
millimeter square and the spacing between these is at least 3 meters apart. So, if you give
100 mm bond beam reinforcement, then the spacing is about 3 meters which means you
must at least have a if your interest or height is about 3 meters you means at least have a
roof band of and a plinth band.
You are you are allowed to give more depending on the seismic design itself and then
these are the other critical locations the edges of the edges of the walls and the edges of
the opening itself where specific requirements have to be adhered to as far as how much
steel at what distance are you giving from these important locations. So, what the code
gives you an entire set of verbal requirements which is again reproduced here in this
drawing for the different types of walls.
472
So, the first type A is referred to as a detailed URM shear wall. So, the URM shear wall
is coming from IS 1905 design, but it is detailed as per the requirements of the national
building code that is your type A wall then a minimum requirement of vertical steel as
we saw in the previous slide and maximum spacing between them in the critical
locations which are corners of walls and 400 millimeters around the sides of the
openings and at the ends of the walls- 200 millimeters from the ends of the wall.
Horizontal reinforcement again, minimum what needs to be provided and at what

spacing and also with respect to openings the steel reinforcement has to should not be
terminated where the critical location is or the opening itself is ending, but should be
further extended into the masonry construction at least 500 millimeters or 40 times the
bar diameter around the opening and close to the roof or the floor again that is a critical
location where continuous horizontal steel has to be provided either in the form of a bond
beam or in the form of steel reinforcement that runs in that location.
So, these set of specifications have to be adhered to and would classify as the minimum
reinforcement requirement over and above the designed URM shear wall as per 1905.
473
The other two categories type B wall and type C wall. In type B wall you are designing
as per the requirements of the National Building Code and ensuring that over and above
the steel that you are already designing as per the requirements of the code, you have
complied with the minimum requirements that are stated earlier. Whereas, in the
specially reinforced masonry walls type C walls you again you are designing them as per
the requirements of the National Building Code, but there are minimum percentages of
steel that are required. So, the horizontal and vertical steel together the sum of the
reinforcement should at least be 0.2 percent of the gross cross-sectional area of the wall
and the minimum reinforcement in each direction; the minimum horizontal steel and the
minimum vertical steel should be individually 0.07 percent of the gross cross sectional
area. So, when you come to the special reinforced masonry wall shear wall construction
you have you will not use the minimum requirements that we have been using for type A
and type B wall, but it is more in terms of specific percentages that you have to adhere
to. Also, the maximum spacing of horizontal and vertical reinforcement should be the
lesser of either one third of the shear wall length or one third of the shear wall height or
1.2 meters lesser of 3 values and in terms of how much horizontal steel you are providing
and how much vertical steel you are providing typically your vertical steel will be more
than the horizontal steel the minimum cross sectional area of reinforcement in the
vertical direction should be at least one third of the requirement of the shear
reinforcement. So, this link between the 2 is essential if you remember one of our earlier
474
slides in the introductory lecture it is established that the vertical steel improves the
effectiveness of the horizontal steel.
So, you can have bed joint reinforcement acting as shear reinforcement, but they cannot
be as effective as a construction where vertical steel is provided to account for good
anchorage of the horizontal steel itself. So, this broadly gives us the overview of the
entire set of recommendations as far as reinforced masonry design is concerned. Of
course, there are some most specifications which you can read. But what I have
discussed with you today are key aspects that we have to remember within this course as
well. And, we will start looking at in-plane flexural design P-M interactions and then the
shear design of the wall in the next two lectures and so on.
475
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 04
Lecture - 26
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part – V
So, good morning. We will continue with the reinforced masonry portions and today I
would like to look at P-M interactions for reinforced masonry walls and then that will
lead us to looking at design for bending plus axial load, which is addressed in an
empirical manner in the code, in the national building code and the section on reinforced
masonry.
So, before we move into the prescriptions in the code, it is essential to look at P-M
interactions for reinforced masonry walls, but within the working stress approach. So,
what I am going to be doing today is, develop the set of expressions that you can use
based on the linear elastic behavior, but with the use of the working stresses for both
steel and the masonry and then look at the different zones of the P-M interaction curve
so, that analytical expressions in those zones can be developed and you can use that as a
design tool.
476
So, depending on the demand in terms of the axial load and moment, if it were to be
lying within or on the P-M interaction curve, you look at verifying the design or altering
the design based on the comparison between demand and the interaction curves itself.
However, as I said the national building code prescriptions are empirical in terms of the
design approach and we will examine that subsequently.
So, when you are looking at P-M interactions for reinforced masonry walls, we are really
looking at reinforced grouted concrete hollow block masonry. Now, those could be
concrete hollow blocks or it could be the perforated clay brick blocks with steel
reinforcement and grouting. So, we are basically examining either the clay bricks with
perforations or concrete blocks and so, the strengths coming from those; the different
types of units that you would use is required.
And then of course, one important difference in the moment capacities that you would
see is depending on the reinforcement configuration in the wall itself. So, the
reinforcement configuration as stated here, you are looking at either a spread
configuration or a concentrated configuration right. Now, what do you mean by a spread
configuration of reinforcement and a concentrated configuration of reinforcement.
If you are using hollow blocks and your wall is made out of 4/6/8, depending on the
number of hollow blocks that you require to make the entire length of the wall, the
placement of the reinforcement considering that you are designing these as flexural walls
in plane flexural walls or shear walls, the placement of the steel reinforcement can either
be concentrated and put at the ends of the walls which is good in terms of the moment
capacity that you will be able to achieve because with respect to a neutral axis you are
going to be placing a steel reinforcement farthest away from the center of the wall.
So, it is a good method to place your flexural steel, mind you are placing a flexural steel
farthest away from the center line of the wall itself and therefore, you are concentrating
the flexural steel. You could choose to spread the flexural steel which is ok.
Nevertheless, the minimum vertical reinforcement that you require has to be provided
over and above this steel that you are providing as flexural steel.
So, the minimum spacing requirements between the vertical steel has to be taken into
account anyway whether I choose to place the steel reinforcement at the ends as flexural
steel or not the minimum spacing of the vertical reinforcement has to be taken into
477
account. So, if you were to place them at the ends concentrated, you might have to
provide some additional vertical steel at least the minimum that the code requires so, that
you have satisfied the requirements for vertical and horizontal steel distribution.
So, you can either have a configuration where as you see in the figure, these vertical bars
have been placed in all the alternate hollow regions and it is spread or you could ensure
that two of these bars are placed in the first block and two of the bars are placed in the
last block and therefore, you are you are concentrating them. You know that the lever
arms are going to be different and therefore, moment capacity will be better in the
concentrated situation than the other situation of course, it depends on other aspects of
how much of area of steel and all that you are going to be considering.
So, this is one important difference that is normally checked. The other aspect is you are
seeing a situation where in one block, in one of the cavities one reinforcing bar is placed
ok. It is most often going to be the case you will not place a second reinforcement bar
inside the same cavity and this is basically a geometrical requirement, you will not have
enough space between bars and you would not have clear dimension between the cavity
and the bar edge itself which has to be filled with grout.
So, from cover considerations and given the size of the cavity, typically it is going to be
one bar you know in a given cavity. So, the placement of the reinforcement is up to the
structural designer and therefore, that is one choice you need to make whether you are
going with a concentrated reinforcement or spread reinforcement. And of course, there is
the other requirement are you going to be looking at a fully grouted wall or are you going
to be looking at a partially grouted wall?
So, this again needs to be ensured and most often what would happen is only the cavities
where you place steel reinforcement it is grouted and the others are typically left hollow,
but then that is again a design choice. So, you really need to know if you are going to be
using a grouted wall or a partially grouted wall and make necessary amends as far as
your calculations are concerned.
So, working stress approach to create the P-M interaction curves. So, you need to
establish what the allowable stress in your steel is depending on the steel that you have
chosen establish Fs which is your allowable stress in steel, you should know the
compressive strength of the masonry and we discussed this. Of course, you can develop
478
your set of expressions considering the different strengths of the grout and the block
itself. However, with the requirement that the grout is at least as strong as the block and
using the strength of the block as the value that you will use for calculations is
acceptable.
So, assuming you have an estimate of the compressive strength of the masonry f prime m
you then need to establish what the working stresses are; Fa is the permissible
compressive stress and Fb is the permissible compressive stress, but for flexural
compression where we are allowed to increase the permissible compressive stress by 25
percent.
So, Fb is 1.25 times Fa and now Fb is what you will require for your stiffness calculations
you will have to use, of course, in this strength based approach you are not going to be
using this stiffness calculation, I mean you are not going to be using the modulus of
elasticity; however, the modulus of elasticity can be estimated as a function of the
compressive strength of the masonry that we have seen earlier.
So, to make your deflection checks you will have to use masonry modulus of elasticity.
So, those are the parameters that you will require to begin with. Looking at the geometry
I am going to be using this geometry in the ensuing slides and therefore, it is useful to
familiarize ourselves with the notations here. L is the total length of the wall, t is the
thickness of the wall which is nothing, but the block thickness in this case and depending
on whether you are going to be using a single block or a double block then that of course,
varies. t is the thickness and then assuming that a spread reinforcement configuration is
used and it is symmetrically placed.
You have the distances from the edge fiber to the centerline of the steel reinforcement
each reinforcement bar of diameter Φ- d1, d2, d3, d4 or di depending on the number of bars
that you have. And then all the geometry can be worked out based on these distances
from the centerline of the bar to the edge of the wall L, t and the areas of the steel
reinforcement.
The other thing that can be done is in this particular case we are really looking at in-
plane capacity. When you are looking at the out of plane capacity again the choice is
how you place the steel reinforcement. Is the steel reinforcement going to be placed for
out of plane moment capacity in the center of the wall along the thickness or is there a
479
possibility of having two reinforcement bars placed at the farthest edges within the
cavity.
So, in the out of plane direction, if you are placing the steel reinforcement at the centre
line of the wall thickness you are not going to be able to use the contribution to capacity
by the bar because it is right in the center, unless you have large eccentricities. Instead if
you actually place the steel reinforcement apart as two bars within the cavity, you can get
a better moment capacity in the out of plane direction.
So, configuration of the steel reinforcement within the cavities is an important aspect that
as a designer is under your control. So, with this configuration in mind, please do keep
this configuration in mind, we will start looking at different zones and the expressions
that we can use for the calculations of the moment capacity for a given level of axial load
itself.
So, the P-M interaction curves one choice that you should make in your calculations is
whether the contribution of the steel reinforcement to the compression resultant is going
to be considered or not, right. So, are you going to be using steel contribution to the
moment capacity only after the section cracks is a choice left to you. And in the
assignment that you will do with respect to the P-M interactions you will actually check
if the contribution by the compression steel is something you must actually bring into
your calculations or is it something negligible.
480
So, assume that we are actually going to be considering the contribution of the
compression steel in our calculations that you are going to see in a few minutes, but this
is again a choice that you need to make. It is a simple alteration to the P-M interaction
curve itself ok. So, first situation you have the wall that is subjected to a combination of
gravity forces and lateral force, in-plane lateral force and so, you have a non uniform
distribution of compression; however, the entire cross section is in compression.
So, that is where you begin your full cross section is in compression. Your full cross
section can be in compression with the condition that there is no bending at all; zero
bending moment on the section, which means the two ends, the section is fully in
compression, but the two ends the stresses fm1 and fm2 are both going to be equal. Now,
when both fm1 and fm2 are equal, you have a situation where there is no strain gradient
and therefore, you should be using the permissible compressive stress Fa in this case as
the limiting compressive stress.
However, with any finite value of moment along with the axial force, the limiting stress
is no longer Fa, but Fb which is nothing, but 1.25 times Fa that you can consider. So, we
are looking at a situation where there is already some bending in the wall entire section is
in compression, all the four steel bars are also in compression and contribute to the
moment capacity or the axial load capacity.
So, C1, C2, C3 and C4 are the resultants of the compressive forces in the bars whereas, the
grey area that you see is the compressive stress distribution in the masonry with fm1 on
one end and fm2 on the other end where the section is less compressed. We are working
with an assumption where the entire wall is grouted and that is again something that you
should carefully check between your calculations and actual execution itself.
The first zone is the zone that I have spoken about earlier and that is pre-cracking. So,
there is moment acting on the wall and the entire section is in compression, no tension in
the cross section yet. So, in zone one no bars are in tension and therefore, in this situation
how do you set up your equations? The value that you see here as P-M is nothing but the
resultant of the axial force in the masonry itself; P-M is the resultant of the axial force in
masonry, given that we have some amount of bending now there is an eccentricity of Pm
with respect to the center line in the wall itself. So, that is the eccentricity em, eccentricity
in the masonry due to compression.
481
So, the expressions you now need to be able to estimate given this distribution of stresses
knowing fm1 and fm2, we start with fm1 and fm2 values and we will come to that in a
moment. So, you need to be able to make an estimate from the geometry of the
distribution of stresses and the geometry of the wall what the resultant forces C1, C2, C3
and C4 are for which you are basically making use of the triangular distribution of
compressive stresses in the wall.
The triangular distribution of compressive stresses that you see here, the full wall in
compression fm1 and fm2 known, you will be able to use the modular ratio n, the modular
ratio that is modulus of elasticity of steel to the ratio of modulus of elasticity or steel to
that of the masonry. So, with a modulus of elasticity used what you are doing in this set
of calculations is working on a transformed section and arriving at the value of C1, C2, C3
and C4 which are the compression resultants in the bars which are all in compression.
So, with respect to the non-uniform distribution of compressive stresses, you will
estimate Ci for each of these situations for a fixed value of fm1 and fm2.
(f − f ) 
C i = A si (n − 1)  m1 m 2 di + fm 2 
 L 
Let me set up the expressions and then go to the stage wise calculation. The axial force
resultant in the masonry is given by,
482
Pm =
( fm1 + fm 2 ) Lt
2
Mm =
( fm1 − fm 2 )  L2 t
2 6
 P = C1 + C 2 + C 3 + C 4 + Pm
M = C e i i + Pm e mc
Mm L
where, e mc = and e i = di −
Pm 2
So, this way you have established for each level of stress distribution what the value of
axial force and moment capacity is going to be.
So, these expressions can be used in zone 1. And in zone 1 the expressions that we just
talked of are at the bottom, but I am now looking at different stages to estimate the
moment capacity. So, my first point is when the wall is in pure compression my fm1 is
equal to the permissible compressive stress since I am looking at capacity, but within the
working stress approach, I am starting with Fa as the value of fm1 and Fa as the value of
fm2; wall is in complete compression; for this particular case of course, there is no
moment capacity, this is the axial load capacity of the wall itself.
483
So, that is your first stage, then you start looking at making the compression non-uniform
whereby since a certain moment is also being considered you cannot use Fa any longer
and therefore, you start using the value of Fb as the limiting stress. So, you use Fb in the
second point, I am using Fb and then keep reducing the value of fm2 thereby you are
considering larger eccentricities keep continuing till fm2 becomes 0. Meaning when you
say fm2 become 0 that is your limiting condition where the entire wall is still in
compression, but any additional moment would mean cracking of the cross section
begins.
So, the first zone is purely in compression. So, make your calculations using the
expressions developed within this range, estimate values of P and corresponding values
of moment based on the condition in the wall stress distribution in the wall Fb and the
reducing values of compressive stress in the lesser compressed edge of the wall itself.
So, that is zone 1. Once cracking progresses you are into zone 2 cracking progresses and
here again you might want to use a tensile strength of the masonry. If you think that the
value of tensile strength of the masonry Ft is significant enough it could be brought into
calculations or neglected. You can either neglect the contribution to the moment capacity
by the tensile strength of the masonry or introduce that into the calculations, but that is
going to be a very small quantity. So, you might as well do away with that additional
calculation.
484
So, once the wall starts cracking, you reach a situation where with additional moments
first bar and then the second bar and so, on start experiencing tension. So, zone 2 is
where part of the section is in compression, the rest of the section is in tension which
means now slowly each bar will start coming into tension. And as the moment on the
wall increases question is what is the tensile stress in the bar and whether the tensile
stress in the bar is reaching your permissible tensile stress in steel Fs and the same
calculations will continue, but you are looking at a situation where there is some net
section which is going into tension.
So, here what I was talking about is, do you want to consider this portion with a certain
limit on Ft? You have seen that we can use a permissible tensile stress for the masonry
depending on depending and here you are basically looking at tensile strength
perpendicular to the bed joint and not parallel to the bed joint.
So, you use the permissible tensile stress that is that is for the direction where tension is
perpendicular to the bed joint, it is a small value you know that the value prescribed by
the code is about 0.05 or 0.01. So, the question is whether you want to use that and still
make an estimate of the contribution to the moment capacity, the tension carried by the
masonry itself.
Otherwise you will have to examine whether the bars are now in compression or the bars
have started going into tension. So, I am looking at one of the intermediate situations
where at least one bar is in tension, two bars are in tension and the other bars are in
compression. So, this is a check that you will be doing at every stage to see how many
bars are in compression, how many bars are in tension the distribution of the masonry
stress is now triangular.
So, we are still assuming a linear elastic distribution and the distribution of from the
moment when fm1, fm2 becomes 0, this distribution of stresses is triangular that change
will have to make as far as the calculations of compression resultant because the
distribution of compressive stresses is triangular now.
So, here you basically need to establish whether you are looking at a compressive force
resultant or a tensile force resultant at each bar. So, you are checking with respect to the
side in tension fm2 by αL. Now, this αL is nothing but the length of the compressed zone
that is it is less than L; α is less than 1.
485
So, as the wall starts cracking the length of the compressed zone is less than the or length
L and therefore, now you are going to be using the value of αL instead of L in your
calculations for the zone that is in compression. So, we are trying to check if see the
compressive force resultant at each bar is it positive or negative. Now, if you are getting
positive values as far as the notation as far as the calculations here, positive is considered
to be compression and a negative value of the resultant force would be tension.
So, you need to make that check and if you are looking at a bar still sitting in the
compression side, you will continue to use the previous expression, derivation of the
previous expression because now you are not you do not have the full length whereas, if
the bar is in a zone where tension is present in the masonry, then you will have to look at
n instead of n-1; now you are looking at nAsi because you are not counting the bar
diameter twice.
So, that check is required. Therefore, estimate the value of C1, C2, C3 and C4 or it might
be tension once that is estimated your triangular distribution of stresses is what the
compression is in and therefore, the axial force resultant,
Lfm 1 t
Pm =
2
P-M is established the based on the triangular distribution; again the eccentricity of the
compression resultant with respect to the centroid of the triangle itself is given by,
L L
e mc = −
2 3
And then similarly the summation of the moments from the bars in compression plus the
portion of masonry in compression. Similarly make an estimate of the overall
compression resultant from C1, C2, C3 C4 and Pm; you have the estimates within this zone
also.
Now, you keep continuing in this part of the interaction diagram, you are going to be
basically considering lower and lower areas of masonry in compression right. Because
you have now reached limiting values of the stresses at the end the edge compression
fiber fm1 is fb you already at that maximum, but now with that maximum you are
reducing the zone available in the wall cross section in compression.
486
So, you keep reducing the value of α and get the distribution of the capacities in the cross
section, that is how you would proceed in this particular zone and continue until the first
bar reaches a value of Fs Asi; that means, the first bar has well yielded, but not yielded in
its true sense because in the working stress approach, it has actually hit the value of
permissible tensile force.
So, you have reached a stage where one end of the wall cross section is in the maximum
value of compressive stress permissible and the other end the first bar has actually
reached the permissible stress in tension that is your balanced section. You have your
balanced section and then continue the calculations with reducing values of alpha.
So, you continue reducing α until Ti = Fs Asi and at this point you reach the balanced
section. Mark that point as your balanced section and continue with the calculations.
So, in this segment I have reported the expressions at the bottom, but the different steps,
the different points of the P-M interaction diagram as you see on fm1 the compressive
stress in masonry continues to be the permissible compressive stress due to flexural
compression. So, Fb is what you maintain.
But what you are actually doing is fm2 is already 0 as earlier, the section has already
started cracking and now the value of α is what you are steadily decreasing. You keep
reducing the value of α you will see more and more of your bars will go into tension and
487
therefore, the calculation of C 1, C 2, C 3, C 4 and Σ P and Σ M would vary so, that is your
zone 2, you get your balanced section also coming within this zone.
Zone 3, now the question is as you keep reducing α, you should come to a point where
the entire section is now cracked. So, you are basically reducing α to values like 0.1L
and to do that once the steel reinforcement bar as you increase this, as you in as you
reduce αL, as αL reduces, let us assume all the four bars have now entered state of tensile
stress.
Then the tensile stress in the bar will limit the level of compression in the masonry itself.
So, now, you will have to look at what is the level of tension in the first bar and then
corresponding to that would be the tension would be the compression in the remaining
portion of the masonry. So, in this typically you will you will get all the bars in tension,
but whether or not all the bars would actually reach the peak value, the permissible
tensile force, fs Asi is something that is typically not seen that is all your bars may not
reach the maximum value of the permissible tension itself.
So, you keep continuing in this zone reducing the value of α and now with these steel
stresses governing estimate what is the value of fm1 the masonry compressive stress this
value will be actually lower than the peak value this value will be lower than the peak
value and peak value which is Fb and you will now see that the moment resistance
488
coming from the compression the compressed part of the masonry is what is being
compromised or lost.
Of course, in your calculations you can look at a situation where fm 1 is almost close to 0
and stop there and at that situation depending on the geometry of the wall and depending
on the location where the bars are, all the bars may or may not reach the value of
permissible compressive force Ti here. So, that is something which can vary; in this case
three bars may reach fs Asi whereas, one bar is less than fs Asi. So, that situation is to be
expected.
So, in this particular case what you are doing is, since the balance section has been
reached, that is one of your bars has actually reached the permissible tensile stress, you
will use the permissible tensile stress in the steel as what is going to govern the behavior
of the wall thereafter.
Therefore, Fs will dictate what is the corresponding allowable masonry compressive

stress. It is no longer going to be Fb, but a value that will be lesser than Fb, but governed
by tension governed by the tension steel and therefore, in zone 3 the difference is that fm1
is not predetermined as a value equal to Fb, but fm1 is estimated based on what the value
of Fs is.
489
So, again geometry of the cross section and value of Fs will dictate what value of fm 1 is
and then you will again check whether all your bars are in tension or there are some bars
in compression with the same set of expressions that we saw earlier, estimate C 1 C 2 C 3
C 4 or they may become T1, T2, T3, T 4. Estimate again the compression is distributed in a
triangular manner, compressive stresses are distributed in a triangular manner you will
Lfm 1 t
still continue to use Pm = as the resultant compression carried by masonry. From
2
the geometry, the eccentricity in the resultant and then the moment total moment and the
total axial force resultants are estimated to complete the section in zone 3.
So, zone 3 you basically have to estimate what is f m1 corresponding to the tensile stress
Fs and continuing this value is now less than the value corresponding to the balanced
section. That is why α is now at a value less than the condition at the balanced section
you will then go to a situation where you want to have the fourth zone which is where
you have fm1 is equal to 0.
490
So, this zone, the fourth zone is where you will designate that the masonry stress has
reached 0 which means you only have the bars in tension there is no axial force capacity
basically in the there is no compression resultant available the whole section is in tension
bars are all possibly at their Fs values and so, you have a moment capacity, but axial
force capacity is 0.
So, then you reach the next critical point of the P-M interaction where P is equal to 0, M
has reached a certain value. So, it is just continuing sections. So, now, you have no axial
load capacity only moment capacity in the section fm 1 equal to 0, the resultant in terms
of the tensile force carried by the bars is nothing, but Asi into Fs.
So, this is how you would look at four zones, now what we did here was to assume that
the compression reinforcement continues to contribute to the moment capacity. We use
the reinforcement for both tension capacity and compression capacity. So, one way could
be to just neglect that contribution and so, just look at where these bars are showing
value of C greater than 0 which is compression, set that to 0 and look at the P-M
interaction curve neglecting the compression reinforcement and that is a quick check that
you can you can do.
So, simple checks that you can do is, if you assume there is a finite permissible tensile
stress that you want to consider for the masonry how much does that contribute to the
moment capacity. If you were to consider the compression reinforcement how much is
491
that going to contribute to the moment capacity? How do these P-M interaction curves
stack up? Ok.
So, you would get a P-M interaction curve of that sort. The reason why it is capped off is
because we are starting off with a peak capacity in compression on one end. So, you are
capping it off as far as the permissible compressive stress is concerned. So, that would be
your zone 1 all the way till it cracks. So, the upper part of the graph is this part is zone 1
and then the wall cracks after the wall cracks you get into your zone 2 calculations where
you are basically reducing the compressed length alpha L.
And then you reach the balanced section in this state; once the balanced section is
reached and then you continue reducing αL, but then once the bars have reached their
permissible stresses, you will calculate fm1 based on what the permissible steel tensile
stress is and that could be your zone 3 and finally, zone 4 is the portion where you are all
you are considering zero axial force capacity and only moment capacity in the section.
So, critical points would be only axial force capacity- no moment capacity, then the
balanced section and then finally, you have only moment capacity-no axial force
capacity and the four zones in between. So, this is how of course, you may be familiar
doing this for the limit state approach. So, one exercise would be to compare this with
the limit state approach to create interaction surface and then look at the interaction
492
surface that you have created using a working stress approach and how much more of
moment capacity can be considered for the same section but using a different approach.
So, your next assignment is basically going to deal completely with the P-M interactions
for reinforced masonry walls ok. Before I conclude this section there is something that I
would like to touch upon and that is the P-M interaction behavior for a masonry wall,
this particular exercise actually is very instructive from the capacities of reinforced
masonry as a structural solution itself.
Now, why do I state that as far as the P-M interaction curve is concerned? That is
because if you look at a masonry wall and if you look at the P-M interaction curve, we
were looking at the axial force capacity at this location, right. If I were to introduce more
and more steel in the in the cross section, then basically it is after cracking that you will
see increased capacity in the wall; you would see increased capacity in the wall
depending on how much steel I am putting in.
It is only after the cracking that is going to contribute. Now, if the level of axial stress in
the wall is very high ok. Let us not think in terms of what the code allows as the
maximum permissible stress, let us assume that the compressive stress in the wall is very
high, close to the close to the limit that it that it permits. Assuming that we are
somewhere here as far as the in that zone as far as the axial stress ratio is concerned. The
level of axial stress due to compression divided by the strength of masonry or in this case
the permissible stress in compression.
If we are in that zone steel reinforcement literally has no role. There is no effect in
changing the interaction surface for us. But if you take masonry, if you take masonry as a
structural system, if you look at shear walls and load bearing walls in a masonry
structure, we know that the level of compression that exists is typically very low in
comparison to the capacity in compression. It is a material which is good in compression
which means most often, even if you are looking at two storied/ three storied structures
the axial stress level in the wall will ensure that you are in the in the lower portion of the
interaction diagram as far as P-M is concerned
Because you do not make very tall masonry structures, and because the code also does
not allow you to go too far beyond the strength in any way close to the strength in
compression, the axial stress level will ensure that you are in the lower portion of the
493
axial force moment interaction diagram. Now why is that good? It is good from two
perspectives- first is that, it is the region in which the provision of steel reinforcement is
going to be beneficial to the moment capacity in the wall or shear assistance in the wall.
So, that is the zone where with more and more steel reinforcement that I design, I will be
able to get better moment capacity. So, in-plane capacities are bound to increase when
axial stress ratios are in this zone; that is one thing. The second important thing is of
course, the axial stress ratios are small because you are looking at an entire wall cross
section. If it were columns, these axial stress ratios will be high would you agree? If the
entire structure were not made out of load bearing walls, if they are made out of
columns, the axial stress ratio will typically be higher for a similar plan area.
So, it is because of the presence of load bearing walls. Now, if you look at the P-M
interaction curve and then for different locations on the P-M interaction curve, if I were
to draw a moment curvature diagram for that section, you would get typical moment
curvature curves based on section analysis. Now, if for each point on the P-M
interaction, if for that section I am estimating the moment curvature, then you will see
that the moment curvature when the axial stress ratios are high or the axial load demand
is high you will have very brittle behavior.
The curvatures will be low in those sections. As you come down; as you come down the
moment curvatures will show better ductility and when you come to these zones, in
which the axial stress ratios are low, the moment curvature will show good desirable
ductility. So, this situation for moment curvature with very low ductility does not
guarantee good ductile performance as far as earthquake resistance is concerned.
When axial stress ratios are high, you do not get ductile behavior how much ever steel
you want to you put in there. So, as a typology, masonry because of load bearing walls
gives you the possibility of low axial stress ratios therefore, you are in a P-M interaction
zone where moment capacity increases because of the presence of steel significantly and
to the moment curvature of the sections there significantly demonstrate good ductile
behavior.
So, reinforced masonry is an excellent choice for seismic solutions as far as providing
good ductility, good deformation capacity in earthquakes. This single feature actually
makes it a category that is far superior to moment resisting frames. For moment resisting
494
frames, the frame constructions with reinforced concrete columns, the immediate
problem that you have is you will not be in the lower portion of the moment interaction
diagram the P-M diagram, you will be in the higher portion because of higher axial stress
ratios. And because of the higher axial stress ratios how much of a steel you want to put
in there you will not get ductile behavior in moment curvatures.
So, reinforced concrete moment resisting frames cannot give you the desirable ductility
beyond a certain limit whereas, here you have a structural solution that gives you the
possibility of achieving good deformation behavior as far as earthquake forces are
concerned. So, this is something that you will see is discussed quite extensively in the
literature on seismic behavior of reinforced masonry and I wanted to close the P-M
interaction discussion with this particular aspect. So, you value the P-M interaction that
you are doing as a demonstration of good ductile behavior of reinforced masonry itself.
495
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 04
Lecture – 27
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part – VI
So, good morning we continue looking at the P-M interactions, we looked at yesterday
how the P-M interaction curves for in-plane bending of masonry walls, reinforced
masonry walls, the set of expressions can be developed with the working stress approach
consideration. And we looked at four different zones for the interaction curve and
primarily it is important to understand that we consider there is a portion where the
masonry cross section is uncracked and then a portion where the masonry cross section is
cracked.
And in this region where the masonry portion is uncracked and once cracking occurs till
you reach the balanced section the masonry compressive stresses governing. It is
controlling; beyond that you have the situation where it could be controlled by
compression or could be controlled by the permissible tensile stress in steel.
And that part of the interaction curve where beyond the balance section, depending on
the state of stress in the wall you would have to either take a compression-controlled
496
state or a tension-controlled state. So, that is the portion of the interaction curve where a
priori you would not know where the tension controls, or compression controls. The
actual distribution of states of stresses is essential to be able to establish that.
So, you will see that the reason for introducing an iterative approach as far as the design
is concerned is primarily because of this region where you do not know a priori whether
the tension controls or compression controls. So, we will come to that. This was the
interaction curve for the working stress approach. It is instructive to examine the
interaction surface that you will get with the working stress approach and compare it to
the interaction curve that you will get for the limit state approach.
So, the limit state approach is what we will look at; what considerations you will have to
make; of course, our design is completely in the working stress approach. So, this is only
an exercise that you will do as far as the interaction curves are concerned. So, if you are
adopting the limit state approach, then it is a question of reformulating those expressions
in which we had four different zones as far as the working stress approach was
concerned.
Here given the limit state approach we can make our formulations completely with
respect to strains, so a strain-based formulation is what would be ideal if you are
adopting the limit state approach. So, you will see that the formulation is based on
assumptions of strain in the cross section under the in-plane loading of P plus M.
497
Of course, you need to make an estimate; you need to use an estimate of the crushing
strain of masonry. Now, you are familiar with crushing strains in concrete epsilon cu the
ultimate crushing strain of concrete as 0.003; 0.003 is a value that is also typically used
for masonry. So, this is a value that is again established based on experiments that look
at crushing failure under flexural compression.
So, the crushing strain of masonry an assumption of 0.003 is again an acceptable

assumption and used for calculations in masonry as well. So, if you remember the cross
section that we were looking at yesterday, we had a symmetrical distribution of
reinforcement. It is important to make these a priori assumptions on what the diameter of
the bars that you want to use are and the placement.
And therefore, you established what these values of di, d1, d2, d3, and d4 which is the
distance of the centroid of the steel reinforcement bar numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 with respect
to the edge fiber. Again, our assumption is that the architectural layout is going to set
what are the dimensions of the wall, the overall dimensions of the wall.
However, the configuration of the grouted masonry whether it is fully grouted, or

partially grouted where you are placing steel reinforcement is again left to you. But,
importantly they would make differences; they would bring about differences in your
actual values in the geometry. So, it would be an iterative process to go and change the
layout of steel, the bar diameters, and then look at the values d1, d2, d3, d4 or whatever
those steel reinforcement locations and sizes are.
So, as far as the limit state approach the values that you would require, the crushing
strength of masonry is required f’m and then you need the yield strength of steel and the
crushing strain in masonry. Earlier we had our permissible stresses in compression (in
flexural compression) and permissible tensile or compressive stress in steel. And here we
are going to be working with the ultimate strengths of the masonry and the steel itself.
So, the formulation is far simpler than the four regions approach that we had earlier and
you get a more continuous P-M interaction curve in the limit state approach. Because, it
is possible to work completely in strains and keep increasing the strains and estimate the
stresses at different stages.
498
Whereas, what we have been doing in the earlier situation is working from the stresses,
but then the continuity and stresses cannot be guaranteed you start taking off sections.
You will have to make amends for the cracked uncrack situation and then once the
control comes from the steel permissible stress as well.
So, the formulation as far as the P-M interaction diagram here is far simpler. So, we will
come to the table in a moment. You need to make an estimate, you need to start from a
state of strain and then look at introducing eccentricities such that there is a strain
gradient. So, when you begin you begin with the assumption that we are at the crushing
strain in all the entire cross section.
So, the first point is actually looking at a state of pure compression, the first stage is
stage of pure compression ε1, ε2, ε3, and ε4 are the strains corresponding to the 4 bars.
And we are keeping that because of the compatibility of strains equal to the crushing
strain of the concrete itself. So, you have got 0.003 at all those four locations; your
moment capacity is 0 at this stage, the axial load capacity is your maximum axial load
capacity in the wall.
So, that is your starting point of course, for that the notation c that is used here is the
compressed length of the wall ok. The compressed length of the wall implying in this
case, the first case I have put infinity here implying that the position of the neutral axis
499
when you have full compression is infinity. So, you keep reducing the position of the
neutral axis in the subsequent stages.
So, how do you formulate, so in the first stage you are fixing the values of ε1, ε2, ε3, and
ε4 as 0.003 and estimating corresponding stresses. And the corresponding compression
resultant in each bar Cs1, Cs2, Cs3, Cs4 and estimating the compression carried by the
masonry, getting ΣP and ΣM based on corresponding eccentricities ok.
So, how do you estimate the strain at each location, the strain at each location is related
to the compressed length c; c is the compressed length L is the total length of the wall.
And di is the distance from the edge fiber to the centroid of the cross section of the bar
that you are considering 1, 2, 3, or 4 and εm is the value of crushing strain that you have
assumed.
i =
( c − ( L − d )) 
i
m
c
So, merely by the distribution of strains which is remaining triangular you are able to
make your estimate of what the strain is in each bar; correspondingly you will estimate
what is the stress with an assumption of what the modulus of elasticity is. So, here
modulus of elasticity of steel has to be assumed and you will estimate what is the force in
each bar. Mind you were in the limit state approach the concept of modular ratio is out of
the picture now in we are working purely on steel stresses and we are working on strains
and then moving on to the steel stresses and the masonry stresses.
So, here E you will use directly the modulus of elasticity of the steel itself, but then you
limit the value of the steel stress to the yield stress and so, you will make a check if εiE is
greater than fy, if it is so then fy is the value that you are limited to steel has yielded. And
you will continue using fy if it is not yielded, then you will use the value that you get out
of the calculation of εiE itself.
So, with the steel stress known, so you know fs1, fs2, fs3, fs4, you can then estimate based
on the areas of cross section of the steel bars what the compression resultants are:
C i = A si fsi .
500
Once that is done we now have to look at what is the contribution and compression
coming from the masonry. But we started by examining the crushing strain stage in the
masonry, that is where we are beginning.
And therefore, the compressed end of the masonry is at its crushing strain, is at it is
ultimate point. And therefore, the stress block has to be brought in; here we have already
reached crushing strain and therefore, the masonry compressive stress cannot be
estimated like we had done earlier. We use 0.85 f’m where we are using the stress block
parameters now. And therefore, the compression resultant Cm in the masonry is 0.85
f’mt(0.85 c); 0.85 x 0.85 gives you the rectangular stress block parameters and c is again
the compressed length of the wall in masonry.
So, Cm is estimated; you get your estimate of the total force resultant axial force resultant
and the total moment resultant.
P = C si + Cm
L c
M = C e + C m  − 0.85 
si i
2 2
The lever arm for the steel reinforcement bars has to be estimated for each bar as nothing
but the distance from the edge fiber minus half the length of the wall. Whereas, for the
masonry portion it is centroid of the rectangular stress block with respect to half the
length of the wall. So, you get the two eccentricities, you have your estimate of M.
So, what you do next is to start reducing, let us assume that the first stage is over. The
second stage you are estimating that the eccentricities are such that the compressed
length is equal to the length of the wall right. So, it is at that limiting stage where beyond
that point you start getting tension in the cross section.
So, now, all the four bars are in compression, entire length is compressed; compressed
length is equal to L of the wall. For that state keeping the masonry compression
compressive strain at the maximum 0.003; you will then estimate what is the
corresponding strain from the geometry at bar 1, 2, 3, and 4.
So, you are you are fixing the eccentricity and then estimating the corresponding strains
from the linear distribution of strains assumption. Estimate ε1, ε2, ε3, and ε4 and proceed;
501
then reduce the compressed length you assume cracking in the cross section and keep
going further till the section is completely cracked.
Or compressed length comes down to 0; the beauty of the formulation based on strain is
that the same set of expressions hold right from the first stage full compression to the last
stage where it is going to be fully in tension. Where depending on the geometry possibly
all the four bars have yielded or few bars have yielded and few bars have not yielded.
And then with the last stage you will have no axial load capacity, only moment capacity
and establish the P-M curve for the limit state approach. So, that is rather straight-
forward and this is what you would be doing as far as comparing the P-M interaction
diagram from the limit state approach to the P-M interaction diagram that you have that
you have seen yesterday.
So, things that you will be comparing in the assignment that follows is to look at the
effect of compression reinforcement in our calculations. You can do that even here; even
here where the contribution of compression reinforcement can just be neglected. Put a 0
wherever you have contribution of compression Cs1 in compression Cs2 in compression
and once they are in tension use those values only as you did for the working stress
approach.
So, the first one is to look at a comparison between the working stress approach and the
limit state approach in terms of the P-M interactions. The second would be to look at
how effective is consideration of compression reinforcement in the P-M interactions;
what is the percentage increase that you get in the surface itself.
And the third would be to see if tensile strength of masonry, if you actually make use of
the tensile strength of masonry. It is so marginal that you can actually neglect it in your
calculations, should you be considering even that the permissible tensile stress in
masonry towards estimating the P-M interaction surface itself.
And finally, you can look at different arrangements of steel reinforcement, if you have
the concentrated steel reinforcement at the ends versus a distributed steel reinforcement
how do the P-M interactions pan out as far as the same geometry, and the same material
strengths are concerned. So, these are iterations that you can do and get an understanding
of the capacity the bending capacity affected by the axial load levels in masonry in
502
reinforced masonry walls ok. With that I think it is at this stage important to link up to
design.
Now, as you know in reinforced concrete design you have design aids where particularly
for different types of cross sections and different layout of steel reinforcement. You have
P-M interaction diagrams design curves which are readily available to you in the design
aids right.
Now, we do not have design aids here and that is something we could look at coming at
some point of time. However, masonry wall configurations can be more random than
regular reinforced concrete column cross sections. So, it is not going to be so simple to
be able to arrive at a set of design aids for different lengths and different configurations,
it is going to be too exhausting, too voluminous in reality.
And therefore, as far as design is concerned it is not going to be possible, it is not going
to be feasible for you to prepare a P-M interaction curve for every reinforced wall in the
masonry structure right. That may be the ideal thing to do and if you do that you have
complete control in terms of your design loads and the interaction surface itself.
However, that may be too much to ask for and therefore, since you will not be using a P-
M interaction surface, you need to know what is the for the combination of moments and
axial forces at a given wall, you need to know what is the state of stress in the wall. Are
you in the cracked condition of the wall, are you in the uncracked condition of the wall is
compression controlling if you are beyond the balanced section. And that will determine
how much steel you are going to put in the wall itself to ensure the wall design satisfies
the load combinations.
So, since as I mentioned earlier, beyond the balanced section you really do not know a
priori whether you are in the compression control state or the tension control state. You
need an iterative procedure to understand in which part of the interaction curve do you
does the combination fall in and use appropriate expressions to estimate where the
neutral access depth is lying.
Because that is something you do not know at all, you have to estimate where the neutral
access depth is lying. And then based on that go back and check the state of stresses in
the masonry and the state of stress in the steel and ensure that they do not go beyond the
503
permissible stresses. So, that aspect of not knowing where you are in the interaction
surface and whether it is going to be a tension-controlled estimate or compression
controlled estimate.
And therefore, what is the neutral access depth is the unknown portion of the design
process. So, the code when you are looking at design for P plus M, the code actually
gives you two iterative procedures ok. The description of the iterative procedures are
available in the annex of the section that deals with reinforced masonry in the national
building code.
So, you could look at using either of these procedures and as I said we look at one of the
iterative procedures today and examine the second iterative procedure as well. So, that
we are familiar with the approaches to iteratively estimate the state of stresses in the
wall, and do the necessary design check.
So, that is where the first iterative procedure is what I am looking at. Procedure 1 makes
an assumption of where you are sitting in the interaction surface. And then tries to arrive
at what expressions should we use when you are in the compression-controlled
assumption or tension-controlled assumption.
So, we look at the free body diagram here, we are looking at a wall made out of hollow
blocks, it has a certain arrangement of the steel reinforcement. Here we have an
504
arrangement with the steel reinforcement concentrated at the two ends ok. So, again total
length of the wall is lw and you have the steel on the two ends, they are the flexural steel.
You have an axial load acting about the centroid of the wall and you have a moment
coming from external forces acting on the wall. Now, what you really need to establish is
what is kd or the depth of the neutral axis and this is still in the working stress approach.
And therefore, the triangular distribution of stresses is what we are going to be basing
these calculations on.
So, you have the free body diagram at the bottom and then you have the bending moment
and the axial forces, the tensile and compressive forces that we will have to estimate. We
are assuming that part of the wall is cracked, and the tensile force is acting at the
resultant of the region which has the reinforcement in tension.
So, we are taking the centroid of the two bars and that is where the tension resultant has
been placed compression resultant is of course, sitting at the centroid of the triangular
distribution of compressive stresses. So, you need to make some basic assumptions when
you start and then go back and check if for the distribution of stresses and the values of
stresses is there assumption right.
If that assumption is incorrect then you go back and make a change to that basic
assumption which is on whether we are in the compressed compression-controlled zone
of the interaction surface or in the tension-controlled zone of the interaction surface. We
begin by making an assumption that we are in the compression-controlled zone of the
interaction surface. And we assume, this again depends if you have got an eccentricity of
the axial load with respect to the wall.
This is the axial load coming from gravity, if there is an eccentricity that is something
that you need to consider. But if P is acting at the centerline of the wall you can then take
moments about the centroid of the tension reinforcement. So, you have the tension
reinforcement on this side, on the left side you take the centroid of the tension
reinforcement. And take your moments about the centroid of the tension reinforcement
itself.
505
So, with respect to the notations in the drawing here, we take the equilibrium of
moments. And then the moment due to the load because there is an eccentricity that is
coming because of the cracking in the wall. Because of the cracking in the wall the
eccentricity would then imply that there is an additional or secondary moment that
occurs because of the cracking in the wall.
 kd   lw 
C  ( l w − d') −  = P  − d'  + M
 3   2 
So, with that written you can basically write down the compression resultant from the
triangular distribution of stresses in terms of Fm. Because since we are assuming that
compression controls, we are at the permissible compressive stress.
506
Fm bkd
C= and l w − d' = d
2
Fm bkd  kd  l 
 d−  = P  w − d'  + M
2  3   2 
l 
P  w − d'  + M
( kd )
2
2
kd 2 − =  
3 Fm b
2
 l  
3  P  w − d'  + M 
2
( kd ) − 3d ( kd ) +   F b   = 0
2
m
2
You will see that you get a quadratic equation in kd.
So, you basically need to estimate kd for the assumptions that you have made, and for
the kd that you establish you want to check what the state of stresses are. So, we now
have an expression that can give us a quadratic in kd which you can solve and get values
for kd.
So, if you have to solve this expression, if you look at the values that you need to plug in
there, you need the dimensions of the wall, you finalize the dimensions of the wall. You
507
would need to have made an estimate of the steel reinforcement that you are going to
give right. You need to have a priori decided what is the steel reinforcement as a first
stage in your design. And therefore, some assumption on what the bar diameter and the
location of the bar is becomes essential as your d’ will get affected by that choice.
So, you will need to know what the axial force is that is acting on the wall, the external
moment, the length, breadth and the thickness. And the d of the wall, what is the
permissible compressive stress in masonry and what is the assumption that you want to
make for d’. And therefore, your steel reinforcement configuration matters. With those
values known you can solve for kd and establish what the value of kd itself is.
Now, for this kd, once you establish this kd, you know that the compression resultant C
is written in terms of kd, as a function of kd; you can go and solve for kd. And then with
the compression resultant known and P known, you can establish what T is. And you
now have a way of checking if your first assumption that compression controls the
interaction whether that is valid or not.
So, since you looked at compression-controlled situation, based on the compressive

stresses you will establish from strain compatibility what the steel stresses are. So, the
steel stresses are established, we are in the working stress approach, n here is the
modular ratio of the steel to concrete moduli. And you establish fs after you have
established what the state of stress in the masonry is going to be.
508
Fm is considered as the stress in the permissible compressive stress in masonry. So you
now have an estimate of fs. However, if this estimate of fs is larger than the permissible
tensile stress in steel then your assumption is wrong that compression controls.
So, at this stage with fs established you go and check, if this fs is less than the permissible
steel stress Fs. If permissible steel stress Fs is larger, then you have been working with
the right assumption; in reality the load combination is such that in the interaction
surface masonry compressive stress still governs.
And therefore, you can now make an estimate of what is the area of steel that is required
to satisfy the design requirement. So, estimate area of steel from tension force that you
have estimated divided by the stress in steel; the stress in steel is the actual stress in steel
lesser than the permissible tensile stress in steel.
So, if this is true the cycle ends and you have establish how much steel is required to
satisfy the interaction accounting for the interaction itself. However, if the stress in steel
fs is greater than the permissible steel stress, then your basic assumption that the masonry
compressive stress governs is wrong. And you have to go back and make amends
because the kd that you have established is the wrong kd now.
So, in this case you will have to go back and start using a tension-controlled scenario and
for the tension control scenario check again if your fs value is less than the permissible
509
tensile stress. And then if it is right, establish what the compressive stress is and close the
calculations, establish the amount of steel reinforcement required for that condition.
So, to proceed, we now have to look at a tension-controlled scenario and from the
tension control scenario Fs being the permissible tensile stress, you will then calculate
how much is the value of fm. So, but you need an estimate of the amount of steel to
actually begin; you also need an estimate of the masonry compressive stress.
So, we can actually start this part of the calculation assuming that the masonry
compressive stress still controls. And divide the tension that you are getting from
equilibrium with the allowable steel tensile stress. You have from the equilibrium
established what T is and divide that T with Fs and get a trial area of steel because from
the previous calculations whatever kd you established is wrong and area of steel is
wrong.
And therefore, you now need to rework and start somewhere and to therefore, to get a
trial area of steel you are taking the tension force that you arrived at dividing it by the
allowable stress in steel. Because now allowable stress in steel is governing, tension
controls get a trial area of steel and then start your calculations.
You might want to change bar layout or bar dimensions; your d’ will change, check if it
is still feasible to use the d’ that you are using earlier. And then the total compression
510
force as the tension resultant plus the axial force that is acting on the wall. This
compression and tension is because of the bending itself.
So, you actually have to account for the secondary effects; there is going to be cracking
in the wall shift of the centroid shift of the there is an eccentricity cost because of the
cracking and due to the axial force there will be secondary moments. So, you account for
the secondary moments, and the external moment acting on the wall. And then establish
what the compression force for which you are going to be making the calculations
themselves.
So, the area of steel that you are going to be using in your calculations is the area of steel
that you estimated in the previous step plus the axial force divided by the permissible
stress Fs. So, to account for the secondary effect tension force plus the axial force that is
due to gravity T plus P divided by Fs. So, this becomes an estimate of the steel that you
are going to be using in your calculations. For this area of steel rho effective is the
percentage of steel in the wall itself; (As) effective divided by bd, where b is the width of is
the thickness of the wall, and d is the effective depth. With that expression you will now
estimate the value of k. And the corresponding j in the triangular distribution of
compression, j = 1-k/3 in the triangular distribution of compression. Again you are
solving a quadratic and getting the value of k; now this k thus established, if it satisfies
the requirement of tensile stress and steel lesser than Fs you can actually conclude.
511
So, you estimate what the tensile stress in steel here is; this tensile stress in steel should
not be more than Fs. So, fs is calculated from the moment, the total moment you have a
moment which is the secondary moment because of the shifting; because of the
eccentricity caused by cracking plus the exterior the externally applied moment.
From kd and j calculated, you can then make an estimate of what the stress in steel is.
And the stress in steel as the total moment divided by the effective area of steel divided
by j into d. And it should satisfy the original set of assumptions that you have made in
terms of what the effective tension is and what the tension from equilibrium itself is.
So, once that is established, with fs known you can estimate what the corresponding
masonry stress is. And with the triangular distribution of stresses you can estimate that it
is given by,
2M '
fs =
bj(kd)2
So, you are making an estimate of the stress in the masonry compressive stress and this
value again has to be lesser than the value of fm which is the permissible compressive
stress in masonry.
So, here again the fs that you have estimated if it is lesser than the permissible tensile
stress of steel you can stop your iteration. But if fs is greater you basically have to look at
512
changing the sizes of the bars, which would mean again some changes in your
configuration or the values of d’. So, you might require additional bars or larger bar to
account for fs being less than or equal to Fs.
You need to reduce the steel stress, update your d’ and then if d’ is getting updated, your
estimate of kd will change. And then your k and j will change and then you have to
reevaluate your value of M’. And then for that value of M’ again fs has to be calculated;
effective area of steel has to be calculated and corresponding masonry stress has to be
evaluated.
So, that is the iterative approach which is basically taking you through a set of
assumptions. There is an implicit reference to which zone of the interaction surface are
you falling in, right. But there is no direct use of the interaction surface itself; the second
approach which we will discuss subsequently is an approach that actually identifies
explicitly in which zone you are.
And then uses a non dimensional parameter M/ Pd to estimate what expression should
you use to check how much of steel is required for the interaction; the P-M load
combination itself. So, this is the first iterative approach you are free to choose any
iterative approach; even another third iterative approach is ok.
But this is necessitated because of the unknown condition particularly when you are
looking at beyond the balance point of the reinforced masonry cross section itself. So, I
will stop here with the iterative approach, the first iterative approach. And discuss the
second iterative approach and then get into some design examples which will give you a
feel for and a hold on how you make these iterations. And why you make these iterations
depending on the P and M demands on the wall itself.
513
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 04
Lecture – 25
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part – VII
Good morning, we will look at the P-M design approach.
We have been looking at how P-M interaction curves can be made and then we have
been talking about within the approach to reinforced masonry design with respect to
NBC, how the P-M design is addressed. Since design curves in the form of P-M
interaction curves are not developed and readily available for different configurations of
reinforced masonry walls. The difficulty is when you deal with design to be able to
arrive at the steel required for a specific combination of P and M.
And since one approach would be for each configuration of wall to draw the P-M
interaction diagrams, which is not available to you or if you want to do that you are
welcome to do that, but you are dealing with several walls in a building. So, that
approach may not be the most convenient approach unlike in reinforced concrete design
where the P-M curves, design curves are made available to you in design aids.
514
You do not have that luxury in the reinforced masonry design as of now; plus it is also
wall configurations can have different combinations. And so, arriving at design curves is
not as straightforward as in reinforced concrete frame cross sections. So, we were talking
about an iterative method; we talked about one iterative method in the previous lecture
and today we look at the second iterative method. And the next assignment which is
going to be dealing with P-M design would then take you through the specifics of how
you would arrive at, in which region of the interaction is the design situated and how do
you check how much of steel is sufficient for that combination. So, we looked at a first
iterative method where the assumption of whether the tension controls or compression
controls in the cross section is where you begin with. And then make a set of checks to
see whether that is an acceptable assumption and complete the design.
The second technique is similar, but deals with regions in which you may be situated;
you make a check to know which region in the interaction curve would you be situated.
And for each region you have a maximum moment that the section should be able to
carry. And if the design moment is less than the moment that the section can carry for the
amount of steel that you have started with and if you are in that region itself, then it
completes the design process.
So, the second method is a little different from the first method, but they come from the
same requirements of identifying which regions you fall into as far as the P-M
interaction curve is concerned. So, basically as we have been examining with the P-M
interaction curve development itself you know that there are broadly three possible
conditions that the combination of P and M, the applied axial force and the external
moment acting on the wall can take the wall to; in three different conditions.
The first condition is that the wall is uncracked you have some amount of bending in the
wall, but predominantly you have compression the entire wall is in compression the wall
is uncracked; the section is in an uncracked situation. All the bars, if you are providing
bars are in compression and the entire wall is in compression.
The second case is where the eccentricities are such that the masonry section is now
cracked. But the cracked zone of the wall is such that the length of the cracked zone or
the length of the compressed zone is such that all the steel that you are providing is still
in compression. So, cracked cross section, but steel is still in compression and as you
515
progress, the steel reinforcement goes into tension. And so, the third zone is where the
wall is cracked and the steel is in tension as well. So, these are the 3 regions which you
should be able to check a priori. As we discussed earlier the first two regions are simpler
because you can actually arrive at a closed form solution to estimate the maximum
moment in the first two regions, where basically the masonry compression is controlling.
The third region is where the tension is controlling and where the tension controls you
need to use an iterative procedure. So, the third region is where iterative procedure
becomes important or is required ok.
So, the 3 regions that we are talking about; basically you are familiar with the P-M
interaction diagram now, regions 1 2 and 3. The first region is up to a point where the
wall cracks. So, what we basically do is we use a non dimensional parameter and we will
come to define the non dimensional parameter M/Pd as you are aware; M/P has been our
definition for eccentricity. So, we are really looking at e/d, so it becomes a non
dimensional parameter.
So, it is nothing but the eccentricity divided by the distance from the centroid of the steel
reinforcement to the edge compression fiber. So, if you see the way d is defined in the
diagram it is the centroid of the steel reinforcement where T is acting to the edge
compression fiber that is d, so it is basically effective depth itself.
516
So, the ratio M/P which is eccentricity e/d is the non-dimensional parameter that you are
using. And as you know based on this eccentricity for a linear elastic behavior of a cross
section, it is possible for us to determine in which part of the interaction we are. So, with
limiting eccentricity of length divided by 6 you are in the uncracked portion and then
once cracking takes place, you need to figure out whether the steel reinforcement is now
going into tension or steel reinforcement is also in compression.
So, that is the basis with which these two lines, you have these two straight lines
expressed in terms of the non dimensional parameter M/Pd with respect to the geometry
of the wall; and the length of the wall lw and the distance from the centroid of the tension
reinforcement to the edge compression fiber. And this parameter α that is additionally
brought in; this parameter α is actually the eccentricity of the tension resultant with
respect to the centroid of the wall itself. So, we are using these parameters to then
establish if you are in the cracked region or the uncracked region.
So, these straight lines that go from the origin and the define into which region you
would fall. As I said region 1 and region 2 given the linear elastic distribution of stresses
in the wall cross section, you can establish the maximum moment. And check it against
the moment the external moment that is acting on the wall and see if you are in a certain
region. And the amount of steel reinforcement that you have provided or even without
steel reinforcement it might satisfy the P-M demand on the wall for regions 1 and 2 in a
closed form manner and then you go to region 3 ,where the iteration is required because
you could be in the tension controlled region or the compression controlled region in
region 3. But in region 3 as per design, it is essential that you have a tension controlled
design; you have to ensure that in this region the permissible tensile stress in steel
governs the design.
So, it is required that you fall into the tension controlled region, but given the state of
stresses you could be in the compression controlled region and therefore, you need to
bring it into the tension controlled region. So, that is the iteration that would be required
and that is the reason why we do not know where the lie in region 3.
517
So, basically your first check would be to estimate this non dimensional parameter M/Pd
and check in which region the wall would fall. So, if M/Pd is less than this quantity here,
the whole wall cross section is uncracked. And you are in region 1 and we will use the
maximum moment estimated from equilibrium to get the amount of steel that you should
design for the given wall.
2
In case you then make this estimate of −  for the state of forces and resultants in the
3
2
wall. And if M/Pd is less than −  , then steel is also in compression; the wall is
3
2
cracked but steel in compression. But if your M/Pd value is greater than −  , then it is
3
a condition where now the steel is actually gone into tension, so you know you whether
you are in region 2 or region 3.
Region 2 again is compression controlled and you can establish a closed form expression
in that region. Region 3; if you fall to region 3 is where the iterative procedure is
required. So we will go through the overall procedure for region 3 as well. And you will
compare how the 2 iterative procedures work to establish a check for the P-M design in
the next assignment.
518
So, the closed form expressions come from the distribution of stresses in the wall. Since
region 3 is iterative, you actually have to begin with some assumptions and you are
going to be having to start with what distribution, what configuration of steel you want to
place and what is the percentage of steel.
And then we assume that tension controls and check if the situation is such that tension
controls; if compression controls then you come back and make another round of
iteration to ensure that you are still in region 3 and tension controls the design itself.
519
So, that is the overall approach, in step 1 you have to actually estimate based on the P
and M that you are looking at. Calculate what is this quantity alpha; this is a new
quantity that we are introducing. We were not working with this earlier; this quantity
alpha is the distance from where the axial load is acting to the centroid of the tension
steel, normalized to the effective depth d which is from the edge compression fiber to the
centroid of the tension steel. So, once you estimate alpha, you can estimate the quantity
M/ Pd and see in which region you would fall. So, I am making reference to Annex F of
the national building code that is where you would find this procedure that we are talking
about and the first procedure that we talked about and the previous table that you have
seen in the previous slide of the 3 regions you can find that in table 34. So, once you
estimate alpha, estimate M/Pd you can then check in which region you fall and based on
that use the expression for the maximum moment. So, depending on the region let us say
you are in region 1, region 1 fully in compression and you are controlled by the flexural
compression in the masonry.
And therefore, you will have Fb which is the permissible compressive stress in masonry
due to flexural compression already defined. That is the maximum permissible stress in
compression that is allowed if the entire cross section is in compression. So, with respect
to the diagram here, there is no tension in the cross section, the entire section is in
compression. So, you basically make an estimate of what the maximum moment that the
wall cross section can carry. You have a triangular distribution of stresses you have a
strain gradient because whole wall is in compression, but you have a strain gradient.
You make an estimate of the maximum moment that the wall can carry based on the
limiting permissible compressive stress considering flexural compression.
bl2w l
Mm = Fb − P w
6 6
Of course, you will have to from this reduce the effect of eccentricity of the load itself
and that is the part that you see. So, if Mm calculated when you are in region 1, calculated
thus is greater than the external moment that the wall is subjected to, then you have you
have a wall cross section that is designed sufficiently to address the P-M expected on the
wall. So, in reality, there is no reinforcement coming to the picture, here the steel
reinforcement is not considered to be effective. Because the entire wall is in crossing is
520
in compression and that is what is governing the flexural compression and the masonry is
really governing in this region.
You might still you will you would still have to provide steel reinforcement and that is
the minimum steel reinforcement that he will have to provide depending on the type of
wall that you are looking at. Your wall Type B and Type C are walls as per NBC which
you will go for design as per NBC, but minimum steel as prescribed in NBC.
So, you will have to do this design, let us say you have a combination of P and M which
keeps the wall in region 1, it does not require any steel designed in the wall for taking
care of the P plus M acting on the wall. However, there is already some minimum steel
requirement if it is wall type B or wall type C. So, that has to be provided, but you are
not designing steel and placing it in this wall because it is not required for the level of P
plus M combination.
A similar situation is what you will see when you are in the second region, in the second
region again wall has cracked, but you are still controlled by the compressive stress in
masonry. Therefore, again Fb is something that is governing, here again there is really no
requirement of steel as far as the design is concerned.
So, the area of steel, it does not come out of the requirement of P plus M, it comes
merely from the minimum steel that is required as per NBC to ensure seismic capacity in
521
the wall. So, in this case again you see that the estimate of the maximum moment comes
from triangular distribution in the cracked portion of the wall. But with all the bars still if
provided, all the bar still in compression and Fb is the limiting stress again which is the
permissible flexural compressive stress in masonry.
2  P2 
Mm = P ( 1 −  ) d −  
3  Fb b 
So, regions 1 and regions 2 are simple you have this expression coming from the linear
elastic distribution. And you can check M external moment against Mm and the wall
itself based on its dimensions should be able to resist the action of axial force plus
bending moment. By the way this procedure and the previous procedure that we talked
about is valid for both in-plane and out of plane design ok. So, these are procedures that
can be used for design checks or design calculations both in case of in-plane bending and
out of plane bending ok.
So, region 3 is the one where you are not sure whether you are going to be governed by
compression or governed by tension; governed by compression in the masonry, governed
by tension in the steel. And therefore, there is an iterative procedure which means we
have to begin by some area of steel and then check the original assumption. We could
begin with the assumption of the tension in the steel governing and come back and see if
that is a valid assumption otherwise make some changes. So, the way we go about is we
522
really do not know what the neutral axis depth is, for the combination of the P plus M
that we are looking at for the wall considered.
So, kd is something we still do not know and is the reason why we need to have an
iterative approach. So, we begin by assuming that the compression centroid is located at
a distance ‘a’ from the edge fiber and then we assume that with that configuration the
steel reinforcement which is in tension, is limited by Fs the permissible tensile stress in
steel and you start calculating.
Now, you will proceed to estimate what the area of steel would be for this requirement.
You might arrive at a state in your calculations where the area of steel may work out to
be negative which basically implies that you do not need tension steel in the case of the
P+M that you are looking at in the wall. You just have to then go ahead and provide
minimum steel that is required as per the code, but there is no design steel required for
that particular condition that is what the negative value of the area of steel would imply.
So, here you are going to be estimating what the moment is acting on the wall which is
basically due to the cracking of the wall and the eccentricity caused because of the
cracking.
l 
Mp = P  w − a 
2 
This is the assumption that you will have to make because you do not know where the
neutral axis is actually lying.
To make a first estimate of what the area of steel,
M − Mp
As =
Fs ( d − a )
You get an estimate of the area of steel and then proceed with this; is an empirical
empirically developed iteration procedure. And therefore, you will make an estimate as
you can see of this value a2.
523
 2 + 2 d − 
a2 =
3
where,  =
( P + As Fs ) n
Fs b
And if a2 is equal to a, your calculation is has reached convergence, if not in the next step
take a2 as a and continue till a2 and a converge. So, it is an iterative procedure we are
trying to see if your assumption of the location of the neutral axis is correct. So, this is a
simple iterative procedure, should converge in a few steps, you can keep reducing the
difference between a2 and a that you are assuming in your calculations. And then it will
converge quickly and then you need to check whether the tension controlled criterion is
correct or not.
So, if the iterative converges your value of a is correct and therefore, you know what the
neutral axis depth is and your calculation is correct the wall is limited by the tension
reinforcement the Fs that you have that you have used as the permissible tensile stress in
this steel. And you can complete your analysis and the final value of a is estimated and
you can use that in your calculations.
And it should work out to be the one that you are seeing on the screen and n is the
modular ratio that you have been using in your previous calculations as well. If you
calculate this value of a and if the resulting value of a is less than this value; that is the
524
value that you have used in your previous calculations, you get a converged value. If that
converged value is less than this limiting value, then your analysis is complete the
tension controlled assumption is correct.
And you can proceed to use the area of steel that you have used for that set of
calculations as the final area of steel required. In case the value of a that you have
estimated by the procedure of convergence is greater than the value, the limiting value of
a, then the limiting value of a is the value limited by the stress in steel divided by the
stress in the masonry under flexural compression. So, if it is so, you proceed to the next
step and then calculate the area of steel corresponding to an a given by the expression
here.
And in this case, you might have a situation where the previous term, the under root in
the previous term can become negative. Now, in such a situation it basically implies that
the compression capacity of the wall is inadequate. So, if the compression capacity of the
wall is inadequate you need to go and basically increase the width of the wall. Meaning
now, you have of course, gone into a situation where there is significant moment in the
wall; significant section of the wall is cracked and you are designing the steel for that
situation.
However, the compression capacity of the wall is compromised, so that state you
basically need to go back and change the overall configuration of the wall. So, you can
525
basically increase the strength of masonry which means Fb will change or increase b
which is the width of the wall. So, in case the tension controlled criterion is not satisfied
when you then proceed to estimate a, if the under root is negative, then there is a physical
implication which has to be addressed which is lack of compression capacity which
requires a change in the design strength or the cross section of the wall. So, this is
something you would need to be careful about; we were talking about the under root
term here. And then you proceed to check what is the area of steel for this condition right
this we are now in the compression controlled condition it was not the tension controlled
condition.
And therefore, we are making a change in the amount of steel that we put into the wall
such that we are in the tension control condition. So, the last step here is to ensure that
we bring the design back into the tension controlled portion of region 3 and that is your
final estimate of area of steel itself. So, assignment 3 will basically take you through the
how these calculations evolve, but also the basic assumptions with which these
calculations have been made.
But it is iterative and empirical based on tests that have been conducted on reinforced
masonry and an understanding of the distribution of stresses in reinforced masonry wall
cross sections. But considering a non-linear P-M interaction; we have actually
considered a non-linear P-M interaction implicitly in this approach itself. So, that is
where I would stop today and what we need to start looking at is, we have looked at
design for P+M, we looked at pure axial force design.
We have seen the expressions that are developed for pure axial force design in the
reinforced masonry wall. We then have shear design which has to be addressed; with that
the component level design is complete and then we will look at system level design of
masonry buildings. Then arrive at the demands to walls and then come back to designing
the components themselves.
526
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 04
Lecture – 29
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part VIII
Good afternoon, continuing from the P + M design that we have been looking at the
previous lecture, today we will examine how you go about designing for shear. We
already looked at the overall framework that has to be adopted for shear design. We go to
the specifics today and then initiate the overall design framework in terms of how you
estimate the demand in terms of shear force and then the axial force and bending
moments required for each component design within an entire system.
So as far as design for shear is concerned; we are really beginning with an estimate of
what is the actual shear stress that is expected on the masonry wall. Now, I am assuming
that we have already estimated the shear force that has to be attributed to a given pier in
a masonry wall.
So, from the shear demand we then arrive at what is the value of shear stress that we are
looking at in terms of the demand shear stress on the masonry wall. And this value of
shear stress can give us an indication whether the masonry alone, that is the unreinforced
527
masonry wall alone, would be in a position to resist the shear demand. And this is the
stage where you actually make up your mind on whether you are going to use designed
web shear reinforcement or just have the masonry take care of the shear itself.
So, if the shear demand is not significant you might be in a situation; where you do not
have to design shear reinforcement. You still would have to provide minimum horizontal
and vertical steel as per the wall category A/B/C that we have seen earlier. So, not to be
confused with the need to provide the minimum reinforcement; you need to take this
decision of whether or not the wall will have designed shear reinforcement ok.
So, for that you make an estimate of the actual shear stress that is expected in the wall,
the shear stress f v as the shear demand that you are looking at; V divided by the width of
the wall itself into the effective depth d is considered. We take about 75 percent of the
shear force itself is the shear stress that we are looking at; here 0.75V/bd is your estimate
of the shear stress f v.
And here you make the decision of whether you are going to go with the web shear
reinforcement or no web shear reinforcement. Of course, that depends on the level of
shear stress that the wall is experiencing given the distribution of shear force in the wall
itself. And this is where I recall the requirement that particularly with wall type B or wall
type C, now that you are designing the masonry wall, you are in wall type B or wall type
C; the web shear reinforcement as required by 10.7.2; we will examine for wall type C in
a moment, but needs to be provided even if the masonry can actually take all the shear
stress coming on to the wall. Typically for zones 4, 5 for 1, 2 storied structures; we are
looking at shear stress levels for which you typically would have to provide designed
web shear reinforcement. For lower seismic zones you might see situations where you do
not have to provide additional web shear reinforcement in the masonry wall.
So, to begin with we have discussed this fact that it is really the aspect ratio of the
masonry wall and its boundary conditions which will determine the kind of behavior that
the shear wall would have. So, the estimate of this ratio M/Vd is the first, once you have
done the estimate of the actual shear stress; we need to then look at what this M/Vd ratio
is.
And the M/Vd ratio; if you remember will then lead us to what are the allowable shear
stresses that the code permits Fv; you need the allowable shear stress Fv and that comes
528
from looking at boundary conditions and the aspect ratio of the wall. So, if you have a
squat wall which is wide, longer than it is taller versus a slender wall which is taller than
it is longer; you will be able to establish what the allowable shear stress is.
So, the M/Vd ratio has to be estimated. So, you are looking at the bending moment
demand on the wall; the in-plane bending moment demand on the wall M; divided by the
shear force that you have estimated multiplied by the effective depth which is the
distance from centroid of tension reinforcement to the edge compression fiber; that
estimate is then used to determine what are the allowable and the maximum allowable
shear stresses themselves.
So, if you recall we had this table where there are two parts to the table; when you design
considering the masonry to take care of shear or you design such that the reinforcement
takes care of the shear coming on to the wall.
So, the upper part of the table looks at without web shear reinforcement, where as the
lower part of the table is considering web shear reinforcement. And in this case when
you say considering web shear reinforcement the assumption is that only the shear
reinforcement is taking care of shear, you are not considering the contribution from the
masonry itself. There is always a contribution from the masonry, in addition there is a
contribution that you want to assign to the steel reinforcement. When you design for
529
shear reinforcement you assume that the masonry is not contributing anymore all the
shear is going to be carried by the shear reinforcement.
So, we have seen this table earlier, the M/Vd ratio here is categorized into less than 1 and
greater than 1, looking at walls that are squat versus wall that are slender. So, that is one
categorization, after the first the initial categorization which we do as with and without
the web shear reinforcement design. The M/Vd ratio is estimated and then you know
which category the wall would fall into for which the allowable shear stress Fv is
prescribed.
If you see that the allowable shear stress is prescribed as a function of M/Vd; therefore,
the aspect ratio of the wall is a governing parameter as far as the shear resistance that the
masonry wall can offer and the masonry compressive strength, here represented as
fm .So, the two important parameters that govern the shear resistance of the masonry
walls are really the aspect ratio.
The aspect ratio is also affected; the wall is also affected by the kind of boundary
condition it has and then the masonry strength here represented as under root of the
compressive strength; which is how the shear strength varies with compressive strength.
So, you can then estimate Fv and look at the maximum value of Fv that the code permits
within the allowable stress design.
So, to examine the overall contours of these values; if you represent what this table tells
you in terms of the relationship between allowable shear Fv and the M/Vd ratio. We will
look at with and without web shear enforcement what these numbers look like. Basically
our M/Vd ratio is what is representing the aspect ratio; M if you were to represent; M as
Vh; M/Vd is nothing, but your h/d.
So, it is really giving you the h/d ratio; it is really representing the aspect ratio. And there
are factors that will take care of the boundary condition in the way the boundaries are
affecting the shear deformation of the wall itself.
So, if you look at with and without web shear reinforcement, depending on the M/Vd
1  M 
ratio, the value goes from (for without web shear reinforcement) 4−  fm . So,
36  Vd 
that is the lower red line that you can see from M/Vd ratio 0 and at M/Vd ratio of 1, you
530
come to the maximum value that we are considering 0.083 fm , but this is limited
irrespective of a compressive strength; it is 0.2 MPa for any value of compressive

strength.
So, there is a limit in value put there and if you have web shear reinforcement; you are
going from an M/Vd ratio, h/d, small h/d to larger h/d ratios from 0.167 and then it
saturates at 0.125 fm and the maximum value there irrespective of the compressive
strength is 0.4 MPa.
So, this calculation that you will make on the aspect ratio of the wall will determine what
is the allowable shear stress for the design itself and you have to ensure that the shear
stress itself is within these parameters; otherwise it would mean you will have to design
the web shear reinforcement or change the dimensions of the walls such that the masonry
itself can resist the shear demand coming on it.
So, this is to arrive at your allowable stresses; once that is done it is about coming back
and estimating how much of web shear reinforcement should you be providing and how
do you do that. So, is there a minimum; is there a basis with which you estimate how
much of web shear reinforcement you should be providing. Yes, and it is a rather
simplified assumption that is done here. You know that in reinforced systems; as you
have studied in reinforced concrete, the shear resistance comes from several parameters.
In reinforced concrete you have the portion of concrete in compression that resist shear;
you have the aggregate interlocking across a shear crack that can resist shear. You have
the dowel action that can actually resist shear and then the shear reinforcement that you
would provide; the tension resistance of the shear reinforcement also would contribute to
the shear resistance.
So, it is a rather complex mechanism as far as shear design is concerned; however, the
approach that is adopted in provision of shear reinforcement in masonry is rather simple.
We estimate with some basic assumptions how much of minimum web shear
reinforcement should you be providing; knowing the shear demand coming on to the
wall and with knowledge of the type of steel that you going to use.
531
So, as far as the design for the shear reinforcement is concerned, it is prescribed that you
make an assumption of what the spacing is going to be and that is anyway required as a
design step. So, you begin by assuming a spacing s, but you now have to ensure that this
spacing respect the requirements of minimum spacing the code prescribes for shear
reinforcement. And therefore, ensure that the maximum spacing of the shear
reinforcement is not greater than 0.5 times d, where d is the effective depth of the wall
cross section that we are looking at or 1.2 meters; take the lesser of the two and that is
your spacing that you are assuming to make this calculation.
And the minimum area of shear steel that you would be providing would be,
Vs
A v ,min =
Fs d
Fs is the permissible tensile stress of the steel that you are using for the construction and
d is the effective depth.
So, this is basically arrived that from a very simple assumption; we have the masonry
wall panel h in height and effective depth d, we assume that a 45 degree shear crack is
extending from the extreme compression fibre to the centroid of the tension steel. And
then if you sum the forces you will be able to arrive at how much of steel is required to
equilibrate the shear demand that the wall is experiencing.
532
So, in this particular assumption, you really do not consider the contribution of other
effects such as the dowel action that the longitudinal reinforcement would actually be
providing. There is a contribution which is there, but we not making an estimate of how
much that component of the shear resistance itself is. We make an estimate of what the
minimum web shear reinforcement that you have to provide is and then check against the
minimum prescriptions for type B or type C wall, ok.
So, the process is quite straight forward; first you make an estimate of the shear stress
itself fv; then use the M/Vd ratio for the wall that you are designing and establish the
maximum value of allowable shear stress and the maximum value of allowable shear
stress. And then you take a decision whether you want to go with web shear
reinforcement or the masonry itself will be able to counteract the shear demand. If web
shear reinforcement has to be provided, then this is the minimum web shear
reinforcement that you provide.
Estimate how much Av,min is and then compare it against the minimum requirements of a
type B or a type C wall.
So, at this stage we will basically go and check what the minimum prescriptions; I am
and looking at the type C wall prescriptions here. It requires that you provide the steel
reinforcement both in the horizontal direction and in the vertical direction. And we have
talked about this earlier, the horizontal reinforcement as shear reinforcement becomes
533
more effective in the presence of vertical reinforcement. And therefore, it is about
providing both horizontal and vertical reinforcement uniformly in the masonry wall.
But there are specific requirements in terms of how much of reinforcement, minimum
reinforcement should be provided. There are two requirements, basically the sum of the
reinforcement in both directions that is how much of area of steel you are providing in
the vertical direction and how much of steel you are providing in the horizontal direction
should be at least 0.2 percent of the gross area of the wall cross section.
So, this is one requirement that has to be adhered to and the second requirement that in
each direction the minimum steel that you provide is 0.07 percent. So, in many cases
depending on the zone that you are designing and the size of the structure that you
looking at and the criticality of the wall in terms of attracting shear forces; you might be
providing the minimum steel, the minimum steel that it requires.
So, these two requirements have to be taken care of the sum of the reinforcement in
vertical and horizontal directions and the minimum reinforcement in each direction. So,
should be 0.07 at least in each direction and the sum should be atleast 0.2 percent.
Spacing of the reinforcement; you already have a requirement in terms of the spacing of
the reinforcement, this is what type C wall or type B wall would be prescribing. Here in
this particular case is the maximum spacing the horizontal and vertical reinforcement is
the lesser of these three values that you would estimate; lw length of the wall divided by
3 or the height of the wall divided by 3 or 1.2 m.
So, that 1.2 m spacing is something that you will see is a recurring number that comes
from established experimental work which shows that at least 1.2 m spacing of
reinforcement is required for minimum desirable behavior of a masonry wall panel.
There is also another requirement that this code puts in that the minimum cross section
area of reinforcement in the vertical direction has to be one-third of the required shear
reinforcement. So, this is an additional check that you would make, that you have the
area of shear reinforcement that you are estimating and then ensure that in the vertical
direction the minimum cross sectional area of reinforcement that you have provided is at
least one-third of the value that you providing for the shear reinforcement itself.
534
So, this is basically your shear design that as far as this code is in concerned is required
to be done. Pier by pier you would be caring out the shear design; mind you there is no
specific prescription for; there is no specific design prescribed for the spandrels, ok. The
design of reinforcement both flexural reinforcement, the P+M design and the shear
design is for the piers; for the vertical load resisting elements.
You do not have a design process prescribed for the spandrels; the spandrels are the
portions between the vertically aligned piers and minimum steel is prescribed for the
spandrel regions. So, if you look at areas of masonry above the window opening and
below the window opening; you will have to ensure that the minimum reinforcement that
we have been talking of a type A, type B, type C wall is adhered to as far as these
regions are concerned.
So, design is only going to be for the piers.
Once assume you have designed your wall to carry axial forces; we will looked at the
prescription, axial forces both the steel reinforcement has a contribution as well as the
masonry itself.
We had a simple expression that takes care of the maximum allowable axial force for a
wall under compression. Then if you have P+M in-plane or out of plane; you can do the
P + M design approach that we have examined earlier and then the shear design
535
depending on the shear demand coming on to the wall. Once those three are done; of
course, the shear reinforcement or the flexural reinforcement are going to be effective;
only if you provide adequate anchorage for the reinforcement bars. And therefore, one
has to look at design for development length, design for anchorage by achieving the
required development length. And here again prescription is rather straight forward and
most of the principles, most of the prescriptions that you would adopt for reinforced
concrete are applicable in this context.
So, the development length Ld has to be estimated for each of the locations, each of the
bars, where it is 0.25 into diameter of the bar into the permissible tensile stress of steel or
300 mm. So, you would make that estimate and provide the development length that is
required, the lesser of the two estimates is what you use.
You are also allowed to provide hooks as you would in reinforced concrete where
development length is becoming difficult because of congestion of reinforcement or
practical difficulty in placing an extension of the steel bar; you are allowed to go with
hooks. And we have seen that there is a section that tells you the detailing of the hook as
in reinforced concrete has to be taken care of.
You would need to do lap splices because you are looking at the vertical reinforcement
that would have to run continuously across the entire height of the masonry walls.
Therefore, lap splicing and where should you do lap splicing and what is the overlap that
you required for lap splicing is again something that you can take care of.
Bar curtailment is again allowed for as in reinforced concrete where if the expected
demands are lesser than M max; the maximum moment, then you are allowed to go with
bar curtailment. So, these prescriptions in the detailing stage have to be adhered to and
with that the component level design is complete. So, what we will do in the next couple
of sessions is to take up the design process from system level and arrive at the design
forces that are required at the component level.
So, that is where it would be instructive to examine design of a single storied structure
which has a certain distribution of the shear walls and a multi-storied structure with the
distribution of the shear walls. And then arrive at what are the design forces required for
the masonry walls that you would be designing. So, with this the component level design
aspects are complete.
536
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 04
Lecture - 30
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part - IX
We will focus on the basis for design and then start defining the shear forces for the
structure, the shear forces that are then distributed to the walls and from the walls to the
piers. So, this process is what we are going to be examining here on, both for single
storey and for multi-storey structures; however, this design is within the framework of
earthquake resistant design.
So, it is not going to be gravity design alone, but the framework is design for a
combination of earthquake force and gravity forces which is dead plus live load. So, we
are basically looking at arriving at a distribution of demand axial forces bending
moments and shear forces for a combination of earthquake load, dead load and imposed
load or the live load itself.
So, the starting point is again as far as the seismic design is concerned, you have the
design configuration, the plan configuration that you have arrived at and we have to
choose the type of system that we want to actually design; which then leads us to what
537
sort of a response reduction factor can you use in the design and arrive at the horizontal
seismic coefficient; which then determines what is the total base shear that the structure
is going to be designed for.
So, I am revisiting the response reduction factor and what this response reduction factor
is basically standing for; I recollect that we have talked about the different values of the
response reduction factor that are prescribed for reinforced masonry. And type A, type B,
and type C walls as you remember; as you will remember the first one is again governed
by 1905 design. While all the three are still in the allowable stresses design, the first one
type A wall is governed by 1905 design and that is why you are allowed to design such
structures only in seismic zones II and III and the minimum reinforcement requirement is
anyway provided. So, here the design is going to be as per 1905 which is the code for
unreinforced masonry as a structural solution.
B and C we are allowed to go to R factors of 3 and a maximum of 4 for type C wall

which is with special reinforcement, we just looked at the percentage of reinforcement,
which is about 0.2 percent combination of horizontal plus vertical and minimum of 0.07
percent in any direction.
So, if you are looking at R factors of 3 or 4; what this R factor is doing. So, this R factor
is a combination of effects that are considered in the overall structural behavior. So, if
you were to look at in this graph the red line that you see; it is really the overall lateral
force design of the structure, overall lateral force response of the structure.
So, you have lateral force on the y axis and the roof displacement; it is a control node
that is being considered at the top of the structure and we are looking at how this
structure behaves as the lateral force increases and finally, there is failure in the structure
by any mechanism that is formed leading to its ultimate behavior. So, if you look at the
red line which is really the actual behavior of the structure.
We are then looking at certain important points on this force displacement behavior,
which gives us the basis for the definition of the R factor. So, if you are looking at a
structure and based on its initial elastic stiffness which is the initial line, the dotted line
that is there along the initial curve of the structure; that helps us determine what is the
total elastic force that the structure is to be designed for. So, your elastic force Felastic is
determined; but then you do not design for the elastic force.
538
Considering the fact that the structure cannot take the elastic force completely, but starts
deforming and getting damaged significantly before the behavior of damage formation
that you observe in a given typology of structure needs to be accounted for and therefore,
Felastic is not something that you would design for you will have to estimate what you
should be designing for.
So, to be able to arrive at what you should be designing for, once we have defined Felastic,
we need to go and define what is this yield force at which the structure starts showing
significant deviation from elastic behavior. And that is your second stage Fy. Now unlike
metal structures; again when you are looking at metal structures it is an assembly of
several elements, it is not a single metal element, it is not a single bar in steel that you are
looking at. It is an assembly of several metal structures, even there it is not going to be a
marked point as far as the yield of the structure is concerned.
So, defining what is the force corresponding to the yielding of the structure is not
something that can be defined objectively. There is a certain amount of difference
depending on the approach one would adopt in defining the yield force and typically
what is done is, you have a non-linear curve which is the red curve here is a non-linear
curve and to define a point which is the yield force in the non-linear curve is not
straightforward.
So, what is typically done is that this non-linear curve is then converted into an
equivalent bilinear curve with or without hardening and there are prescribed procedures
for example, equal area approach is one of the procedures to arrive at iteratively, a value
of yield force, as far as the behavior of the structure is concerned. It could also be, if you
have reinforced concrete structures or even steel structures, prescriptions are you look at
the first yield, the force at which the first element starts yielding in the structure, but then
as I said there are different ways in which that is approached.
So, let us say that using an analytical approach or using some specific prescription such
as first yield; you arrive at the yield force of the structure, then this ratio between the
elastic force and the yield force of the structure is the ductile behavior owing to ductility
in the behavior. That is the structure is now yielding and the displacements in the
structure are going to be significantly larger from that point onwards. And therefore, this
ratio of the ultimate displacement of the structure Δu to yield displacement of the
539
structure, ultimate displacement to the yield displacement is the displacement ductility of
the structure.
So, the first parameter which is due to ductility Felastic by Fy is capturing that phenomenon
of the ductility available in the structure. So, that is where you have the first contributory
factor. We designate ductility with the factor μ, displacement ductility is what we are
basically referring to, where this displacement ductility of the structure is nothing, but
because it is now going on almost horizontal; the ratio of Δu to Δy.
So, reflecting Δu to Δy using this Rμ, we are really talking of this ratio Felastic to Fy. So,
that is the first part. Then you also have overstrength. So, you expect a certain material to
yield at a specific value which is what on an average that material should yield. But
depending on manufacturing processes, depending on existing defects, depending on the
fact that materials will have variability, material will have an overstrength and will not
necessarily yield at that particular value exactly.
And therefore, there is an overstrength factor that needs to be accounted for and that ratio
is brought in by this Fy/Fs. Now this Fy/Fs is a value that is greater than 1 and depending
on the type of material we are looking at, one would be able to arrive at what is the
correct overstrength factor that you should be using for a given typology.
How much should I use for reinforced concrete, how much should I use for steel. For
steel these values are much lesser because it is a material which is not affected so much
by variability, but for materials like masonry and concrete; Fy/Fs is a significant number
and cannot be neglected. That is taken care of by the second factor, RΩ here which is
actually due to the overstrength.
So, Fy/Fs is that element that comes in and the third one is the design approach that we
are taking. So, if we were designing for strength, if we were adopting limit state design
and doing ultimate strength design, designing at limit state defined by ultimate behavior,
then we would have actually stopped at Fs. If we were doing strength design, we should
have said Fs is our design force.
However, in this particular case we are using the allowable stress approach and therefore,
Fs is not what we would be designing for. We use a factor of safety to further bring down
the design force and therefore, the third component of response reduction that we are
540
bringing in is due to the allowable stress; allowable stress approach. And that is your Ry
that is sitting here. So, Fs / Fdesign would define what that factor itself is.
A simple analogy here is, when we were looking at compressive strength of masonry
right; using a prism test. We then looked at the basic compressive stress which was 25
percent of that compressive strength from a prism test. We were bringing in a factor of
safety of 4. This is analogous to such a situation where I know that the material is going
to yield at a certain value or fail at a certain value, but I do not want to design it at that
level.
I already reduce it for overstrength and then further reduce it for a factor of safety and
that is what is reflected here as Fs divided by Fdesign. So, RΩ is taking care of the
overstrength. So, you are really looking at Fy/Fs. You are then looking at Ry which is
your Fs divided by Fdesign, which is the design force under the working stress approach
that you are adopting. Now these put together; the overstrength factor, the ductility factor
and the allowable stress design factor together is what we refer to as the behavior factor,
right.
So, it is a word; the R is really a, it is a conglomeration of several phenomena. And it is

called the response reduction factor because exactly what it is doing is reducing the
response for us as far as design is concerned; but in earthquake engineering literature,
this is referred to as the behavior factor. So, the structural behavior under an earthquake
is basically governed by these three primary aspects as far as your design forces are
concerned.
If you want to bring in any your allowable stress design, you bring in Ry; but you have to
anyway consider overstrength factor and ductility factor. So, that is our starting point.
So, with an appreciation of what R factor should you use, we then go and define
depending on the zone we are sitting in; what the design seismic coefficient is.
Now adopting the design seismic coefficient implies we are also choosing the design
force for which we are designing and that is what we see the design basis earthquake
being Z/2, which is the zone factor divided by 2, multiplied by the factor that tells you
what is the demand level depending on the period of vibration of the structure, which is
Sa/g divided by the response reduction factor, but this has to be qualified again
depending on the importance factor (I) of the structure.
541
Z I Sa
Ah =  
2 R g
So, this is our starting point as far as the overall system design forces are concerned. Ah
is established and then the shear force from Ah, the base shear force from Ah needs to be
now distributed. So, we will look at that in the next lecture where we go from system
level design up to the pier shear forces within a given wall.
Thank you.
542
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 04
Lecture – 31
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part – X
Good morning, we will continue with our lecture on the basis for seismic design. And,
define how you arrive at the demands on different components- the piers that are going
to be designed for a combination of gravity and lateral forces.
So, with respect to the code that refers to the definition of seismic input IS: 1893 part 1,
we have seen how the horizontal Design Seismic Coefficient has to be defined for the
building that you are going to be designing. And Ah which is the design seismic
coefficient requires the use of the zone factor, Z/2, Sa/g which comes from the design
horizontal acceleration response spectrum. And with the selection of the level of ductility
that you would like to have in your structure which determines the behavior factor.
So, depending on the type of reinforced masonry or unreinforced masonry with specific
seismic resistant detailing that you would do with respect to IS: 4326, you would choose
your R factor and the important factor based on the occupancy and use of the building
itself. For the value of Sa/g, we make reference to the elastic design response spectrum.
543
And, the response spectrum that you see here is the one that is prescribed for response
spectrum analysis.
If you are working with equivalent static analysis, instead of the response spectrum
analysis, this initial part of the response spectrum, the ascending curve, the ascending
portion of the response spectrum is not considered and instead you start with a value of
2.5 at time period T is equal to 0 for equivalent static method.
However, for the response spectrum method, assuming that you are using a response
spectrum method to model and analyze the structure; this is the elastic response spectrum
that you would be using from which you require the value of Sa/g, but for the value Sa/g
you need to be able to a priori estimate the fundamental period of vibration of the
structure, which in a simplistic manner, can be estimated by knowing the overall
dimensions of the structure that you are designing; h being the total height and d being
the side dimension, in the direction that you are considering the earthquake design. So,
that is your initial estimate, of course, after your model you can always come back after
doing a full-fledged modal analysis. Come back and check if the Ta that you have used is
good enough or would you want to make some iterations there.
So, this is required once your Ah is determined, assuming we are talking of the design
basis earthquake where the level of earthquake input is determined by Z/2, Z being
defined for the maximum considered earthquake. So, once Ah is defined based on the
choices you have made, you then go and estimate the design base shear for the total
building which requires the seismic weight W of the building.
So, the seismic weight again requires a percentage of the live load to be accounted for
depending on the level of imposed loads. And, it also should consider additional loads
like; heavy snow loads or sand loads if present in regions that are affected by snow
storms and sand storms. So, once the design base shear VB is estimated for the building
that you are designing, we then move to the next phase which is taking that to different
floors and then taking that to the different walls and the piers to establish what is the
shear force for which we should design.
544
So, today we will actually be looking at this transition from total base shear in the
structure to the base shear that you would estimate and the basis to estimate that for each
pier. So, the first part is about the vertical distribution of the base shear to the different
floors. Now, what does that require? It requires us to be able to define what is the seismic
weight now floor wise. We had the overall seismic weight of the structure but then we
should also be able to estimate the seismic weight per floor.
And estimate Qi which is the shear force corresponding to one floor (one storey)
 
 
W h2
Q i = VB  n i i 
 
  Wj h j
2

 j=1 
Where the i here stands for the storey that we are looking at, Wi is the seismic weight of
a given storey and hi is the interstorey height of the storey that you are considering. So, hi
could be different for different storeys and that is something you should be careful about;
typically h1 the first storey maybe taller than the other. j is nothing but the number of
storeys again; so one to the maximum number of storeys, in this case 4. So, you are
basically estimating in a proportionate manner, how much floor shear of the total base
shear should you apportion to a given storey?
545
So, when you are estimating seismic weight; care is to be given to calculating the seismic
weight. Because what we are implying in this model is that the seismic weight of the
structure is lumped at the floor level right. It is a multi-degree of freedom system
composed of masses which are lumped at the floor level. Now, that requires a certain
careful transition from the actual structure to this lumped mass idealistic model that we
have.
So, what we typically do is; every floor is considered to be composed of half the mass of
the storey above and half the mass of the storey below. So, if you look at W1; W1 is
lumping half the mass from the top and half the mass from the bottom. What happens to
the mass below of storey 1? It is you are considering a fixed boundary condition and
therefore, that has no degree of freedom and so, half the mass of the ground story is
really not coming into the calculations.
If you look at the top floor- fourth storey here. It takes the load from the terrace probably
you have a parapet wall and then half the mass of the fourth storey. So, it is essential to
estimate the storey masses which is then used to distribute the total base shear to the
floor shears. Again, if you were doing this, you can have different masses in different
floors and that is fundamentally the reason why we are trying to look at the distribution
of shear forces based on the distribution of masses.
In a masonry structure considering the fact that most masonry structures are rather
symmetrical in their plan layouts and load bearing walls are continuous, the mass should
typically be quite similar along the height except for the topmost story. So, once you
estimate Q 1, Q 2, Q 3 and Q 4 at each floor you are basically ready to now take the floor
shears and then distribute it in the floors. What you are seeing here is really the
conversion of the base shear that we had, V B into the different floor shears and as you
can see the summation of all the 4 shears Q1 to Q 4 can actually give you the total base
shear VB itself. So, once this is carried out, you know what is the floor shear that each
floor has to be designed for; our focus now shifts to the floor itself. We now have to start
examining different aspects within the floor.
546
So, again to come back to the terminology that I have been using, you are talking of floor
shear. You are talking of total base shear, the floor shear and then we are talking of the
different walls in the floor itself. Within each wall you have resisting vertical lateral load
elements which we are referring to as piers. So, the transition is total building to the
floors, to the walls and then to the piers and your final goal is to be able to establish what
are the shears forces per pier, ok?
So, that would be a floor for you with different walls configured around the plan. So,
each wall that you see here, each extension along the x and the y directions are different
walls. Now, the next goal is to be able to apportion this floor shear Qi that we established
in the previous slide to the different walls themselves and then to the separate resisting
elements within the wall. Now, the walls can actually be solid walls with no perforations
or walls with perforations.
Now, walls with perforations have to be dealt with a little more carefully, because it is
more involved; however, if you have a wall with perforations as you see here we have a
door opening and then other a large opening that is dividing the wall into 3 vertical
lateral load resisting piers. So, finally, we are interested in knowing what should I design
H 1 pier for, H 2 pier for and H 3 pier for or what are the values of H 1, H 2 and H 3 and
along with the gravity load you have the demand to which you will be designing the
structure itself, designing those components themselves.
547
Now, for that of course, we require the definition of the stiffness of a pier and this is
something we have already seen. Now, this requires a consideration of the boundary
conditions of each of the piers and based on this categorization; whether we are looking
at a solid wall or a wall between openings we have looked at the ideal deformation under
lateral forces of such walls.
So, a solid wall with no openings within it should be expected to have a cantilever
deformation profile, implying that the top of the wall is free to rotate, the bottom is fixed.
And, we have in our previous lecture been able to estimate the stiffness of such a pier
and relate it to modulus of elasticity of the masonry, the geometry of the wall H, length
of the wall L and t the thickness of the wall.
Now, if it is a wall between openings, with perforations, then the pier that is sitting
between these perforations is limited in terms of its deformation at the top, particularly
the rotations at the top. And, you would have a shear deformation profile implying that
the pier now has to be considered with a fixed-fixed boundary condition and for this case
as well we have estimated what the stiffness could be. So, you have the basic unit in
terms of estimating the stiffness of a pier, but now the transition from a wall to the pier
has to be established ok.
So, let us now focus on how do you go about estimating the stiffness of a perforated
shear wall? The solid shear wall is not so much of a problem. You can assume that it is a
548
cantilevered deformation profile and based on the geometry and the assumptions on the
modulus of elasticity, arrive at the stiffness of the wall, but the complication comes when
you have a perforated shear wall.
So, typically under the assumption of a rigid diaphragm ok; let us work with a rigid
diaphragm at this point and also examine towards the end, if we were not having a rigid
diaphragm in the structure what were to happen. In terms of distribution of the forces to
the walls. Now, if you have a masonry structure with a reinforced concrete slab- a
reinforced concrete floor or a roof slab typically, assuming that it is a rigid diaphragm is
a rather acceptable proposition.
And we can then therefore, as a consequence, consider that the distribution of the shear
force from the floor, the diaphragms to the walls will be based on the relative stiffness’s
ok. So, we are going ahead with that proposition. If that were not so, if the in-plane
stiffness of the diaphragm is not adequate and we will see the limits on what is adequate
in-plane stiffness of a diaphragm; then the diaphragm could actually be classified as a
flexible diaphragm or a semi rigid diaphragm, that creates a complication because you
cannot now distribute the forces onto the walls related to the stiffness; you have to adopt
a different strategy.
So, now at this stage we are examining the distribution of the shear forces to the walls
proportionate to the relative stiffness’s. So, what is really happening is, we need to be
able to establish what is the distribution factor- I have 4 walls, I have 5 walls in the
configuration in a plan, I need to establish what is the distribution factor with respect to
the total stiffness of that storey which goes to the wall itself.
So, the distribution factor can simply be defined as the ratio of stiffness of the pier that
you are examining to the sum of the stiffness’s of all the piers; if you are looking at a
wall in a floor, if you are looking at the pier it is within a wall itself. So, still it is simply
K i or sum of K i and that is a ratio that you would use, multiplied with the wall shear to
establish what is the shear force going onto a single component itself.
Now, the moment you have openings, the openings in a wall, it increases the deflection
of the wall right. And that reduces the stiffness of the wall. So, how do you account for
this is important, but there are some complications. If you consider a regular wall which
has window openings and door openings and ventilator openings, you have openings of
549
different sizes in the first place, you have openings which are aligned at different heights
along the height of the wall and hence how do you account for these different sizes of
openings at different locations in a wall is a rather involved set of calculations.
So, this is what we are going to be examining; however, there are simple analytical
methods that are prescribed based on simple statics that you could use and we will
examine three of them and you could use; you could use any of them; however, some of
them have a level of conservatism which is probably not acceptable; if you are doing a
rigorous analysis.
So, the first method is the simplest method, but you are bound to get percentage error in
comparison to a more rigorous calculation which is not insignificant. I would say 5 to 10
or more percent with respect to what would be a more rigorous calculation is to be
expected in the first method; however, this method is also acceptable from an
engineering standpoint and for a quick estimate this is accepted.
Now, what this method does is; you assume you have a wall with openings, that the
stiffness of the wall is estimated merely from the stiffness’s of the piers; by just simply
adding up the stiffness’s of the piers. You are not considering the effect of the spandrel
that is typically present above the openings in the case of a window and below the
openings; again in the case of a window. In the case of a door you have the spandrel
above as well.
550
So, this sort of a calculation really does not give due consideration to these spaces. What
we are talking of; if you take this particular wall that you are seeing in the slide I have
two window openings, they are of different sizes, they are all aligned at the same height
in the wall; you could have a further complication that these are not equally aligned. One
of the smaller window, the other is a bigger window or one is a door.
So, we have three piers between openings; pier 1, pier 2 and pier 3 within that panel zone
the panel which is defined by A, B, C and D. You have the total wall and this panel
within which the windows in the piers are. So, now once the windows are considered,
then you actually have only 3 vertical lateral load resisting elements, vertically aligned
lateral load resisting elements are only piers 1, 2 and 3.
What is prescribed in this sort of an approach is, you simply look at pier 1, pier 2 and
pier 3. Since they are sitting between openings, the boundary conditions are such that
rotations at the top are prevented. And, therefore, considered a fixed-fixed boundary
condition, estimate the deflections of pier 1, pier 2 and pier 3 and sum them up to get the
total stiffness of the wall itself.
So, the total stiffness of the wall is merely sum of stiffnesses of K 1 of pier 1, pier 2 and
pier 3. Now you will definitely agree that we are completely neglecting the role played
by the portion of the wall the panel that you see above and the portion of the wall that
you see below ok.
Student: This one is considered as a solid 1, 2 and 3 portion.
1, 2 and 3 yes.
Student: Similarly, what we did the (Refer Time: 20:39).
Exactly; 1, 2 and 3 we have come down to the basic unit now. We have got a pier we
have two options there. Either cantilevered pier or fixed fixed pier in this case since it is
sitting between openings we choose the boundary condition as fixed fixed and that is a
solid panel with the boundary condition and we have already established what the
stiffness itself is. And you are summing up the 3 stiffness’s and this is simply springs in
parallel. 3 springs in parallel is the total stiffness of the system itself.
551
So, we then go to method 2, which starts accounting for the effect of the large panel that
we had above and below the openings.
So, what we are actually going to be doing in this second approach is examine the wall
as a whole; but the wall is a whole is; if you look at the boundary condition, if the wall as
a whole is not sitting between openings, it is not restrained at the top. So, the wall as a
whole can actually be considered as a cantilever, to have a cantilever deformation
profile.
So, we could estimate the lateral deflections of the wall assuming it to be solid
cantilevered deformation profile, then consider the strip within which the windows are
sitting. So, you see in the second, in the third picture you have the basic configuration of
the top the solid wall neglecting the presence of the windows below that is the solid strip.
And then we take one small strip within which the windows are sitting that is the third
one A, B, C, D. Now, that has window openings and so that is going to be restrained
compared to the overall wall without any window openings. So, this is considered to be a
fixed-fixed pier and then we can go and estimate for the original piers that have
identified, even in the last a method pier 1, pier 2 and pier 3 and calculate the deflections
for that pier considering again fixed fixed boundary condition for the last case.
552
So, here in method 2, what we are doing is first calculate the deflection of the solid wall,
but treated as a cantilever; second step take that solid strip within which the openings are
sitting and calculate the deflection of the solid strip, assuming that it is fixed fixed now.
Because it really has these panels sitting on top and below that would prevent the
rotation of the top and the bottom.
So, it is correct to assume that is fixed ended. Then you calculate the deflections of each
pier individually; you have pier 1, pier 2, and pier 3 here again we have fixed ended and
you can calculate the deflections Δ 1, Δ 2 and Δ 3. So, I have the solid wall, I have the
solid strip and then I have Δ 1, Δ 2 and Δ 3 estimated.
Now, to be able to estimate what is the actual deflection of the wall, you are basically
going to correct the deflections of the central portion with the deflections that we know
at the top and the bottom. So, basically again this is an analytical approach. We are
correcting what we did in the previous method itself. So, what we are saying is the
stiffness of the three panels, stiffness together the let us call it the pier group, the
stiffness of the pier group K = K 1 + K 2 + K 3
Now, to arrive at this stiffness of K 1, K 2 and K 3 independently individually we are

going to introduce some corrections. Now, we take the inverse of the stiffness and that
553
1 1 1
gives us the deflections. So, + + ; K 1 and K 2 and K 3 are then represented as
K1 K2 K3
the inverse, inverses of the stiffness’s.
1
So, we write it down in terms of this value is equal to , but we also know
1 1 1
+ +
1 2 3
that because of this because of the fact that the reciprocal of the stiffness is going to give
1 1 1
you the deflection; + + , the total stiffness of the pier group is going to be the
K1 K2 K3
summation of the corrected deflections Δ 1 + Δ 2 + Δ 3.
So, each of those therefore, the deflection of the pier group is, if you use this which is
nothing, but because deflections and the stiffness’s are reciprocals and the first
expression; we can then arrive at the total deflection, this is of the pier group, this is of
the individual piers. So, deflection total deflection of the pier group which is the
correction that we are doing as the right hand side with the individual deflections,
reciprocals of the individual deflections on the denominator.
So, what we are finally going to be doing is, the actual deflection is the gross deflection
which is coming from the deflection of the overall wall considered as a cantilever
without any openings, minus the deflection of the strip which is this plus the 3
deflections of the piers. So, still an approximate method, but it is something that
considers the important role played by the spandrel at the top and the spandrel at the
bottom.
So, this is finally, what you should be keeping in mind that we are looking at the net the
corrected deflection as being gross deflection minus the strip deflection plus the 3
individual deflections of the small piers 1, 2 and 3.
554
So, this is the second method the third method, is a little more systematic in terms of the
considerations of actually how these stiffness’s are lining up. If you remember when I
talked about method 1, I talked about method 1 being 3 springs in parallel right. When
we came to method 2 that gets a little cloudy; we do not define it very clearly. We are
looking at a total and the negatives and then working on subtracting smaller stiffness’s
from the overall stiffness.
In the third method; the third method is probably the best method which requires a little
more rigorous calculation, but really considers the whole process of distribution of forces
by considering them as springs in parallel or springs in series. So, if you look at the
whole wall in this whole wall, the 3 piers pier 1, pier 1 and pier 3 can be considered as 3
spring 3 springs in parallel. Now, if you were to consider the 3 springs in parallel with
the beam or this slab or the panel that is above right; that is 3 springs in parallel with a
panel in series now yes.
So, the panel above with the 3 springs in parallel is a system which is in series. Similarly,
if I consider the 3 piers and the panel below, that is a system which is in series. So, once
I have established stiffness of springs in parallel and then stiffness of spring in series, the
one above and then the one below. I then can look at the total stiffness of the wall as
springs in series.
555
So, that is the approach; this approach is probably the most convenient. Because the
moment you have a windows and doors openings which sort of different sizes this starts
giving you a better hold on how the stiffnesses contribute, individual stiffnesses
contribute to the overall stiffness.
So, in a simplistic manner looking at if you have springs in versus springs in series,
because in the whole wall it has a system of springs in parallel and series. So, if you were
looking at a set of springs, which are in parallel; so if you look at idealize your masonry
system as just having 3 piers. Each of stiffness K 1, K 2 and K 3, then the total force that
the wall is being subjected to is shared based on the just based on the stiffness’s.
And, you get the proportions H 1, H 2 and H 3 which will then add up to give you H.
Again, fundamental assumption here is you are talking about a rigid translation of the
diaphragm; this cannot be considered if you do not have a rigid diaphragm in the system.
This distribution is no longer valid. And, therefore, the total force H by equilibrium
would be stiffness K1Δ; Δ remains the same for the entire system K2Δ plus K3Δ and
therefore, H by Δ will give you the sum of these stiffnessess K 1, K 2 and K 3 what we
did in method 1 was only this, what we did in method 1 was only this.
Now, if you were to consider the and therefore, depending on how many have a system
how many of parallel walls you have, you can make a summation and get the total
stiffness.
556
If you were to look at a system in series and that comes into picture when you have a
spandrel and opening and a spandrel a set of piers and a spandrel you need to examine it
in terms of system in series. And, so now the important difference is each spring will
have it is own deflection. Three deflections would then add up in this case with 3 springs
as the total deflection Δ; Δ 1 + Δ 2 + Δ 3. to the lateral force H acting on the system.
So, here if you were to write down what actually happens is you take a summation of the
displacements Δ being equal to Δ 1 + Δ 2 + Δ 3.. Each of the deltas depends on the spring
stiffness H remains the same here, overall H is the same and therefore, and we can write
1
down the stiffness of this sort of a system in terms of , over all the springs in the
 Ki
system.
So, this third method involves dividing the wall into the respective springs in parallel and
springs in series, establishing these stiffness’s of the respective systems. And, then
putting it together in terms of the entire wall as a set of springs in series. So, I get your
question. So, just to paraphrase what you asked me; as far as the first set of the first
figure that you have seen we are looking at springs in parallel and this is exactly what we
did in method 1; which means, those three piers which were running in parallel were
considered as piers with fixed fixed boundary conditions right.
557
So, this is piers with openings in between. So, that is fine. The moment we go to the
other one we are talking of three sets of springs which are in series now. And, your
question was when you are looking at the original wall that we were studying, it had in
the central panel, it had a clearly the effect of the top and bottom panels and therefore,
considering that as fixed fixed is meaningful what happens to the two strips at the top
and the bottom?
Strictly speaking, they are not in isolation, they are all part of the same system and
therefore, the fact that the top panel then has a continuation in terms of what we have
considered as the central strip the boundary conditions need to be considered
consistently. So, we would still continue considering the top strip and the bottom strip
not to be cantilevered, but to have a fixed fixed boundary condition. And, if you
remember in method 2 we looked at the whole panel with no openings, there we went in
for a complete cantilevered profile.
No; Again I think this is something that mentioned I had mentioned earlier in class. That
we are not talking of the slab providing a rotational restraint, we are not talking of the
slab providing rotational restraint. It is the presence of extensions of the masonry on
either side of the top or the bottom that is providing rotational restraint.
So, if you look at a pier between openings, you have the spandrel zone at the top and the
bottom on either sides of the pier. That is what is blocking rotations. So, that is the
reason why when we took the whole wall the whole wall really has no restraint; it is free
to rotate. The slab might offer a certain partial rotational restraint, but it is not as
significant as what a panel sitting beside and preventing rotations would do. Therefore,
considering all the 3 to be having fixed fixed boundary conditions is the more
appropriate decision that you would take ok. So, you could then sum up the reciprocal of
the stiffness’s in this case.
558
So, if you were to look at another example such as this one; a wall panel with a door
opening- a wall with a door opening you have 2 piers, 2 and 3 and you have the panel at
the top comprising of the spandrel and the extensions on the two sides. So, in this
particular case we really going to be first looking at the system of springs in parallel;
which is 2 and 3 and then the system of springs in parallel become a system in series
1
with the panel 1. And, therefore, the total stiffness of the group is written as
K 1+ 2 + 3
1 1
So, + and I have already done the springs in parallel here adding these
K 1 K 2+3
stiffness’s. So, this is; so this is an approach that is consistent with the actual boundary
conditions and it is more meaningful to go with the sort of a calculation. So, once you
make these calculations, you are then able to arrive at what is the total stiffness of the
wall, the ratio of individual stiffnesses to the total stiffness gives you the distribution
factor so, the wall shear or the floor shear is then multiplied with that to establish what is
the shear demand on a the pier that you are working on.
(Refer Slide Time: 37:21).
559
So, this set of discussions that we have had so far were with respect to a wall with
perforations; now the moment I take one step backwards and say I have a set of walls
and now how do I distribute the floor shear to those walls, what considerations should
one make? So, the moment you want to look at floor plan configuration and the
disposition of the walls within the floor plan, there are 2 things that need to be looked at.
One is when you have a floor subjected to a shear force; if the floor were to translate
with no rotations then you distribute the total floor shear to the individual walls. So,
assume the building that you are looking at is made up of 3 walls and these 3 walls are
now a system in parallel and you can estimate stiffness of wall 1, 2 and 3 relative to the
total stiffness of the floor. This floor is now subjected to earthquake forces from base
shear, I have arrived at Qi which is the floor shear and now need to distribute the floor
shear to the three walls.
The displacement of this floor given the symmetry of the floor that I am looking at in the
direction that is being considered. If I were to look at, you need to look at the symmetry
with respect to the direction in which the earthquake action is. So, if the earthquake
action is parallel to the 3 walls you now, because of the consideration of the rigid
diaphragm effect and the symmetry, would have a uniform displacement of the structure,
of the slab, of the diaphragm itself and therefore, Δ will be the same for all the 3 of them
and therefore, distribution by stiffness’s is easy.
560
This is a case where you have translation of the system with no rotation right; which
means, the total shear force coming to the floor has only a direct component or direct
shear component which is distribution factor into the floor shear, distribution factor into
the floor shear for the second wall and distribution factor into the floor shear for the third
wall. Only translational components of shear coming into the picture.
However, if and this is basically because, as far as this floor is concerned, the center of
gravity of this floor, the center of mass of this floor and the centre of stiffness of this
floor coincide. Since the centre of mass in the centre of stiffness coincide, I do not have
any rotation expected in the floor and you have only a direct shear component.
But, the moment you are going to look at more complex configurations you are going to
have a second component which is a torsional shear component, that comes because of
the eccentricity between the center of mass and center of stiffness and that needs to be
established.
So, when you have an unsymmetric configuration, unsymmetric with respect to the
direction of action of the earthquake force, you should be able to in addition to the direct
shear component estimate what is the torsional shear component and add that in the
demand coming onto the wall itself; the separate walls. So, in the previous cases owing
to the symmetry you really need not estimate what the center of mass and center of
stiffness is.
561
But, in this case you need to estimate the center of mass and center of stiffness. And,
then be able to establish what is the eccentricity in the x and the y, between the center of
mass and central of stiffness, because that will determine what is the additional bending
moment, what is the additional shear force because of the twisting of the floor right; so
what we will do in the rest of this lecture is to be able to establish a framework for
estimating the torsional shear in addition to the direct shear component.
So, if you look at a configuration which actually does not have the symmetry that we had
in the previous case with respect to the direction of action, you will have to establish,
what is this eccentricity between the center of mass and center of stiffness in the two
directions. And, then establish what each of the walls will get in addition to the direct
shear component. If the earthquake were to happen in the y direction you will have an
additional torsional shear component in all the walls and similarly, in the x direction.
So, we will continue with creating the framework for this in the next class. And with that
you actually have the entire set of analytical basis required for arriving at the component
shear demand and axial force demand, which then closes the loop in terms of system
design to component design ok. I will stop here.
Thank you.
562
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 04
Lecture – 32
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Part- XI
Good morning, we continue with the Design Requirements, we were looking at, how
from the system level we were going to be arriving at the distribution of shear forces in a
floor and then to the wall and then in the walls distributed to the different piers. So, in
continuation with what we were looking at in the last class, I introduced this problem of
whether the floor or the structure is expected to have rotations along with translations or
not which is actually going to depend on whether or not you have eccentricity between
the center of mass and center of stiffness.
And therefore, if you have a plan which has an eccentric configuration and layout of
walls which causes an eccentricity between the center of mass and center of stiffness;
then you will have to worry about the rotation of the plan in addition to the translation
when lateral forces are acting on it; which would mean that you will have to estimate
what is the torsional shear component in addition to the direct shear component.
563
And as I said, today we will look at a framework for making those calculations; then for
any plan configuration whether you have translation without rotation or translation with
rotation you have the framework to distribute the shear forces to the individual walls.
And in this particular context, we are looking at floors or roof slabs which have rigid
diaphragm action. So, with this is within the context; valid as long as the rigid diaphragm
action is being considered.
So, in the last lecture we were looking at the situation of translation without rotation and
given the rigid diaphragm translation all walls were subjected to equal displacement;
therefore, we were able to distribute the shear forces to the walls based only on the
relative stiffness’s of each wall. However, when you have a configuration which has
eccentricity between the center of mass and central stiffness, this has to be carefully
considered, because in a given direction, if you were to consider x direction seismic
action or y direction seismic action, the seismic force is going to be acting at the center
of mass. Therefore, if there is an eccentricity between the center of mass and the center
of stiffness or the center of rigidity of a system, you will have additional rotation of the
floor plan, which will cause additional forces, additional shear forces acting on the
resisting elements. So, let us examine for a moment, the plan configuration that you have
on the slide.
The grey rectangle is the overall plan dimension, overall rectangular plan layout; it has
two resisting walls, wall 1 and wall 2. The lateral forces, if I were to consider earthquake
force acting in the x direction or earthquake force acting in the y direction, the green
arrows represent the force considered in the two directions separately; then they would
be acting along the lines defined by the center of mass or the stiffness.
So, given a plan configuration you will be able to estimate the center of gravity based on
the masses; but then you should be able to estimate what the center of stiffness is, the red
mark that you see there is the center of stiffness of the configuration here. We have two
walls which are representing the resisting, lateral resisting, vertical load carrying
elements, wall 1 and wall 2.
Now, the eccentricity that we are talking about is, if you consider earthquake action in
the x direction and the component of the earthquake force Hx acts along the center of
mass and what we are concerned about is the eccentricity ey between the center of
564
stiffness, the line defining the stiffness in that direction e y. And similarly an earthquake
force were to be considered in the y direction, Hy; then the eccentricity ex between the
line defining the center of stiffness in that direction (in the y direction) and the center of
mass, so eccentricity ex.
So, our aim is to be able to first define what CS is with respect to, centre of stiffness is
with respect to a plan configuration. And once that is defined, then we will be able to
distribute the forces acting in the x and the y directions by calculating the additional
torsional shear component. So, in this plan configuration, the geometry has to be laid out
carefully, you fix the axis and that is up to you. In this particular case you see that, the
left corner is taken as the origin of the axis; x and y is established. And then you have the
geometry of the rest of the resisting elements, you need the center of gravity of each of
the walls individually and the center of gravity of the overall system.
So, with respect to this what we are going to first look at is, how to estimate the center of
stiffness itself. So, in the drawing again the center of stiffness when established, we are
interested in looking at the dimensions, the distances of the centroid of each of the
resisting elements with respect to the line defining, the lines defining the center of
stiffness. So, if you look at x r and y r , that is these two, with respect to the axis defined,
give you the center of stiffness of the plan configuration.
Then with respect to x r and y r , we are defining for each of the resisting elements wall 1
and wall 2, the x and the y dimensions with respect to the centroid of those resisting
elements. So, if you take wall one; if that intersection there is the centroid of a wall 1,
then we need to define x r 1 and y r 1 these two dimensions here which define the
eccentricity with respect to that particular resisting element of wall 1; x r 1 and y r 1 .
Similarly for wall 2, we define x r 2 and y r 2 with respect to the center of stiffness, the
lines projected from the center of stiffness.
So, that is the overall geometry with this way we are working, we should then be able to
estimate the stiffnesses of wall 1 and wall 2 in the respective directions. In this case if the
earthquake force is acting in the x direction, my consideration is that wall 1 is the only
resisting element. I am really not going to be considering the resistance offered by wall 2
in the out of plane direction right. I assume that the resisting element is wall 1, which is
565
subjected to in-plane forces. Similarly, when we are considering earthquake force acting
in the y direction, I am not going to be considering the resistance coming from wall 2 in
the out of plane direction, but I will be considering only the resistance in-plane of wall 2.
So, that is one little assumption that we make on the conservative side for most plan
configurations, we will stick to that assumption here. So, given the configuration and
given the estimate of the in-plane stiffness of wall 1 and wall 2 that we can make, based
on all our discussions earlier; considering what boundary condition wall 1 and wall 2
would have from the geometry and the material properties, we will be able to establish
what k x1 and k y1 are going to be k x2 and k y2 are going to be.
So, I take wall 1 and estimate the stiffness of wall 1 in the x direction, I will estimate
stiffness of wall 2 in the y direction. And I have the in-plane stiffnesses is to work with,
you can also estimate the out of plane stiffnesses if you want to do a more rigorous
calculation.
So, the first step is estimating the centers, the center of stiffness defined here by x , y
with respect to the origin that you have established. So, this is depending on how
complex your wall configuration in the plan can be, becomes involved; but as you can
see, it is straightforward geometry-based estimation that you are doing here.
566
Once that is done, we then start looking at what would actually happen to the system
when there is a force acting in the x direction or the y direction. When the force is acting
in the x direction or the y direction; because of the eccentricity between the center of
mass and the center of stiffness, you do not have translation alone, you are going to have
a rotation. But this rotation is going to be centered at the center of stiffness. The force is
acting along the center of mass, the rotation is centered at the center of stiffness and
therefore, you should expect.
Because of the lever arm that is now created, you should expect additional forces which
are torsional shear forces acting on wall 1 and wall 2 depending on the direction of force
that we are looking at. So, geometrically, if you are looking at θ being the rotation at the
center of stiffness due to the lateral force acting on the wall configuration; then you can
define that the component of shear force acting on wall 1 with respect to the centroid of
wall 1, can be geometrically defined. Consider wall 1; knowing the rotation θ, then this
distance is going to be y r 1 and similarly for wall 2; because of the rotation, the distance
between where the shear force is acting in the wall at the centroid of that resisting
element versus the direction of the shear force you would have the lever arm defined
here in terms of x r 2  for wall 2. So, this is again established from geometry and
therefore the component of shear force that wall 1 is going to get is Fx 1 = k x 1 yr 1
Similarly in wall 2, you would have stiffness of the wall in the in plane direction, you are
taking the stiffness of the wall in the in plane direction and the component of force.
Fy 2 = k y 2 x r 2 
So, in this case to estimate the torsional shear component, we take the sum of the
moments, the exterior moment externally applied force creates a moment and that is the
total moment is Hy into the eccentricity ex and Hx into the eccentricity ey which is going
to be resisted by the internal restoring moment. And here as I said, we will neglect the
component coming in the out of plane direction which is one small; and therefore,
considering the wall dimensions, length of the wall versus the thickness of the wall it is
to neglect the out of plane components and take into account only the in-plane
components.
567
So, the internal resisting force, internal resisting moments that are defined with respect to
the force component, Fx1yr1 bar that we looked at here plus Fy2xr2 when you consider
earthquake force in one direction. So, again Fx1 and Fy2 can be written as defined earlier.
Here if you rewrite this expression, this expression actually has the polar moment of
inertia of the configuration and that is what is pulled out here:
J r = k x 1 yr21 + k y 2 x r22
So, basically this is the polar moment of inertia that is being defined for the plan
configuration. So, we are able to rewrite the expression in terms of the stiffnesses, these
eccentricities for each of the walls wall 1 and wall 2 in a direction and establish what is
the torsional shear component that is acting on the wall.
So, the torsional shear component itself Fx 1 = k x 1 yr 1 ; that is the that gives us the
direction in which the force will act. And therefore, the estimate of Fx1 can be made in
k x 1 yr 1
terms of M ext . And similarly, Fy2 can be established; and therefore, you have the
Jr
estimate of the torsional shears Fx1 and Fy2 that is possible from the geometry and the
total shear force acting in the system itself.
Where M external was defined earlier as Hxey + Hyex, so the torsional shear components
are established. Now, that is not all what is acting on the wall, you have the direct shear
568
component. So, it is translation with rotation. So, the translation gives you the direct
shear component and the rotation gives you the torsional shear component and the
torsional shear component is what was established here.
Therefore the total shear that the wall will experience is going to be. So, the shear force
Fxi in wall 1 or wall 2 would actually be the translational component which comes
merely by multiplying the shear force in that direction, in the direction that you are
considering multiplied by the distribution factor that we saw earlier.
k xi
In the last class we looked at the distribution factor is the distribution factor in the
 k xi
x direction, stiffness considered in-plane multiplied by the shear force in the x direction
gives you the direct shear component plus the torsional shear component that we just saw
in the last slide. Similarly, Fy1 is established with respect to Hy, the shear force in the y
direction and the distribution factor in the y direction and the torsional shear component.
So, this basically gives you the total shear that wall 1 and wall 2 will experience, if there
is earthquake shaking; which is giving you two components H x and H y in the due to the
eccentricity between the center of mass and center of stiffness. So, this helps you to
establish what is the total shear force expected in wall 1 and wall 2. Once that is clear,
then wall 1, if it is a wall with perforations, then you go back to look at how the shear
force is going to be distributed between the piers within the wall itself.
569
And for that we looked at different methods that can give you an estimate of the
distribution that should be done. And instead if it is a solid wall, then you will choose an
appropriate boundary condition; cantilever typically if it is a solid wall, and the total wall
is going to be resisting the shear force in that direction.
So, this is under the consideration that you have rigid diaphragm action. And if your plan
configuration does not have eccentricities, it is going to be only translations considering
x direction and y direction independently, and you will be able to estimate what are the
wall shears and then estimate what are the pier shears. However, if you have rotations,
then you need to estimate the torsional shears and add the torsional shears before you go
and distribute it among the piers in a given wall. So, this is the, these are the steps that
you would actually have to go through to establish the actual shear force acting on the
wall and the resisting piers themselves.
Having said that, I think it is important to examine for a moment, the role of diaphragm
flexibility. Now, all this while we have been talking about a rigid diaphragm
consideration. So, if you have a masonry structure, which has a reinforced concrete floor
slab and roof slab; we are talking of a system that can offer adequate in-plane stiffness of
the diaphragm. Mind you it is in-plane stiffness, it is not the out of plane stiffness which
is the bending stiffness of the slab.
570
We are talking of the in-plane deformability and in-plane stiffness of the slab. So, if you
take a structure I mean, if you take a system such as a reinforced concrete slab; relatively
speaking you are looking at a rigid diaphragm. So, a rigid diaphragm assumption for a
reinforced concrete system is acceptable; however, if you look at other types of floor
systems, if you have a timber floor.
If you have a timber plus masonry floor, you cannot guarantee rigid diaphragm action in
such systems. And therefore, we need to check whether we are falling into the category
of definitions of a flexible diaphragm or a rigid diaphragm. So, we need some guidelines
on that and it is useful to go back to IS 1893 which defines what is a flexible diaphragm
and what is a rigid diaphragm, because you need to quantitatively define that. And be
able to say that look I am working with a rigid diaphragm, I can continue the calculations
that I have been doing in the previous slides or no it is not a rigid diaphragm we have to
be careful, we cannot distribute the forces based on relative stiffnesses anymore.
So, the definition of a floor diaphragm; a flow diaphragm is considered to be flexible; if

it deforms such that the maximum lateral displacement, you take anywhere measured
from the chord of the deformed shape anywhere, is more than 1.2 times the average
displacement of the entire diaphragm. So, you estimate the average displacement,
assuming it is going to deform in-plane; that average displacement multiplied by 1.2, if
displacement at any point on the diaphragm is more than this value, then you have you
do not have rigid diaphragm action ok.
Now, this definition, different codes give more or less similar approaches to estimate
whether the diaphragm is stiff or not; this is what is adopted in the IS code. So, if you
look at the grey box with the dotted lines, that is the original configuration; but then
under the action of lateral forces, the diaphragm is deforming in-plane. With the
diaphragm deforming in plane the end displacements of the diaphragm are Δ1 and Δ2,
they are unequal values; but you get a significant, significantly different displacement
that mid span or at any other locations.
So, here particularly we have taken delta mid span and if you take delta average which is
1 + 2
nothing, but , then you make a check whether Δmidspan or any other point on the
2
571
chord is greater than 1.2 times the average displacement and the average displacement in
1 + 2
this case is .
2
So, this is the check that one would make, and typically when we are looking at
reinforced concrete slabs; it would satisfy the sort of a situation, but it also depends on
the stiffnesses of the walls. So, it is to be more rigorous, it is useful to make this check;
however, when you are dealing with, examples that we had seen in the beginning of this
lecture such as Madras terrace floor slabs or jack arch floor, slabs it may not respect the
requirement for a rigid diaphragm action.
So, if that is so, we cannot actually work with all that we have talked about, the center of
mass and center stiffness and the torsional shear; it starts becoming inappropriate as far
as flexible diaphragms are concerned. So, if you have a flexible diaphragm how do you
go about doing your calculations as far as seismic design is concerned. So, let us assume
you have a wall, I mean a floor configuration, a plan configuration where you have three
resist walls wall 1, wall 2 and wall 3; we are looking at earthquake action in one
direction.
So, H y there is distributed, uniformly distributed load which is basically the inertial mass
acting in the y direction. Now, this it has to be resisted by walls 1, 2 and 3 and therefore,
what would be F 1, F 2 and F 3 and how would F1, F2 and F3 be; how would you arrive at
572
F1, F2 and F3? Because since you do not have the rigid diaphragm action, you cannot use
the concept of relative stiffnesses, you cannot use the concept of distribution factors
coming from relative stiffnesses.
So, what typically happens in this case; and which is how load transfer happens, is if you
have fully flexible diaphragms walls attract lateral forces based on the tributary areas.
So, then I need to know, I have the distances between the walls is L 1 and L 2. So, the
total force coming on to wall 1 and wall 2 would be distributed based on half of L 1 to
wall 1, half of L 1 to wall 2, half of L 2 to wall 2 and half of L 2 to wall 3.
So, you basically have to go the tributary areas, and so you take the floors, look at the
total floor force coming there just identify the distribute three areas L 1/2 and L 2 / 2 and
then sum them such that equilibrium is established with respect to Hy. So, it is very
different if you consider the condition of rigid diaphragm and estimate the shear forces
coming on to the individual walls versus a situation of diaphragm flexibility.
So, of course, in modern constructions we are not often choosing to design with
diaphragm flexibility, we are typically going with reinforced concrete floors. And hence
this sort of a situation may not necessarily be encountered. So, with that we now have the
total framework to be able to from definition of the seismic input to arriving at what
should the wall be designed for, the pier be designed for in terms of a combination of
shear force, bending moment, and axial force and that is where we began our component
design.
We have those forces; we can do in-plane, the flexural wall design, out of plane flexural
wall design where we use P-M interaction diagrams, and the design for shear and design
for axial force. So, that closes the loop as far as the design from component level to
system level is concerned.
573
We have come back to the component level to conclude; I am actually going back to
where we started from, which is something that we have talked about, but not looked at
specific details. So, let us say you want to design a simple building, you want to design
and construct a simple building; you are not going to be adopting a rigorous design
approach as prescribed by 1905 and particularly the reinforced concrete, reinforced
masonry design requirements in NBC.
So, if the building is simple now; what is a simple building? A building is simple; it does
not have the vertical and horizontal plan irregularities, it is a small configuration and you
have a uniform distribution of shear walls in the x and the y direction. In such a situation,
if the configuration is simple, you can go by recommendations of IS 4326 and not have
to go through rigorous design calculations as prescribed by NBC or 1905.
So, if you remember the categories of buildings that we were talking about, defined by IS
4326, 2013 depending on the seismic zone 2, 3, 4 and 5 we were looking at importance
factors 1 and 1.5 and categorizing buildings as B, C, D and E. So, what IS 4326 then says
is ok, if you are designing these simple buildings in within category B, C, D or E; these
are the minimum requirements that you must ensure are constructed. So, that you have
desirable action, desirable seismic performance; but you are really not getting into
quantitatives to check what is the shear force demand on each wall, and whether the wall
is designed to take that shear force.
574
So, really it is prescriptive requirements as far as designing and detailing and
construction of simple masonry buildings are concerned, and there are several features
which IS 4326 recommends. I am going through the most key features here, which is
available to you in the NBC and in IS 4326 and it is essential to be familiar with what
these are; and if you are looking at simple buildings, have an idea of how these should be
incorporated in such structures.
So, one of the first requirements is on the mortar mix that can be used, such that the
whole concept of a simple building is, you are not going through rigorous structural
design calculations. And therefore, you must have a minimum set of construction
features in it, such that you expect desirable performance under an earthquake. If you
were to look at complex configurations, you cannot be sure that these requirements alone
will take care of desirable behavior and that is the reason why those structures have to be
designed.
So, to begin with, there are recommendations on the mortar mix and the crushing
strength of the unit. We have seen that the crushing strength of the unit cannot be less
than 7 Mega Pascals. So, IS 1905 starts from class 3.5 bricks, 3.5 MPa, 5 MPa and so on.
If you are designing respecting recommendations of IS 4326, you can use only class 7
bricks and a higher, the mortar mix is recommended are again.
So, all the recommendations in IS 4326 will be tied to the category of building, which
means the zone in which you are constructing them. So, I have reported here the table,
table 15 from the National Building Code, which has reference to what is prescribed in
IS 4326 as far as mortar mixes are concerned. So, you can see, if you are looking at
higher seismic zone, building categories E and D, you see that we are looking at H 1
mortar, M 1 mortar and up to M 2 mortar; you go down maximum to M 3 mortar, you
know that there are L 1 and L 2 mortars as well.
But we are not allowed to use them if you are going to be designing for minimum
earthquake resistance and the minimum compressive strength is also prescribed. So, it
begins from materials. So, what mortar mix can you use, and what crushing strength of
unit is permissible.
575
Then the building configuration has to be kept simple right. The moment you have
complex configurations, you can have undesirable behavior and that undesirable
behavior would require that the resisting elements are checked and designed to specific
demand coming on to it.
In order to ensure that that is not required, there are prescriptions on what should be the
sizes of openings and what is the allowed distribution of openings; particularly with
respect to where the openings should end with respect to the end of the wall. So, if you
do not have resisting elements close to the end of the wall, you are creating a
discontinuity and possibilities of torsion in the earthquake response. And also, what
should be the minimum distances between, what should be the minimum distances
between openings.
If you have very little resisting material between openings, it is going to actually work as
a larger opening and that is not desirable. So, minimum width between openings and
minimum width between the edge of the wall and the opening is prescribed. So, again if
you see, table 16 here is actually giving you specific requirements, again tied to the
category of building B, C, D and E on what these dimensions and some of these
dimensions should be or should not exceed. So, this is the other recommendation that is
that one has to adhere to, if it is a simple building with such, with earthquake resistance
built in.
576
So, the other important aspect is what strengthening interventions must be introduced,
right. So, we are talking of good material; if you have good material, there is good
performance expected due to the integrity of the material. The second aspect is overall
configuration; overall configuration and openings matter as far as overall configuration is
concerned there are limitations on it. So, material is taken care of, form is taken care of;
third set of recommendations are on seismic strengthening arrangements ok.
So, these are you have the configuration already, these are the things that you must
additionally put in place, which will ensure good behavior under the earthquake; which
is again prescribed depending on which category of building you are looking at. I have
reported here only the two types of buildings that are addressed; buildings with flat
reinforced concrete, flat floors, or flat roof slabs; not flat slab, but regular reinforced
concrete slabs or structures with lean to roofs or structures with sloped roofs with trusses
that are supporting them.
So, if you look at the figure on the left, the minimum requirements are in terms of
introducing bands, the seismic bands- reinforced concrete seismic bands. And as you can
see there are two bands that are shown in the figure here one is the lintel band, a
continuous lintel band and the second is a band that is running at the floor or the roof
level. A third band is typically prescribed which is going to be at the plinth level.
577
So, at any point which is a transition zone, an important transition zone foundation to the
resisting wall; at the plinth level, you will have the plinth band. As you go to the top of
the openings that is the transition zone, merely because area of cross section of the wall
is changing, you have an opening and then you have a continuous resisting element.
So, that is again a transition zone. So, you give the lintel band at the top of the openings,
you keep all the openings at the same level, such that the lintel band which is a
continuous reinforced concrete band is provided. And finally, where you have a
transition between the horizontal resisting element and the vertical resisting element, a
horizontal roof band or a floor band is provided. So, minimum three bands are required;
and you will be able to have desirable performance in keeping the masonry structure
together.
Of course, if you have multi storied structure; if you have two storied, three storied
structures; in addition to the lintel band, if possible you should provide the sill band. The
sill is this location of a window. Now, the difficulty of prescribing a sill band is that; if
you have a door opening, then you would not be able to provide a continuous sill band.
So, attempt to provide a sill band wherever it is feasible. So, the best situation would be
for able to provide these four bands, plinth band, sill ban, lintel band, and roof band or
floor band; if not at least the lintel band and the plinth band, roof band it is a choice very
often between providing a slab on beam or a slab without a beam.
So, the lintel band is indispensable, in even in the lowest category of buildings, category
B, the lintel band is a must. And it is a continuous lintel band; this should not be
confused with the lintel that we are talking of in terms of design. If you are talking of the
lintel design, where the opening comes, the reinforcements must take into account, the
load vertical load that is coming on to the lintel. So, lintel is designed there; however, it
has to be continuous with the band itself.
So, that is the set of strengthening arrangements as far as the horizontal bands are
concerned. The other arrangement are these vertical bars that you can see marked here,
these vertical bars are provided at the corners of all walls and provided at the ends of all
openings. So, these have to occur wherever there are wall corners or junctions of walls
when you have a T junction or a H junction or any junction between two load resisting,
vertical load resisting walls; these vertical bars are given, these vertical bars are taken
578
continuously from the plinth band connected to the lintel band to the roof band and
continues to the next storey, if it has to.
So, these are at the corners of walls, at the ends of opening, so where you have a door
opening at the ends this would again come, and wherever there are junctions in walls. If
you are now examining a building which has a sloped roof, it is required that where all
the other requirements in terms of the bands and the vertical steel if you are talking about
are essential.
When you come to the roof element, when you come to the structural system at the roof
level, you have a portion of masonry which is seated in this triangular area. Now, if that
would be at the crown, that would be the tallest masonry construction that you will get
and that is susceptible to out of plane failure. So, there is a requirement that you provide
a gable band that is called the gable; you provide a gable band and this gable band will
ensure that the triangular portion is not susceptible to out of plane failure.
So, in addition to the other lintel bands if you were talking about, the roof band must
ensure that it has a gable band and actually holds the gable from out of plane failure
itself. The other aspect that needs to be taken care of, is when you have these roof bands,
these roof bands are provided bracings as well, lateral bracings are provided in plan such
that the trusses do not move independent of each other. So, these requirements are
prescribed depending on the category of the building.
579
You have another requirement which is particularly in category E buildings, and in
category E buildings, category D and category E buildings; when you have openings, it
is prescribed that reinforcement is given around the openings.
Typically what happens is, when you have an opening in a masonry wall, the edges of
the openings become points of stress concentration, and points where shear cracks can
commence. And therefore, having a tensile resisting element running all around the
opening, allows for prevention of the crack propagation; and therefore, we are talking of
a reinforced concrete element that runs all around the opening. And as you can see, the
reinforced concrete element also needs to be keyed into the brick masonry.
So, and that is simple because anyway alternate courses will ensure that you have the
keying coming in, with that as one of the one side of the formwork and the other side you
create a form work you will get interlocking that will happen in the concrete that you are
pouring in. So, this is the other requirement which is strengthening of masonry around
openings, and typically adopted in higher seismic zones- category D and category E
buildings.
So, the code again then prescribes, as I said this these are all prescriptive, it does not
expect you to calculate how much of steel is required; the amount of steel required is
prescribed. So, depending on which category of building and looking at B, C, D or E,
here for the bands, the code prescribes how much of steel you should be putting in, and
580
these continuous bands you could choose a configuration that is width of the wall to
about 75 to 75 mm in height or width of the wall and 150 mm in height.
The two pictures that you see here a section a and section b are 75 and 150 mm; 75 mm
will have 2 bars, 150 mm will have 4 bars and the number of bars that are required in
each category, number of bars and the diameter of bars are prescribed in the table.
So, this is the arrangement of the reinforcement and the section details of the RC bands.
And this is valid for your plinth band, sill band, roof band, and lintel band and this is
meant to be a tie element; this not meant to be a flexure resisting system, it is not a
moment resisting system, but it is just a tension resisting element to ensure that the
masonry is held together under lateral action.
And finally, the vertical reinforcement; as far as a vertical reinforcement is concerned,

this particular code caters to any type of masonry construction that you are working with
solid units, hollow concrete blocks, the cement blocks, or even the hollow clay blocks.
So, depending on what type of masonry unit you are working with, you may or may not
have the provision for vertical steel. So, if it is solid blocks, you have to make voids that
run along the entire height, place the steel and grout. And that is what you see here; you
have one brick wall, a one and half brick wall, examples that are provided. You have the
581
vertical steel coming at the junction of walls or the wall corners. So, you look at a, b, c
and d, e and f, you can see the layout prescribed for alternate layers.
So, alternate courses must have vertical stagger and that is why course 1- 3- 5, course 2-
4-6 would have to have different configurations. And so, what you see for each example,
each case, is the odd course and the even course. So, you can see that, when you have a
one brick thick wall, the prescription of how you have to break the brick such that you
can create a cavity sufficient enough to place one vertical bar and grout the void is
shown here and then you have the alternate course.
So, odd course, even course for an L junction; odd course, even course for a T junction
for a one brick wall, and then for a one and a half brick wall and so on. So, you see that
depending on the building category B, C, D or E; the number of reinforcement, the size
of the reinforcement bar. The prescription as far as these vertical tie columns; again it is
not a reinforced concrete moment resisting column, it is a tie column; for these tie
columns prescription is one bar and you have to grout the void and you have the total the
vertical bars connected to the steel in the horizontal bands. And therefore, you have
continuity between all the steel reinforcement; these are really confining the masonry
structure.
So, with that I conclude the component that looked at design, including the seismic
design aspects; so we concluded by looking at the prescriptions, when you are not
actually doing structural design and that is in IS 4326. We will look at one and two
storey, one and multi storied building design in the coming lectures.
582
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 04
Lecture – 33
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Example - I
Good afternoon. So, this week we will look at four illustrated examples that deal with
Design of the Components; but we will examine how from the system level to the
component level, we will arrive at the design forces for different conditions, for a single
storied structure, for a multistoried structure. And when we deal with single storied
structures, I would like to look at both a condition where you have a flexible diaphragm
and a condition where you have a rigid diaphragm.
So, the first illustrative example deals with the Seismic analysis of a single storied
building and this building is provided with a flexible diaphragm. So, we are looking at a
structure probably with a timber diaphragm or a metal plus timber composite could also
be classified as a flexible diaphragm.
So, what are the aspects that we need to consider, primarily when we deal with flexible
diaphragm. A building with a flexible diaphragm is what we will be looking at in this
particular example; you will also arrive at the design forces that are required for the
583
masonry walls and then examine if the dimensions are adequate or do we need
reinforcement and so on, ok.
So, let us consider one storied reinforced, concrete masonry unit construction. So we are
looking at CMU construction, so that if there is reinforcement that is required, you can
provide the reinforcement within the pockets. This is a building with a flexible
diaphragm and we are looking at a structure that is an industrial facility.
So, it could be a warehouse as an industrial facility, it is located in seismic zone IV. And
we are going to be looking at in this particular example, seismic analysis that is
performed parallel to the shorter direction of the building that is considered. So, it is a
simple construction, it is rectangular in plan, 15 meters the longer dimension and 12
meters is the shorter dimension and earthquake analysis is now being performed,
considering earthquake action parallel to the shorter direction.
So, just to familiarize ourselves with this particular example, you see the north direction
marked along with the plan. And therefore, walls BC and AD are the northern and
southern walls and wall CD and wall AB are the eastern and western walls. We can have
another nomenclature for these walls, considering that the earthquake action is in the y
direction or parallel to the shorter direction; let us then look at wall A D and wall B C as
the out of plane walls and wall A B and wall C D as the in-plane walls.
So, we will be using this nomenclature, in-plane versus out of plane and the northern,
southern, eastern and western walls in our calculations. The total height of the structure
is 3 meters and it is provided with a flexible diaphragm ok. What are the aspects that we
need to estimate in the problem? What are the design forces for the diaphragm? So, the
way we have been examining the different components within the design of masonry
structures, we have been addressing primarily walls, flexure and shear behavior of walls.
Diaphragm is something that we have really not examined from the point of view of
design forces for a diaphragm.
So, this is right stage to examine, how do we estimate the design forces for a diaphragm;
a bond beam has to be provided, we are looking at seismic zone IV. And this is a
continuous beam that is provided at the level of the roof, between the roof and the walls,
which is actually an element that is collecting the forces and transmitting them to the
walls.
584
So, we need to look at what are the design forces for the bond beam and finally, let us
look at the shorter walls, the East and the West walls and what are the in-plane forces for
the shorter walls, for which the walls A B and C D would have to be designed as in-plane
shear walls. So, these are primarily the aspects that we are going to be considering. What
are the basic assumptions that we are making here?
For simplicity we disregard the openings in the walls, there may be door openings, there
may be some ventilators; but for simplicity I am going to be assuming that, we are
looking at a complete wall panel in A D, A B, B C and C D of the dimensions
prescribed. We are also assuming that the connections between the wall and the roof and
the wall and the foundation are pinned-pinned. So, this is additional information that you
have, at the interface between the wall and the foundation you could have the damp
proofing course.
So, assuming that boundary condition is pinned is an acceptable assumption; here in this
particular case we looking at a flexible diaphragm and therefore, the restraints offered by
the diaphragm to the wall are negligible and therefore, we can again assume that the wall
roof boundary condition at the top of the wall is pinned.
So, with these basic assumptions, let us proceed looking at the other quantitative
information that is available; the height of the wall is considered to be 3 meters, the
length of the building, the longer side is 15 meters, the shorter side width B is 12 meters.
585
And we are looking at; to begin with you need some dimensions on the table for your
calculations.
So, let us assume that the thickness of the wall is 200 mm hollow blocks, concrete
masonry units 0.2 meters in thickness. It is also given to you that the self weight of the
diaphragm and the superimposed load on the roof, so the dead plus the live load is equal
to 900 N/mm2.
For calculations we would require, for the self weight of the walls, we can assume that
the unit weight of the grouted concrete masonry units is going to be about 25 kN/m2, that
is what you would use for concrete. And so grouted hollow blocks, hollow concrete
blocks, it is good to assume a value close to concrete. The compressive strength of the
concrete masonry units is to be assumed as 10 MPa.
So, with these information and the assumptions that I talked of in the previous slide,
what do we do first? We are talking of a building sitting, an industrial building sitting in
seismic zone IV; so we are talking of being able to estimate the design base shear
coefficient first, we will do that for the design basis earthquake. As you know the code
prescribes the zone factors for the maximum considered earthquake, the MCE for the
design basis earthquake we take the zone factor and divide that by 2.
So, we are looking at the design basis earthquake of Z/2. So, the zone factor here, Z is
0.24 zone IV, an importance factor of 1; this is with reference to Table 8, IS 1893 part 1,
2016 we are looking at an industrial building importance factor, it is an ordinary building
and therefore importance factor is 1. Response reduction factor, I intend to reinforce this
construction, so let us provide the R factor that corresponds to reinforced masonry, so I
take a response reduction factor R of 3 and this is again with reference to Table 9 IS
1893 part 1, 2016, ok.
So, if we have to estimate the design base shear coefficient, we need an estimate of the
period of vibration of the structure. The period of vibration of the structure can be
estimated using simple code-based formulae here. If I were to use the fundamental
0.09h
vibration period is equal to ; d being the dimension of the structure in the direction
d
of the earthquake and h being the height of the structure. We can work out the
586
fundamental period of the structure as being 0.077 seconds; so you are looking at a short
period structure and we are really carrying out a simple analysis here.
So, it is really equivalent static method-based analysis and the code prescribes that for a
short period structure; if you are using equivalent static method, then do not look at the
increasing branch of the response spectrum, acceleration response spectrum; instead
assume that for the short period, these spectral acceleration is equal to the value at the
plateau and therefore, the spectral acceleration is considered to be 2.5 times g.
So, the base shear coefficient for the design basis earthquake is calculated Z/2 into 2.5
divided by the response reduction factor R by I, 3 divided by 1 and I get a base shear
coefficient equal to, base shear coefficient Ah is equal to 0.1 for this particular example.
I need to estimate the seismic weight to be able to calculate the base shear coefficient.
So, the second step is to estimate the seismic weight, we need an estimate of the inertial
mass in this particular case. So, what is the information that we already have on hand and
what further calculations can we make. We know that from the diaphragm we said that,
the self-weight of the diaphragm plus the superimposed loads is about 900 N/mm2.
The diaphragm itself is 15 meters x 12 meters; and therefore, the total weight of the
diaphragm is about 162 kN and that is what you see here. Now, this is a single storied
structure and the single storied structure is now being subjected to an earthquake. So,
587
what part of the total structure would you consider as being contributing to the inertial
mass? So, normally we look at one half of the height of the walls in calculating the
inertial force, particularly when we are looking at the ground storey.
The base of the ground storey structure is seated directly on the ground and we only take
the upper half of the structure in the calculation for the floor weight itself, so we take
0.5H in the calculation of the inertial force for this storey. Now, we have the walls in the
direction perpendicular to the seismic action, which are the out of plane walls and these
were the longer walls, the north wall and the south wall of the structure right.
So, to be able to calculate the total inertial mass, in a moment we will try and understand
what is the load path in the structure. So, what is the weight of the north wall and the
south wall, we take one half of the height of the walls, so 0.5 times H; 0.5 times H is 3
meters here. And there are two walls, we have taken the dead weight of the wall with
respect to the density of CMU as 25 kN/m3 and 0.2 is the thickness of the wall itself, 15
is the length of the wall.
So, the weight of half of the northern and southern walls is calculated here; we then have
the total weight, total inertial weight. Now we have calculated the weight of the
diaphragm and the superimposed weight coming onto the diaphragm and then one half of
the walls perpendicular to the direction of the earthquake force and that sums up to 387
kN.
Now, it is important why I have assumed only the weight corresponding to the
diaphragm and the walls perpendicular to the direction of the earthquake action in
calculating the seismic weight of the structure. Now, if you actually look at in the
earthquake the load path in the structure; then we have inertial forces generated, you
have walls parallel to the earthquake, you have walls perpendicular to the earthquake.
The inertial force generated by the walls parallel to the direction of the earthquake force,
these are the in-plane walls that we are talking about which were the east and the west
walls; this is directly transferred to the foundation. So, this the in-plane walls, ground
storey in-plane walls, this force is getting directly transferred to the foundation. So, I do
not use that in estimating what the inertial force is, which is going to come onto the
diaphragm.
588
So, that is the reason why the inertial force corresponding to the in-plane walls has not
been considered in the calculation above. What about the inertial force that is generated
by the out of plane wall? The out of plane wall also generates an inertial force; the
diaphragm is also a weight, it is also carrying some superimposed loads and so it
generates an inertial force. And so, the inertial force generated by the out of plane wall
and the inertial force generated by the diaphragm is then transmitted to the foundation
through the in-plane walls.
So, to be able to estimate the inertial force which the in-plane walls will actually have to
counteract, we estimate the inertial force from the out of plane wall and the diaphragm as
calculated in the in this slide, ok.
Now this is then transferred to the, this is the design force because the load path is going
to be the inertial force generated by the out of plane walls, is carried by the diaphragm
and then transfered to the in-plane walls. So, the diaphragm now has to be designed for
the sum of the inertial force generated by itself and the inertial force generated by the
two out of plane walls, the northern wall and the southern wall. So, that is the diaphragm
design force, that is then transmitted to the in-plane shear walls.
So, how do you estimate the diaphragm design force? Is it just enough if you estimate the
inertial force? No, there are recommendations, because now if you were to look at a
multistoried structure, how do you go about calculating what is the diaphragm design
589
force or if it is a single storied structure how does that work out. Our code currently does
not have any specification, any specific guidelines with respect to estimate of the
diaphragm design forces. So, I will make reference here to the ASCE 7-05, which is
ASCE 7 basically deals with minimum design loads for buildings and other structures,
ASCE is American Society of Civil Engineering.
So, what does the ASCE 7 prescribe? The diaphragm design, seismic force notation here
is Fpx shall be estimated, as this equation given here. So what you have in this
expression?
F i
Fpx = i =1
n
w px
w
i =1
i
However, it is prescribed that Fpx is within certain bounds, lower bound and an upper
bound and here the lower bound is prescribed by ASCE as 20 percent of the spectral
acceleration level corresponding to the short period structures into the importance factor
into w px, which is again the tributary weight at the level x of the diaphragm that you are
making calculations for. That is the lower bound and the upper bound is 40 percent of the
same estimate SDS Iw px. So, as I said S DS is the spectral acceleration corresponding to a
short period structure.
Now, S DS is with reference to the design basis earthquake and in the ASCE, the ASCE 7
the design basis earthquake is considered to be two thirds of the maximum considered
earthquake and this is a difference with respect to our code. In our code the design basis
earthquake and the maximum considered earthquake are related as, design basis
earthquake is one half of the maximum considered earthquake, so that difference exists.
So, you need to convert that to the corresponding estimate for the IS code; but again I
would like to point out here that the spectral design and the spectral acceleration
corresponding to a design basis earthquake and a maximum considered earthquake in the
ASCE 7 is coming from a probabilistic framework. Probabilistic consideration; whereas,
in the IS code 1893, it does not have a probabilistic basis, so a one to one correlation is
strictly speaking, not possible.
590
However, let us have an upper bound and lower bound with respect to the IS code as
well and the upper bound is considered to be 75 percent of Z into I importance factor into
w p x weight tributary to diaphragm at level x. And similarly F p x minimum is 35 percent.
So, with that we will be able to estimate what is Fpx,max and Fp x,min in our case and
compare it to the value F px, that is estimated based on the design shear force at a level
and the weight tributary to level i multiplied with the weight tributary to the diaphragm
at the level where the diaphragm forces are being calculated.
In this particular case, the diaphragm design seismic force F px works out to be 0.1 and
0.1 into the inertial force 387 would give us about 38.7 kN. This value you see is 0.1 and
it lies between the upper bound and lower bound 0.084wp and 0.18 wp and hence we can
take the value that we get directly from the expression.
Now, 38.7 kN is the diaphragm shear force, which then is going to be transferred to the
two shear walls, our in-plane walls which are of length 12 meters. And therefore, the
shear force per meter length, we have 2 walls is 38.7 kilo Newtons divided by 2 into 12
meters, which is the length and therefore, we are looking at a shear force per meter
length of about 1.16 kilo Newton meter ok.
So, that is the shear force. So, that was the first part of the problem that we had to
estimate, what is the shear force coming on to the, what is the shear force for which the
diaphragm has to be designed and what is the shear force that comes on to the in-plane
591
wall, because of the inertial forces generated by the diaphragm and the out of plane
walls.
Now, having estimated that, let us go on to the next stage which is basically, how is this
shear force generated by the diaphragm and the out of plane wall, collected and sent to
the in-plane walls. So, you have basically in between these two resisting; one that creates
the demand and the other which is going to be the resisting mechanism which is the in-
plane wall. You have to have a collector element which is our bond beam, also referred
to as the chord beam.
So, we need to design the collector element which is the chord beam here. So, the inertial
force is generated by the out of plane walls and the diaphragm is transferred to the in-
plane wall through the wall diaphragm connection. And the wall diaphragm connection
is now the chord beam. So, what are we talking about; we have the building, the
diaphragm, length L and width B and this is subjected to earthquake in the shorter
direction and the diaphragm is going to deform.
When the diaphragm deforms, now we are going to have the flexible diaphragm
deforming; which means the collector element; which is a bond beam that is going to be
running all along the peripheral walls is the chord beam, which depending on the
direction of the earthquake action in the out of plane wall will have these walls because
of the deformation. This chord beam will be subjected to tension; whereas, the chord
beam in the opposite direction will be subjected to compression.
So, you can look at the diaphragm as a deep beam as it deforms, you have in it is plane
and when it deforms it has tension on one edge and compression on the other. And we
can make some simplified assumptions to estimate what these tensile and compressive
forces are and then that is the design force for which the chord beam, which is sitting on
the northern and southern walls is going to be subjected to. So, this becomes the design
force which we will use for designing the chord beam in the out of plane bending
direction.
So, that is what we are doing, calculating the chord forces in the bond beam. And how is
that going to be done, as I said we take the shear force that the diaphragm is designed to
take; take the shear force at the diaphragm is designed to take and then calculate the
moment generated in the chord because of the deformation of the diaphragm itself. So,
592
the distributed shear force across the face of the diaphragm, we calculated the design
force of the diaphragm as 38.5 kN and the length of the diaphragm, perpendicular to the
direction of the earthquake action is L which is 15 meters.
So, the distributed shear force w s is nothing but 38.7 divided by 15, which is 2.58 kilo
Newton per meter. So, now, let us look at this diaphragm which is bending, a uniformly
distributed load is acting in-plane of the diaphragm and the diaphragm is bending. You
will have a bending moment for the diaphragm and you will have a shear force for the
diaphragm.
Now, we can estimate the bending moment and the shear force and that is what the chord
beam is going to be subjected to. So, uniformly distributed load, parabolic distribution,
w s L2
maximum moment at the center . Similarly, you will have the shear force acting on
8
wsL w L2
the chord beam, on the beam which is going to be . So, the moment s is
2 8
nothing but, the compression force and the tension force acting on the chord beams.
w s L2
And therefore, we can estimate the compression force or the tension force as ,
8B
which is what you get here. We estimate the compression force or the tension force to be
equal to 6.05 kN. And therefore, this chord beam has to be designed to be able to carry a
compression or a tension force of 6.05 kN. We are looking at providing HYSD bars and
therefore, the permissible tensile stress of the steel is 230 MPa; Fs is 230 MPa.
Therefore, the area of steel to counteract 6.05 kilo Newton of tension or compression in
the chord beam is calculated here. A s t works out to be about 26.3 mm2. We provide 2
bars, 2-10 mm bars and as you can see, we will have tension developing or compression
developing depending on the direction of the earthquake action. So, 2 bars are sufficient,
but you can have reversal and therefore, you are going to be giving 2 on each face of the
beam cross section itself. So, we will have 4 bars in the cross section of the chord beam.
593
So, that is as far as the chord beam design is concerned. Now we will have to look at the
maximum diaphragm shear. Again, we have basically treating the diaphragm as a simple
beam and this is the shear force which is transmitted to the top of the shear wall which is
nothing but the distributed force ws into the length 15 meters divided by 2 is the shear
force on the, shear force transmitted to the top of the shear walls.
Now, the maximum unit diaphragm shear, unit diaphragm shear v, is basically going to
be equal to the shear force divided by the depth, the shorter direction which is 12 meters
parallel to the diaphragm loading direction. So, w s into L divided by 2 into B is what the
unit diaphragm shear force that we are really looking at, coming on to the in-plane walls;
east and the west walls.
Now, we need to ensure that the connection between the diaphragm and the bond beam
is adequate for transferring this amount of shear capacity. It should be able to transfer the
diaphragm forces to the in-plane wall without having a failure; otherwise um, you will
not have transfer of the forces to the in-plane wall and then to the foundation. So, this is
a check that needs to be carried out.
594
So, the design shear force in the east west walls; the total design shear force in the east
west walls or a shorter walls, we need to estimate the total seismic weight. So, now, you
have the self-weight of the east west walls. So, part weight of the east west walls, again
we are taking one half of the height, half of 3 meters we have part weight of the north
south walls. The weight of the diaphragm and the superimposed loads which will totally
make the inertial force that the inertial force that is then coming on to the in-plane walls.
So, the total seismic weight in this case; east west wall plus the north south wall
component plus the diaphragm weight a total of 567 kN comes on to the in-plane walls.
The seismic force; here seismic weight is calculated as 567, seismic coefficient, design
seismic coefficient is 0.1 into 567 and 56.7 kN is the seismic force that is going on to the
in-plane walls. We need to design the in-plane walls for this level of shear force.
The shear stress level therefore is, the shear force that we have estimated in this manner
56.7 kN divided by 2 walls of 12 meters length and cross section 200 which we assumed
for the CMU blocks. And therefore, the shear stress that we have estimated here is an
average shear stress which is of the order of 0.012 MPa, which is really very low. So,
one thing that could be done is since we see that the shear stress is rather low, you could
go back and say I used a response reduction factor 3; assuming that I will be looking at a
reinforced masonry construction.
595
Now, if I were to design this as an unreinforced masonry construction; of course,
providing minimum steel prescribed by the NBC, then I cannot use a response reduction
factor of 3. I would have to change that, come back and look at what the shear stress is
and check if the shear stress is lesser than the permissible shear stress for the problem.
So, we need to check in the final step, the adequacy of the shear wall, the shorter walls.
So, the maximum shear stress; we calculated the average shear stress in the previous
slide. The maximum shear stress is about 1.5 times the average shear stress and
therefore, 0.018 MPa is the maximum shear stress expected.
Now, let us look at a situation where we are not providing any web shear reinforcement.
What the allowable shear stress would be; if you remember the prescriptions based on
the M /V d ratio, aspect ratio of the wall. We can estimate what the allowable shear stress
fv is; it is a function of the moment to shear ratio and the compressive strength of the
masonry. So, the allowable shear stress is estimated. We also have an estimate of the
maximum allowable shear stress in this case and for a squat wall which the wall is, it is 3
meters in height and one point and 15, 12 meters in length.
We calculate for the given M/Vd ratio, what the allowable shear stress is and the
allowable shear stress if you are reinforcing, assuming that minimum reinforcement will
be provided, web shear reinforcement is not going to be provided. We have, it is because
it is a squat wall; we have adequate allowable shear, shear stress in the wall; whereas, the
596
maximum shear stress is rather low. fmax is less than fv therefore, the section is safe in
shear.
So, the other thing that we need to also look at is, I said that the connections between the
bond beam and the wall are important in the in-plane walls; but also the connection
between the bond beam diaphragm, the bond beam and the out of plane walls is
important. And therefore, the anchorage of the structural masonry wall to the flexible
diaphragm should be checked for premature failure. If, that fails then the, you will get a
local mechanism which is what you want to avoid. You want to have a global
mechanism as intended by the design, because you are ultimately attributing the shear
stress from the entire structure to the in-plane walls.
So, this needs to be checked and you have to provide adequate anchorage size and
numbers to ensure premature failure does not occur. Therefore, the design force for each
individual anchor has to be arrived at and ensure that it is adequately designed and
detailed. So, that is the first illustrative example; we basically looked at, what is the
seismic force that the diaphragm will be attracting; how much and how is that transferred
on to the in-plane walls, that is where the collector beams, the collector or chord beams
come into picture.
We need to design them; such that they are they perform adequately under the expected
chord tension and chord compression. And finally, what is the total shear force that the
in-plane walls have to be designed for, and you must also go and check the connections
that you have adequate anchorage and those individual anchors which is the anchoring of
the diaphragm to the walls also have to be checdked.
597
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 04
Lecture – 34
Example - II
Let me move on to the second illustrative example, and the second illustrative example is
one that deals with a single storied building again, but with a rigid diaphragm. And in
this condition, I would like to arrive at the design forces for the different walls. So, this
week you are actually making calculations on the distribution of shear force to walls
when you have rigid diaphragm assumption. So, now, you will see an example which is
embedded within a design approach ok.
So, what are we looking at here, we are considering a one storied masonry construction
with a rigid diaphragm. And rigid diaphragm it could be a reinforced concrete, roof slab
for the single storied structure. And this should perform as a rigid diaphragm as long as
the aspect ratio is, aspect ratio of the plan is not greater than 3. When you have aspect
ratios where the length of the building is 3 times or more than the breadth of the
building, you could have conditions of a semi rigid diaphragm. And, that cannot be
598
treated in the way we have treated, we are treating this particular case over rigid
diaphragm action.
Seismic analysis is going to performed again parallel to the shorter direction and the
earthquake force in the y direction that we are considering here is 100 kN. The following
aspects are to be determined. So, that is the plan that we are looking at, I am looking at
centerline dimensions in this particular problem, we are working on already estimated
stiffnesses. So, it is convenient to work on centerline dimensions.
So, the plan shows you, how in the longer dimension the length of the building is 18
meters and in the shorter direction, breadth of the building B is 12 meters. And so, that is
the building you have four walls; you have two walls in the direction of the earthquake,
and two walls that are perpendicular to the direction of the earthquake. And you can see
that there is no symmetry in one direction; whereas, there is symmetry in the y direction.
So, this particular example, we will use these examples to estimate what the eccentricity
is, and then from the eccentricity arrive at what the design forces are going to be to the
walls in plane direction. In this particular case we are interested in looking at, wall A and
wall B and estimate the design forces in wall A and wall B.
So, the things to be calculated, the center of stiffness; we need to estimate then, what the
direct shear component is and the torsional shear component is. And since we are
looking at earthquake Y, I am interested in wall A and wall B. If you consider the
earthquake force in the x direction, then you can look at in addition the design force is
coming on to wall C and wall D.
We also need to account for accidental eccentricity. So, in the exercise that you have
been doing, you have not accounted for, we have neglected the effect of accidental
eccentricity; but within a design framework you cannot do that, and the code requires
that accidental eccentricity be considered. So, this is an example where we look at how
much the accidental eccentricity is and how do you, then use the accidental eccentricity
to look at the worst case situation for the shear force that you are interested in wall A or
wall B.
Assumptions, the center of mass is at the geometrical center. So, we are assuming that,
the center of mass is at the geometrical center of the plan 18 meters x 12 meters. And,
599
the wall stiffness is estimated for you, so you have already gone through the process of
calculating the stiffness of a single wall considering the boundary conditions; whether it
is fixed-fixed at the top and the bottom or it has pinned-pinned condition.
So, here in this particular case, we are we already have the estimates of the stiffnesses of
the walls; but they are given to us in relative terms. Here wall A has a stiffness of 6 units;
whereas wall B, C and D have a stiffness of 4 units. So, we have the stiffnesses given to
us in relative terms; in a real problem you would actually have to then also take into
account what the actual stiffness is for to arrive at the relative stiffnesses also. So, this is
what is given to us and these are the assumptions that we are making.
So, how do we go about examining this problem; the first step is the estimation of the
center of stiffness. In estimating the center of stiffness, we are interested in looking at the
center of stiffness coordinates x and y coordinates, xR and yR, given the symmetrical
layout of walls C and D; along the y direction there is a certain there is symmetry and
therefore, yR will coincide with the center of mass, that something of a simplification in
this particular case. But in the other direction, the center of stiffness and the center of
mass along the x axis are not coincident; and therefore, that eccentricity is what is going
to cause the torsion in the system when earthquake action in the y direction is
considered.
600
So, we need to estimate the center of stiffness, you can calculate that by summing the
moments of the wall stiffness; wall A and wall B parallel to the applied force about wall
A. And so, I am making this estimate of x R and y R, as
 RB   4 
xR =  L =   18 = 7.2 m
 A
R + R B   4 + 6 
 RC   4 
yR =  B =   12 = 6.0m
 RC + RD   4+4
So, the coordinates of the center of stiffness, estimated for this given plan configuration
(xR , yR) is (7.2 ,6); and x M, y M we originally talked about this, we consider that it is at
the geometrical center. So, 18 and 12, (9,6) is (xM, yM). You see that, along the y
direction you do not have eccentricity; the point is 6 and 6 there; and therefore, the
coordinates are 6 and 6 there. So, there is no eccentricity in that direction, but you have
eccentricity in the x direction.
So, ex = xM - xR and therefore, we estimate the eccentricity as 1.8 meter. So, that is the
eccentricity which is causing torsion, and that significant eccentricity, it is 10 percent of
the plan dimension perpendicular to the direction of the earthquake which is significant.
We typically use about 5 percent of the plan dimension as an estimate of accidental
torsion and we have here a case where it is double. So, it is significant eccentricity ok.
To be able to then estimate the shear forces, we need the polar moment of inertia, of the
shear walls about the center of stiffness designated as CS here. And therefore, the polar
moment of inertia is a summation of the stiffnesses of each wall into the square of the
distance, centroidal distance of the wall and that then translates as relative stiffness of
wall A.
J = R A (x R )2 + R B (L− x R )2 + R C (yR )2 + R D (B− yR )2
The polar moment of inertia in this case works out to about 1065.6 meter square.
601
So, step 2, we have estimated the polar moment of inertia and therefore, we are in the
right direction to be able to estimate the torsional moment. Now step 3, let us estimate
the direct shear in the two walls that we are interested in; and since it is a rigid
diaphragm problem with a rigid diaphragm, we are going to be looking at distribution of
the shear forces proportionate to the stiffnesses. And therefore, the direct shear forces
here designated as HD,A; direct shear force corresponding to wall A is nothing but the
 RA 
distribution factor; so, in this case   H Y which is the shear force that we are
 RA + RB 
 RA   6 
considering in the problem, which is 450 kN. So,   HY =   450 = 270kN
 RA + RB  6+4
in wall A. Similarly, the direct shear force corresponding to wall B, HD,B is estimated
 RB   4 
which is   HY =   450 = 180kN . So, that is the direct shear force
 RA + RB  6+4
distributed between the two walls.
Now, do we have eccentricity, yes, and significant, and there is going to be torsional
moments when the earthquake force is acting in the y direction; and therefore, the effect
of the torsional moment due to the eccentricity needs to be calculated. At this point, I
would like to remind you of what the code IS 1893 part 1 2016 talks off in terms of plan
irregularity coming from torsional irregularity.
602
So, plan irregularity can come from different sources like having a cutout in a plan,, in
the plan of the building, it can be due to the shape of the building and it can be because
of the torsional irregularity due to the irregular disposition of the resisting shear walls.
So, torsional irregularity, how does the IS code define; this is with reference to Table 5
of IS 1893 part 1; it requires us to estimate the maximum displacement in the plane, the
maximum drift of the wall divided by the minimum drift.
And if this exceeds, so if you look at a plan dimension and we are looking at the two
walls, wall A and wall B; if the drift of wall A due to the in plane shear force and the
drift of wall B due to the in plane shear force is calculated, you have one maximum value
and one minimum value. The ratio if it is greater than 1.5, then it is a torsionally irregular
building. So, this is the definition of torsional irregularity, we will make an estimate to
check if this building is torsionally irregular; but to be able to do that, to be able to
estimate what the drift is; we need an initial estimate of the shear force acting on wall A
and wall B.
So, we need to make an initial estimate of the torsional shear and then the total shear, due
to a combination of the direct shear and the torsional shear. So, before we do that we
need to understand depending on where the center of stiffness is located with respect to
the center of mass of a building, how is the torsional moment expected to act on the
building, because of which on different walls located around the center of mass and
center of stiffness; how is the effect of the torsional shear and the direct shear
considered.
603
So, for that let us look at what is happening in terms of the earthquake force acting in the
y direction, I will examine them separately as direct shear and torsional shear. So, we
have the plan configuration and the four walls, disposition of the four walls around it.
We have an eccentricity e x between the center of mass and the center of stiffness. Direct
shear force H y is acting at the center of mass and the resistance is coming from the
direct shear force which goes on to wall A and wall B, which is the value that we have
estimated already.
What about the torsional shear? You have an eccentricity and therefore, it is about the
center of stiffness that the plan will try to twist; and therefore, you have this additional
torsional moment which comes as a demand to the structure because of the eccentricity.
So, we need to estimate what is the torsional shear coming from this torsional moment
and what is the value that we need to attribute of the torsional shear to the different
walls; wall A, wall B, wall C and wall D.
The direct shear is counteracted by the two walls; and therefore, we estimated HD,A,
which is the direct shear force corresponding to wall A based on the distribution factor
coming from the stiffnesses. And H D,B is the shear force corresponding to wall B which
again is multiplied by the, is by multiplying Hy with the distribution factor, the stiffness
of the wall divided by the sum of the stiffnesses. So, we did that, we have the direct shear
force.
604
Now, this is added to what happens as far as the torsional moment and the shear coming
from the torsional moment. So, what happens here, the torsional moment is acting about
the center of stiffness. Since in this particular example, the center of stiffness is placed to
the left of the center of mass. And we are looking at a shear force acting at the center of
mass of Hy, the directions of the shear forces coming from the torsional moment is
critical.
It is important for us to look at the position of the center of stiffness with respect to the
center of mass, the direction of the earthquake at the center of mass, and then estimate
what the shear demand on these walls would be, the direction of the shear demand on
these walls. So, in this particular case, the torsional moment is acting about the center of
stiffness; the blue arrow marks that you see in the four walls correspond to the torsional
shear due to this effect.
So, the demand torsional shear on the four walls is in the anti-clockwise direction; and
this is because of the positioning of the center of stiffness with respect to the center of
mass. So, which means that, rigorous estimate of the center of stiffness is essential to be
able to check the directionality of the torsional shear as well. So, the four torsional shear
forces involve a Ht, A which is a torsional shear corresponding to wall A; H t,B, H t,C and
H t,D now need to be estimated.
Then you have the direct shear and the torsional shear working together. Now when you
look at these two figures at the bottom, you can see that on wall A the direct shear and
the torsional shear in this particular case are in opposing directions; and therefore, the
torsion will have a beneficial effect in this particular case, in reducing the total shear
force coming on to wall A. However, if you look at wall B, then you see that the direct
shear and the torsional shear are in the same direction. So, there is an augmentation of
the shear force, the total shear force is now a summation of H D,B and H t,B.
So, this is important. So, it is important for you to work this out; of course, with respect
to the axis that you are considering, you have to ensure that you are not making errors in
calculation. And this is the basis for us to understand, are you going to be adding the
direct shear and torsion shear or are you going to be subtracting the torsional shear from
the direct shear.
605
So, let us look at an initial estimate, we said we need an initial estimate; because with
this initial estimate we will check if you are looking at an irregular configuration. And
once we know that we are looking at an irregular configuration, we can then estimate the
accidental eccentricity and add the accidental eccentricity within a design framework.
So, this is initial estimate I have not made an estimate, there is no estimate of the
accidental eccentricity yet.
So, let us use a thumb rule to calculate the accidental eccentricity before we go to the
code estimate of the accidental eccentricity. So, in this particular case, since we are
making an initial estimate of the torsional shear; I am using the notation H’t,A, which is
the initial estimate of torsional shear in wall A, and initial estimate of torsional shear in
wall B. So, the estimate of the torsional shear is the shear force in the y direction H into
the eccentricity that we have estimated e x plus an accidental eccentricity.
We will assume as a thumb rule the accidental eccentricity is 5 percent of the side
dimension of the building, in the dimension of the building perpendicular to the direction
of the earthquake. So, eccentricity will be 5 percent of the 18 meters that we have as the
length of this building multiplied by x R and into R A which is the stiffness of wall A. x R
is the distance between the center of stiffness and the centroid of wall A itself it is
divided by the polar moment of inertia that we estimated in our step 2. So, make an
estimate, we see that the initial estimate of torsional shear is about 49 kN, 49.28 kilo
606
Newtons. Similarly we make an estimate of H t,B and here to be careful that we are using
the right distances, this is the distance from wall B to the center of stiffness.
So, L - x R and we again have an estimate of the torsional shear, you see that these two
values are rather close to each other. However, as I had mentioned earlier, the direction
of the torsional shear matters, you have to be careful. So, you have HA’ because it is an
initial estimate, you have H A’ is equal to the estimate of the direct shear HD,A - H’ t,A.
So, H D,A is opposed in direction to H’t,A; and therefore, I take 270 the direct shear
component minus 49.28 and I get the initial estimate of the total shear in wall A.
Whereas in wall B, I said both H D,B and H’t,B are in the same direction and therefore, we
add these two effects and we get at the estimate of the. So, 18 plus 49.256 gives us
229.256 as the total shear initial estimate of the total shear in wall B. With this known,
we can quickly make a calculation to see, I know the shear force now, I know the
stiffness of the wall; and therefore, an estimate of the displacement the drift in wall A
and drift in wall B is possible. And from the drifts, since you are looking at two walls,
from the minimum drift and the maximum drift we will be able to check if the code
prescribed limit is exceeded or not.
HA
So, I am estimating ΔA here as, ; mind you RA is in relative terms here, it is a relative
RA
stiffness and therefore, the displacements do not have a unit here, but it is not essential
for us. So, the estimate of the minimum displacement is there, the stiffness of wall R A is
lower than stiffness of wall B. And therefore, ΔA would be Δmin and ΔB would be Δmax in
this case, we get two values here; the average of the values is estimated.
And we are looking at Δmax/ Δmin which is 57.31/36.78 gives us a value which is greater
than 1.5; that is the definition of a torsionally irregular building or a building which has
plan irregularity coming from torsional irregularity. So, this is a torsionally irregular
building. So, what does the code prescribe in terms of accidental eccentricity?
607
So, keeping in mind what we will supposed to do now, we are supposed to estimate the
accidental eccentricity and use the accidental eccentricity to estimate the most severe
torsional shear and calculate what the total shear on wall A and wall B are going to be.
So, IS 1893 prescribes that the total accidental torsion considering dynamic effects,
considering dynamic amplification and that is why you have the subscript d. So, the total
eccentricity considering dynamic amplification should be considered as 1.5 times the
static eccentricity plus 5 percent of the width, 5 percent of the dimension perpendicular
to the direction of the earthquake action.
So, here e si, e si is nothing but the static estimate of the eccentricity which is what we
have been doing all along. We have actually made an estimate of the eccentricity, but
this is the static eccentricity. Under dynamic conditions larger eccentricity is expected,
because a calculation does not implicitly assume dynamic effects; the code requires that
the dynamic eccentricity is estimated in our calculations for design forces.
So, 1.5esi + 0.05bi . And you have another estimate which is esi − 0.05bi . So, typically as
a thumb rule you would look at, eccentricity estimated plus or minus 5 percent accidental
eccentricity. So, in this particular case that is what we are doing, and the e si minus 0.05 b
would give us a worse scenario and that is how the code prescribes the amplification
using a dynamic amplification in one case, and we do not use the additional effect of the
dynamic amplification in the one below.
608
So, this estimate is made and the estimate is eccentricity including the accidental
eccentricity dynamic amplification is 3.6 meters in one case, and 0.9 meters in the other
case. The code requires that, for each wall that you are considering you must look at
what will cause the most severe situation of total shear; it could be 3.6 in one case, it
could be 0.9 in the other case.
So, we make an estimate for both, I would like to mention that; if you are doing time
history analysis and there is an explicit consideration of the dynamic effects, you need
not consider the dynamic amplification eccentricity through the dynamic amplification
that you see here 1.5 times the static eccentricity. However, if you are basing your design
force calculations on the response spectrum method or equivalent static force method,
then it is essential to calculate the dynamic eccentricity and use that to estimate the total
force.
So, we have made an estimate of the eccentricities we can see that it is 3.6 meters, which
is 20 percent of the dimension L of the building. So, this is significant. So, eccentricity is
20 percent of the side dimension. So, with that, if you actually look at estimating H t,A,
the torsional shear on wall A and torsional shear on wall B; if you remember again, we
need to consider that the torsional shear in wall A will reduce the total shear; whereas,
will increase the total shear in wall B. With that in mind, we are going to reduce the least
eccentricity effect of eccentricity for wall A and add the maximum effect of eccentricity
in wall B.
And therefore, I use the second expression in estimating the torsional shear for wall A.
H ( esi − 0.05bi ) x R R A
So, H t,A = . The estimate of the estimate of the torsional shear for
J
wall A is 16.42 kN; whereas, the estimate in the other case wall B, since it is additive we
H ( 1.5esi + 0.05bi )( L − x R ) R B
use the higher eccentricity and therefore H t,B = . The
J
torsional shear component for wall B is 65.675 kN.
Therefore now coming to H A and H B which are the total shear forces; in the first case
direct shear force minus H t,A will be the total shear force 270 minus 16.42 kN, 253.58
kN is the worst case torsional shear for this wall. In the second expression H B which is
609
the shear force coming, the total shear force to wall B, H B = H D, B + H t, B and that is 180
plus this value that we have estimated now 65.675 is 245.675 kN.
So, you see that we have two arrow on the conservative side, we have actually used the
worst case situation for both wall A and wall B and estimated the total shear force. You
can see that now you can add up the two shear forces 253.58 and 245.67 and the value is
close to 500 kN, which is different from what Hy was. Hy was 450 kN; whereas, H A +
HB is almost 500 kN.
So, that, so the extra 50 kN is because of the additional effects that you have that is
because of the eccentricity and the accidental eccentricity which is also built in from the
design perspective. So, with that we have the design forces for wall A and wall B and
you can go ahead and design it as a reinforced shear wall, standard design approach to be
followed there.
610
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 04
Lecture – 35
Design of Masonry Components and Systems Example – III
Ok, 3rd illustrative example that we are going to be looking at deals with the in-plane
flexure and shear design of a reinforced masonry wall. So, this is specific to component
design that we will be looking at particularly for in-plane shear, in-plane flexure and in
plane shear. So, let us consider a shear wall of dimensions 4.3 meters in length and 3
meters in height, it is constructed with the hollow concrete masonry units of thickness
200 millimeters. We are designing the wall for in-plane flexure and shear the lateral
seismic force considered here is 38 kN.
Now, this seismic force corresponds to a reinforced masonry wall and of course, it
depends on the R factor that has been used to arrive at the seismic force corresponding to
this level in the wall. So, this is lateral seismic force which we can use for a reinforced
masonry wall, if you were to design this as an unreinforced masonry wall or check if an
unreinforced masonry wall is feasible, then the lateral seismic force should be different
because the R-factor that you use for an unreinforced masonry typology will be different.
611
So, what are the aspects to be determined; the in-plane flexure reinforcement and the in-
plane shear reinforcement. The data that is available with us, there is a live load acting
on this wall; you can assume that these calculations have been made on a building
system and then the live load acting on the wall is provided to us.
A superimposed load of 32 kN also acts on the wall and the lateral seismic force
corresponding to the reinforced masonry typology will work out to 38 kN in this wall. To
estimate the self weight; the dead load due to the self weight the unit weight of masonry
can be considered to be 20 kN/m3 and the prism strength of masonry is 8 MPa.
The permissible stress for steel considering HYSB bars is 230 MPa and hollow block
construction the width of the bed joint mortar that we will be considering in our
calculations is 60 mm. So, we are basically looking at 30 + 30 which is the shaded
portion that you can see on your slide. So, this is the width of the bedded mortar 30 + 30
that we are going to be considering in the calculations.
And that is a typical assumption, the web is typically not mortared; for ease of
construction that portion is normally not mortared and even if it is mortared you can
neglect the contribution of that area in a hollow block construction. Part of the cavities
may be filled with your grout and part may not be.
612
So, let me come to the load cases; calculations of the load cases and the combinations
thereof. So, Self weight of the wall is one of the dead loads that you have to consider;
this is a hollow block construction let us assume that 50 percent of the blocks are
retained as hollow. So, 20 kilo Newton per meter cube into the width of the wall 0.2
meters, 50 percent considered to be hollow and the total length of the wall, and height of
the wall 4.3 and 3 meters respectively. We also have a superimposed load acting on the
wall 32 kN therefore, the total dead load is 32 kN + 25.8 kN = 57.8 kN here, and there is
a live load or an imposed load of 15 kN acting on the wall.
We are looking at seismic design and therefore, we are going to be looking at an

earthquake plus gravity load combination and under this combination, increase in
permissible stresses is permitted. So, you should be looking at how permissible stresses,
can be increased either you increase the permissible stresses in your calculations by 33
percent in this earthquake plus gravity load combinations or you have the possibility of
taking that to the other side of the equation and reduce your loads to 75 percent and
continue to use a 100 percent of the permissible stress; not 133 percent.
So, that is more convenient to do because you can uniformly apply this to all your loads
and load cases including the combinations. So, we will reduce the load to 75 percent in
our calculations to account for the increase in permissible stresses which is permitted due
to the combination. What are the load cases we can consider? Ok, typically these are the
two load cases that we should consider; one is a situation where you have the dead load,
you have the beneficial effect of the live load and you have the earthquake load.
So, it is the gravity plus earthquake combination including the positive effect of live load
and we are taking 75 percent of the load because of the statement that I made earlier. So,
0.75 (DL+LL+EL) is our first load case.
And a second load case is primarily to account for effects where they could be
decompression to an extent in the structure and therefore, we look at a reduced dead load
and we do not consider the live load. So, the load case is 0.9 DL + EL, in this case
considering 75 percent of the total load we have the load case as 0.67 DL+ 0.75 EL.
At this stage I just would like to point out that these two load cases that we are looking at
are appropriate for a working stress approach; however, if you were to consult IS 1893
part 1 2016 or the 2016 version of the national building code, the load cases stated they
613
pertain to the limit state approach. Where you will see that the factors prescribed for the
load combinations, load cases in the load combinations is coming from limit state
approach.
For example, you are required to do checks for load combinations of 1.2(DL+LL±EL),
1.5(DL±EL), a case of decompression happening where you have 0.9DL ± 1.. So, this is
not applicable for the working stress approach that we use for design of reinforced
masonry and design of masonry as such.
So, a word of caution that these we will penalize the design if you were to apply to a
working stress approach. For the earthquake load we will take 75 percent again of the
earthquake load; so, the shear force into the height will give us the overturning moment
0.75 x 38 kN was what was prescribed for the design of the wall; prescribed lateral force
for the design of the wall height 3 and therefore, we are looking at a moment, an
overturning moment of 85.5 kNm.
What are the axial load cases? That was the earthquake load, we had the overturning
moment from the earthquake load and now for the axial loads we had two cases; the first
case: was looking at 75 percent of dead load plus live load. And therefore, a case P 1
would give us about 54.6 kN; 75 percent of the dead load and live load estimated that is
your case 1 we call it P 1, case 2 with the reduction in the dead load. So, 67 percent of
DL; Dead Load is what we will consider this works out to about 38.726 kN.
614
So, we have two cases that we must look at in design. I will follow I will take up one of
the cases and we will go into the details and one should be looking at both the cases to
see which would give you the worst case scenario as far as the design is concerned.
Some aspects of the geometry and permissible stresses that we will be requiring the net
bedded area, we just talked about this; 60 millimeters into the length of the wall 4300
millimeters, the net bedded area is 0.258 mm2. We need to estimate the second moment
of area and the second moment of area is estimated considering the geometry of these
two strips that are sitting about the centerline of the wall itself. So, the second moment of
area is estimated to 0.3994m 4.
We need effective depth calculation for in-plane flexure so, we are early looking at; let
us assume steel reinforcement is going to be placed in the two voids that are present in a
block. And therefore, the centroid of the reinforcement can be considered to be in the
middle of the two reinforcement bars and therefore, that is one half of the block. And
therefore, we can assume that the effective depth is calculated from extreme compression
fiber to the centroid of the steel reinforcement and that is 200 mm from the edge and
therefore, the effective depth is taken as 4100 millimeters.
Of course, if the steel reinforcement is going to be placed in many more cells then you
will have to adequately come back and check, come back and make alterations to the
effective depth calculation. The permissible compressive stress estimated as 25 percent,
one-fourth of the, compressive strength of masonry which was 8 MPa. So, F a is 2 MPa,
Fb because of the strain gradient effect, Fb is increased you have 1.25 F a , that would be
2.5 MPa and Fs as stated earlier 230 MPa.
Modulus of elasticity is required primarily to make the estimation of n, the modular ratio.
So, Em = 550 f m = 4400 MPa. So, the modular ratio;
2  10 5
n= = 45.45
4400
615
So, let us look at the design; the iterative approach that we talked about there are two
procedures and it is up to the designer to choose the approach he or she would like to
use. Both are iterative procedures and there can be other methods also that one can use,
basically the fundamental requirements are almost the same.
So, we will look at procedure one; in procedure one we were, first making an assumption
that compression controls and then check whether that assumption is true for the depth of
neutral axis that is estimated, and then if not make changes to the way the neutral axis
depth is calculated, and then arriving at the area of steel that is required.
So, under the action of the external moment and the load the total length of the wall is l
w. The effective depth is l w – d’ which is d effective. So, d’ is the distance to the
centroid of the steel reinforcement that is where you are tension resultant is acting, and
then you have the triangular distribution of compression, compressive stresses and C is
the resultant in compression. The length of the compressed zone which is the depth of
the neutral axis k d is what we need to estimate, we also require j d which is 1 - kd/3 as
well in calculations of respective stresses.
So, let us assume in the first instant that the masonry compression controls and calculate
the compressive force in the masonry. The bedded width 60 mm, k is unknown and
effective depth is 4.1m.
616
1
C= Fb bkd
2
So, we have an expression for the compressive force in k; taking the moments to be
equal to 0; taking the sum of moments is equal to 0 we can write down the quadratic
expression in k
 kd  l 
C ( l w − d') −  = P  w − d'  + M
 3   2 
420.25k − 1260.75k − 191.97 = 0
2
Solve the expression for k and we get a value of 0.16 for k.
Now, with that you can go back and estimate the compressive force and since we know
that the tensile force is going to be by equilibrium C - P we get an estimate for the tensile
force. Now with that, let us check the stress in steel and stress in steel is estimated
because now as the compression controls, we have the stress in masonry equal to Fb and
therefore, from similar triangles and compatibility we can estimate what the stress in
steel is, but this stress in steel works out to be much higher than the permissible stress in
steel which is 230 MPa.
Now, this implies that the assumption that masonry compression controls is wrong and
therefore, the estimate of k is wrong. So, we need to go back and look at a situation
where the stress in steel is governing and estimate what is the corresponding k and then
estimate the compressive stress in masonry.
617
So, to follow on to the next step we assume that tension controls; the steel controls and
we have to make now an estimate of the effective area of steel. We use the effective area
of steel to then check if we are satisfying the requirements that the stress in steel is less
than the permissible stress and whether the stress in masonry is less than the permissible
stress in masonry.
P
So, (As)eff is estimated as ( A s )eff = A s + , we are taking into account the effect of the
Fs
tension that is occurring due to the eccentricity caused by the overturning moment. So,
which therefore can be estimated as a sum of tension plus the axial load divided by F s as
a first estimate of the (As)eff. So, tensile force that we calculated in the previous step +
P/Fs could be a starting point.
P T + P 49.507x1000
( A s )eff = A s + = = = 215.25mm 2
Fs Fs 230
From which the percentage of steel is estimated
( A s )eff 215.25
eff = = = 0.00026
bd 200x4100
618
With the percentage of steel ρeff estimated, we can try and we estimate k from the
quadratic expression and an estimate of k is derived and an estimate of j as 1 - k/3 is also
derived.
So, we will have to now look at whether with these estimates do we satisfy the
requirements that tension controls and masonry stress is within permissible stress. So, let
M'
us estimate the steel stress using these estimates of k and j as fs = and this M’
( A s )eff jd
is nothing, but the external moment plus the additional overturning moment that is
coming because of the eccentricity of the axial force due to the tension occurring in the
cross section and a non-uniform distribution of compression.
l 
M ' = P  w − d'  + M ext
 2 
and this totally works out to about 191.97 kNm. We use it in the previous expression.
This gives us an estimate of the steel stress and the steel stress is in this case 228.15 MPa
which is less than the Fs or the permissible stress in steel.
So, this satisfies the requirement, now we can basically use 2-12 mm diameter bars to
achieve this (As)eff here, which is 215.25 mm2; of course, the estimate of (As)eff was an
initial estimate. We can revise that; basically if you are going to choose for (As)eff, two
numbers of diameter 12 bars then the area of steel is slightly more.
So, it should not matter too much in this particular case; you can see that the
corresponding stress in steel is 217.1 MPa and still satisfies the condition that f s is less
than the permissible tensile stress in steel. However, one must check if there are changes
in the number of bars required, one must check if there is an update of d’ that is required
and then come back and correct the calculations at this stage.
The masonry stress is then estimated, fm has to be estimated and fm can be estimated
from the similar triangles from the state of stress in the steel. And this works out to in the
case that we are looking at 0.4 MPa and this is less than fb which is 2.5 MPa and
therefore, all requirements have been satisfied in this particular stage, ok.
619
So, we are looking at two numbers of 12 mm diameter bars that are placed in the extreme
edges considering two directions, Given the symmetry of the structure, we did only one
direction, but then it is true for both the directions. And therefore, we are looking at 2
bars of 12 mm diameter that we placed in the extreme cell on the left and the right ends
of the wall of length 4.3 meters, ok.
Now, as far as the shear design is concerned, how do we go about the shear design; so,
the flexural design was taken care of in the previous slides. The shear force that we are
talking of is a lateral force of 38 kN, but reduced to 75 percent and therefore, you are
looking at 28.5 kN as the shear force. Let us estimate first the actual shear stress that the
wall is subjected to because of this level of lateral loading.
0.75V 28.5x1000
fv = = = 0.116 MPa
b bedd 0.06x4.1
Now, if you remember from the considerations that the code makes in terms of what
should be the allowable shear stress and the maximum value of the allowable shear stress
for different conditions without and with web shear reinforcement affected primarily by
the aspect ratio of the wall or the M / Vd ratio of the wall. We need to choose what the
Fv; what the allowable shear stress and the maximum allowable shear stress are.
620
So, in this case the level of shear stress is low, we could choose to go with either with or
without web shear reinforcement and look at the estimate of M /V d first, and then the F v
and F v max that we must consider within, without web shear reinforcement.
So, let us first estimate M by V d,
M 114
= = 0.73  1.0
Vd 38x4.1
This is a rather squat wall, it is 4.3 meters in length and hence we expect the response
lateral load response of this wall to be basically governed by shear deformations.
So, in this particular case, if we are going to be providing web shear reinforcement the
1  M 
permissible shear stress is calculated as 4−  fm , which is how the masonry
24  Vd 
compressive strength comes in as and a parameter that influences the shear strength.
So, this is estimated as 0.385 MPa; it is limited by F v max as estimated here as 0.254
MPa; however, our masonry shear stress is 0.11, the order of 0.11 MPa and therefore, we
are well within the allowable shear stress or the maximum allowable shear stress.
621
If we were not going to be providing web shear reinforcement we would still be ok, it
1  M 
would be 4−  fm and even here the allowable stress is 0.257 MPa; however,
36  Vd 
our actual shear stress is much lesser, which means that the wall without providing web
shear reinforcement itself is adequate to take care of the shear that the wall is being
subjected to.
However, let us just look at the case where, if we were to provide web shear
reinforcement for wall type C, whether the web shear reinforcement that we provide
satisfies the requirements of detailing. So, I am providing web shear reinforcement, now
we basically assume a spacing s, the maximum spacing of shear reinforcement should
not be greater than 0.5d or 1.2 meters and we take the lesser of the 2.
So, we can check what the minimum shear steel that we are supposed to provide is
assuming a spacing of 1 meter or 1000 millimeters. The minimum area of minimum
shear steel works out to be rather low. So, Vs where V is 28.5 kN as estimated earlier, Fs
is again 230 MPa and the effective depth is used for calculating the value of Av,min.
Vs 28.5x1000
A v ,min = = = 30.22 mm 2
Fsd 230x4100
622
Now, the requirements on spacing the maximum spacing of the horizontal and vertical
reinforcement where we must check has to be the lesser of these three values. Total lw/3,
hw/3 or 1.2 meters; the lesser of the 3 has to be considered. In this case length of the wall
is 4.3 meters and height of the wall is 3 meters and therefore, h/3 would govern, 1 meter
would govern and that is the maximum spacing. And that is why in this calculation I had
used 1 meter as the spacing for the calculation.
Let us assume we are providing 8 mm diameter bars at 1 meter spacing, and if you are
providing 8 mm diameter bars at 1 meter spacing the percentage of steel then becomes
50.26 would be the area of one 8 mm diameter bar, divided by 1 meter spacing. So, that
gives us about 0.025 percent is that, ok.
Now, assuming that we are providing web shear reinforcement is the amount of web
shear reinforcement provided adequate for reinforced masonry wall type-C. If you
remember the prescriptions for wall type-C we need to provide uniform reinforcement in
both horizontal and vertical directions. We need to ensure that the sum of the
reinforcement in both the directions is at least 0.2 percent of the gross area of the wall
cross section. Minimum reinforcement area in each direction should not be less than 0.07
of the gross cross-sectional area.
So, that is something that will get violated because earlier we saw 0.025 percent is what
we get by providing 8 mm bars at 1 meter spacing, and then in the horizontal and the
623
vertical directions together we must get at least 0.2 percent. So, it is important to go and
check if we satisfy these requirements.
So, providing web shear reinforcement, we assumed we made the calculation for an
assumed spacing of 1 meter, we checked that the 1 meter would not be adequate and
therefore, with the 1 meter spacing we get in the horizontal direction, we get the
percentage of steel as 0.25 percent; therefore, we assume 10 mm diameter bars at 500
mm spacing. And the percentage of steel in the horizontal direction is there then
estimated as area of 1 steel bar divided by 500 mm spacing width of 200 mm into 100
and we get about 0.078 percent, which is greater than the seven percent that is required.
Now, percentage of steel in the vertical direction row is 78.54 divided by assuming we
provide steel reinforcement in; assuming we provide steel reinforcement in alternate
blocks with 1 block of height 150, each block of height 150 mm. So, in the vertical
direction if you are looking at how many bars have to be provided. So, this is alternate
blocks so, that is 2 x 150. We get about 0.13 percent for 10 mm bar that is going to be
provided at alternate courses. So, this is again greater than 0.07 percent.
You have another requirement that the horizontal and the vertical, the steel in the vertical
direction should be 3 times that of the horizontal steel and therefore, you would have to
probably reduce this to 150 and check that the additional requirement of vertical steel
being 3 times that of the horizontal steel is also, taken care.
624
The sum of the reinforcement in both the directions would be 0.078 plus 0.131 and
therefore, 0.209 which is 0.2 greater than 0.2 percent which was what was one of the
requirements. So, therefore, we actually have looked at the shear design aspects; this
wall could actually be left without providing web shear reinforcement. But, if you were
to provide web shear reinforcement these are the checks that need to be carried out to
ensure that minimum steel for a certain type A, B or C is taken care of, ok.
With that let me talk of one last aspect, which is peculiar to perforated shear walls. In the
previous case we looked at one blank wall which was 4.3 meters in length and if we were
to consider that to be a multi storied structure, you would have the shear wall design
carried out in a very similar manner as you saw in illustrative example 3.
But, if you were to look at a perforated reinforced masonry shear wall, the one item that
would change and you need to adequately consider that in your calculations is the
overturning moment causes different axial forces in piers. There is a change in the axial
force due to the earthquake force and the overturning moment caused by the earthquake
force, and that has to be accounted for in your calculations.
So, if you were to look at the gravity forces; the gravity forces would come from the
dead load from the live load and from the earthquake force because of the overturning
moment. So, the additional axial force from the overturning moment which could be
tensile in nature or compressive in nature depending on the direction of the earthquake
625
and depending on the position of the wall with respect to the overall geometry of the
structure that you are considering has to be in addition taken into account.
So, the distribution of the overturning moments to piers as axial forces has to be
considered. So, you have this additional axial force coming from the earthquake forces Pe
of there are different walls, if you have to calculate that for the different walls. So,
basically how can you calculate that and where is it coming from? The lateral force
acting on the perforated shear wall which composes the overall building is actually going
to cause a situation of additional compression in the extreme piers, and situation of
tension in the one on the left end, considering that the earthquake force is acting from left
to right.
We typically; in this case we have three piers; the pier in the middle if it is aligned with
the centerline of the overall building plan. Then would see minimal alteration in the axial
force because of the overturning moments or the axial force corresponding to the
overturning moment would be close to 0; however, that depends on the geometry. But,
what we should be careful about is how are these two piers in this wall which is made
out of three piers, how is the axial force due to the overturning moment and what is the
quantum in the extreme piers.
So, we are interested in estimating, what is the neutral axis of this cross section? The
wall made out of three different piers; we have pier 1, pier 2 and pier 3 and therefore, we
will be able to estimate the axial force corresponding to each of these piers, in this case
pier 1, pier 2 and pier 3. As the area of cross section of each pier which is Ai (yb)i which
is nothing, but the distance between the centroid of each of the piers that is being
considered to the neutral axis.
 A i ( y b )i 
( Pe )i =  M
  I NA 
So, the effect is due to the overturning moment; overturning moment into the respective
areas into the distance between the centroid of that cross section from the neutral axis
divided by the moment of inertia from the second moment of area of the cross section
with respect to the neutral axis. So, this additional component of axial force needs to be
considered and as you can see depending on the level of lateral force. The extreme piers
626
can actually have a beneficial effect due to additional pre compression or be in a
disadvantageous situation due to the uplift or even be subjected to tension.
And since, you know that the shear capacity is directly dependent on the level of pre
compression, you can have very different situations in the piers and therefore, design has
to adequately consider this particular aspect, And if there are significant; there is
significant deviation for from symmetry in the plan, then that is again going to be a cause
for concern in the actual design forces to each of the piers.
627
Prof. Arun Menon
Module – 05
Lecture – 36
Special Topics – Confined Masonry
Good morning, we will look at the second of the special topics that we are examining in
this last module of the course. And today the focus is on Confined Masonry; a confined
masonry as introduced at the beginning of the course, is a structural typology within
masonry constructions. It has gained significant fraction in our country in the last few
years; however, this is not a new typology, this has been around and found to work
exceedingly well when subjected to earthquake forces.
And several countries actually have variants of this typology; countries with significant
seismic activity like Chile in South America is known to have a significant stock of
constructions, particularly residential buildings, small office buildings, school buildings
which are all confined masonry constructions. And the advantageous aspect of confined
masonry is that there is ease of construction and with minimum prescriptions, a
structurally favorable typology can be established on the ground. So, that is where
confined masonry is positioned as a viable structural solution with good earthquake
resistance.
Today the national building code, the 2016 version has a section on confined masonry;
but this is again a typology where rigorous design approach is not adopted. But
prescriptive recommendations are provided, such that the construction details regarding
the construction are addressed when you choose this typology.
628
So, let me go over the typology and refer greatly to what the national building code has
in terms of prescriptions for confined masonry construction. But it is also interesting to
see, where the additional resistance, where the global resistance to earthquake, favorable
earthquake response of confined masonry constructions come from. And, simple
calculations can actually be done to estimate the improved flexural capacity of walls
when you have confinement and improved shear capacity when you have confinement
by the confining elements in reinforced concrete.
So, with reference to the national building code section on confined masonry; confined
masonry itself is described as an alternative to reinforced masonry or minimally
reinforced masonry. We have specially designed reinforced masonry where the ductility,
the response reduction factor is as high as 4. We are not looking at a situation where the
confined masonry construction is an alternative to that type of reinforced masonry; but
minimally reinforced masonry with reinforced concrete bands and vertical bars and RC
frame construction as well. So, this is an alternative to reinforced concrete frame
construction.
The masonry has load bearing walls. So, gravity resistance is from load bearing walls,
and these could be clay bricks, hollow clay bricks, or concrete blocks; but the element
that is of importance are the confining elements, which are vertical tie columns or
horizontal RC ties, called tie beams and they confine the masonry wall which is the load
bearing element from all four sides.
629
Now, these tie members are typically of smaller cross section than the reinforced
concrete frame sections of columns and beams, and that is an important difference that
you must keep in mind. Therefore, these are not meant to be flexural elements as you
would have in a frame building, in an RC frame building the columns and beams are
meant to be flexural elements; but here these are tie elements and not defined as flexural
elements. Their only role is, provide tensile resistance in a typology where you
depending on unreinforced masonry walls for the gravity bearing role.
The different structural components of a confined masonry construction, you have the
load bearing masonry walls, they carry the function, carry out the function of gravity
load resistance; but this is this being a shear wall, actually this would be a shear wall it
also works against lateral forces. So, it has a dual role, it is the shear wall for lateral
actions along with the tie elements; that is where the interaction between the tie elements
and the shear walls come about, but for gravity load resistance it is again the load bearing
elements. The confining elements that we talked about these are horizontal and vertical
ties, they provide tensile strength and ductility to the masonry wall panels which are
unreinforced masonry wall panels.
You have floor slabs and roof slabs, be typically prescribed that these are rigid horizontal
diaphragms when they are being constructed, and are capable of transmitting both
gravity and lateral forces. You have to have a plinth band, which is one of the first tie
630
elements in the structural system; the tie beam which is at the lowest level, transferring
both vertical and horizontal forces from the wall panels, the masonry wall panels to the
foundation. And of course, the foundation which is actually the running foundation,
which we will discuss in a few minutes
So, if you are looking at the fundamental differences between a confined masonry
construction and reinforced concrete frame construction; what would they be. The
fundamental difference starts from the sequence of construction right. In a reinforced
concrete frame structure, the frames are constructed first; you have the foundations, you
have the different footings that are constructed or a raft foundation and then you have the
framing elements. And then the infilled wall is the last element to be added, the
nonstructural infilled walls, which are partition walls are added at the end.
However, in confined masonry constructions, the walls are constructed and then the
confining elements are concreted ok. Assuming that the confining elements that we are
talking about, the tie elements horizontal and vertical tie elements are in reinforced
concrete, the wall is constructed. And after the wall is constructed as we can see in this
picture, this photograph here, you can see that a gap is left at the edges of the masonry
construction. You can see that, you have the steel reinforcement in position already and
then concreting is done to complete the confining element right.
631
So, that is a fundamental difference; in confined masonry the confining elements are
constructed subsequent to the wall construction, this is an important difference.
Student: Including horizontal ties.
Including horizontal ties, yes. So, when you are actually coming to the top of a wall, you
have the reinforcement placed in position and then it is concreted yes.
Student: Sir can you make.
What you are saying is the wall construction is happening in say two or three lifts, in
series of lifts and typically you might have a return wall; and the return wall provides out
of plane resistance as the construction is underway. We are not talking of extremely long
walls, these are residential building sizes. So, of course, they could be a potential issue if
workmanship is not good enough and you can have out of plump in the walls. And I
think that is sequence, I mean that is an accept that needs to be considered when the
construction is happening; because you do not have the return walls. Some site
interventions would be required to ensure that the wall is braced against if it is windy.
Windy exactly, but no other special requirement is really there, yeah. So, again
fundamental difference in terms of behavior would be you are looking at load bearing
gravity walls in a masonry construction and in the confined masonry construction versus
framing action which is available in a reinforced concrete construction. The reinforced
concrete frame construction has framing action. Here we are not saying that framing
action is available, though the ties are all interconnected; we are not looking at framing
action, we really looking at tying action that is there provided by these elements.
And finally, the foundations, so foundations in a reinforced concrete frame element, each
framing member, vertical framing member the column would have its own foundation. It
could be either a isolated footing, or a combined footing, or a raft foundation; whereas,
in confined masonry constructions the confining elements, the tie elements do not have
independent foundations, do not have their own foundations. They are sitting on top of
the running foundation, which is the running foundation of the masonry load bearing
632
wall themselves; but you would actually have a plinth beam which helps in connecting
the steel reinforcement of the tie elements to the foundation element itself.
So, running foundation versus footing or may be a raft, but the flexural element in the
reinforced concrete frame construction has it is own foundation, here you do not have,
the tie elements do not have their own foundation. You will see in my slides, number of
photographs which are from IIT Gandhinagar, which is an educational campus which has
decided that some of the residential buildings there, particularly the faculty blocks are all
confined masonry constructions.
So, we are talking of seismic zone III and multi storied ground plus two constructions,
which has been designed and executed in confined masonry. So, these several of these
photographs actually come from the drawings that have been prepared and the
photographs that have been prepared about the campus itself, campus design and
execution itself, particularly highlighting confined masonry ok.
What about earthquake resistant construction guidelines? There are quite of few, as I said
the code does not require you to do a rigorous design, go through a rigorous design
procedure to arrive at the dimensioning of the tie elements. Prescriptions are provided to
ensure that, good earthquake resistance is available.
633
So, I will quickly go over the specific guidelines that you have in national building code;
which we will then carry forward to understand how they should affect the behavior
under lateral actions. So, prescriptions on number of stories; if you are looking at
category B and category C buildings you can go up to 5 storeys, but if you looking at
category D and category E buildings you can go up to 4 storeys.
So, if you remember the IS 4326 tables where you have category B to category E; this
code is then saying that, confined masonry is another typology that you can use to
construct earthquake resistant masonry constructions. Reinforced masonry is one, un-
reinforced masonry with the bands is the other one; but confined masonry could be the
other typology that can satisfy basic earthquake resistance requirements.
The confining elements, you have to ensure that tie beams are provided at the plinth level
and at every floor level, so that is minimum requirement. And that the vertical spacing
between the tie beams should not exceed 3 meters, so mandating that every floor level
you must have for small buildings; that every floor level you must have a tie beam
beginning with the foundation. The tie columns are typically placed at a spacing of about
4 m, if the tie column dimension is 200 x 200 right.
So, you might have a load bearing masonry wall which is 230; 200, 230 or even larger;
your tie column is typically limited in dimension. If it is 200 mm or thicker, every 4
meters you should have a tie column; but if you are looking at a thinner wall, if you are
looking at a 100 mm or a 114 mm thick wall, then you are looking at tie columns that
must be provided every 3 meters centre to centre.
Tie columns must also be provided in addition at corners of walls and wherever you have
intersections of walls. And tie columns are also provided when a wall is has a free end.
So, a door opening is actually a wall with the free end; which means, the door opening
the jamb of the door should actually have a tie column built in at that location.
634
What about walls typically if you are looking at a one storied or two storied construction,
100 mm or 114 mm walls this is basically half thick, half brick thick wall is allowed.
And if you are looking at two storied structures or more storeys, minimum of one brick
thick wall is required. The concept of wall density is introduced and this is something we
will again speak about when we talk of assessment in the next week. Wall density is
defined as the structural plan density in a given story; it is the total cross sectional area of
the confined wall panels, you take the wall panels areas and look at one direction and
then look at the other direction, two orthogonal directions separately. So, it is the total
cross sectional area of the confined wall panels in one direction divided by the sum of
the floor plan areas in all the floors. So, you are looking at total percentage of wall
resisting area in one direction versus another direction divided by the total plan area of
the building in all the floors. So, basically wall density, structural plan density can be
worked out floor wise and can be worked out for a building ok. Floor wise you will use
only a plan area of a floor; if you are using for the entire building, then you would add up
all the floor areas.
Now, what this represents is the percentage of resisting area available in a plan
configuration. And there are limits on this and you will see, when we come to assessment
that this check is one of the fundamental checks to see if the building has adequate
resistance or not. As a very simple check on whether a masonry building has adequate
earthquake resistant or not, the structural plan density of walls is something that we
635
check. So, here the code requires for confined masonry construction that if you are in
seismic zone III, you must at least have 2 percent in each direction; each of the
orthogonal directions, which increases to 3 percent in zone IV and 4.5 percent in Zone V.
So, this is another check which becomes important. Of course, the guideline in terms of
one brick thick wall or a half thick wall is from the earthquake resistance point of view;
but we will also be checking if that wall cross section is sufficient from the gravity load
resistance itself. So, there it is, it is the check based on the permissible compressive
stresses.
So, those minimum dimensions have to satisfy both gravity requirements and the lateral
load requirements as prescribe by the code ok. Since this is prescriptive in nature; the
recommendations or prescriptive in nature, you have specific prescriptions for the
different tie elements and protocols that must be followed when these are being
constructed. So, we will quickly go over construction details for walls, tie columns, and
tie beams and foundations and other aspects.
So, it is prescribed that the wall panel height to thickness ratio, h/t ratio of walls is kept
below 30. And we have seen this number 30 comes back towards, it is identified that at
about h/t ratio of 30, you have instability in the walls due to the slenderness effect itself.
Another important prescription is how the edges of all walls must be toothed, right. So, if
you see the picture here at the top, you see the, the way the edge of the wall is, the two
636
edges of the wall are; toothing is in short such that there is a an offset created by
alternate courses and it is prescribed that this projection be at least 40 mm is 40 mm or
lesser
Now, the importance of this toothing has been verified experimentally and it is
demonstrated that presence of toothing in every alternate course is beneficial to good
interaction between the tie columns and the masonry, unreinforced masonry wall panel
itself. In fact, wall panels which have been constructed without toothing, find it difficult
to get confined effectively by the tie columns; because you have almost a smooth
interface between the tie column and the masonry wall and the shear transfer is a
difficulty between the two elements.
Student: Sir.
The whole idea is that you want interlocking between the two elements, because you
want them to work together quite effectively; and the intention is to have shear
interlocking achieved at that interface as a plastic concrete to support there and hardens.
Student: And the form work of these.
Yeah.
Student: Closed to it or the day filling.
Exactly we will come to the form work in a moment; but the shuttering allows two sides
of the wall, two edges of the wall to act as your shuttering itself ok. Where required you
might want to use horizontal dowels between the masonry wall and the tie column itself.
And formwork is provided on the two sides of a wall as you seen in this picture ok. If it
is a corner, then you it will be two outer edges; and if it is a central tie element, then on
either sides of the wall you would be providing the formwork element itself.
637
So, tie columns there are minimum requirements in terms what should be the cross
sectional dimensions. Cross sectional dimensions can be square or rectangular and it is
prescribed that whenever it is at the corner, these have to be square in cross section. And
at least 200 mm or 230 mm one brick thick cross sections at the corners; whereas, in
other locations they can be 100 mm x 100 mm or 114 x 114, 150 x 200, 150 x 230. So,
rectangle or square cross sections are permitted, minimum dimensions are prescribed
here.
The tie column at the corner, the corner is a location which is subjected to significant
demand; and therefore, the tie column has minimum steel reinforcement requirement
prescribed. And what the spacing of the tie reinforcement should be at the top and
bottom ends of the tie column and the shaft of the tie column is prescribed. A typical
overlapping of the reinforcement, the longitudinal reinforcement is prescribed as 50
times the bar diameter.
And, in terms of the longitudinal bars, depending on the category of the building and
number of stories that you are looking at 4 storey, 5 storey, 3 storey; 4 storey the code
prescribes what should be the minimum diameter of the four numbers of bars that you
would incorporate within a tie element itself. Tie columns at jambs are basically to
ensure that you have a tensile resisting element at a door opening or a window opening
and this is not as critical as the other tie columns. And the number of bars here is
638
reduced; it is two longitudinal bars and dimensions on the tie bar and thickness of these
element is also prescribed.
Similarly, you have prescriptions for the tie beams and these tie beams must run
continuously along all the load bearing walls; they placed at the top of the walls at each
floor level as we discussed earlier. Again, there are minimum cross-sectional dimensions
which must be respected. You have the depth cross sections mentioned here; longitudinal
bars again; how many bars, four bars and at what spacing should the stirrups be
provided.
Lapping of the longitudinal bars also again at 50 times the bar diameter. This, the
prescription of longitudinal bars again as we have seen for IS 4326, comes back here
depending on the category of the building, the bar diameter is prescribed. And in
addition, lintel bars are to be provided. Now these are not like the plinth beams or the
floor beams, these are lintel bands which run continuously at the level of the lintel itself.
And you can use the IS 4326 recommendations, where you have either four bar lintel or a
two bar lintel which is the continuous lintel in the construction. Again, it is required that
the steel reinforcement of the tie columns and the tie beams are integrated; such that the
necessary tensile strength is achieved and that detailing if not provided your tie columns
and your tie beams are not going to act as efficient or effective tie elements
639
So, that is another aspect to be kept in mind. In terms of the foundation and plinth, so as I
said the kind of construction, the kind of masonry typology that we are looking at; it is a
running foundation that is typically used. So, this is a regular masonry foundation; a
plinth beam is provided above the, the plinth beam is to be provided continuously above
the running foundation. And then the masonry wall construction proceeds; but from the
plinth beam you have the locations of the tie columns, the steel of the tie columns are
embedded and tied with the steel reinforcement of the plinth beam itself.
So, that is the running foundation of your wall and then you would have the plinth beam,
the reinforced concrete plinth beam and steel reinforcement of the tie columns actually
being connected to the steel reinforcement of the plinth beam itself.
640
We have been mentioning the shuttering for the tie columns. So, while the two sides of
the tie column shuttering is provided by the toothed edges of the brick wall itself;
because the brick wall is already being constructed or the masonry wall is already
constructed. The other two sides would require shuttering to be provided, and that is
what creates the formwork for the RC tie element.
So, you can see how, in this construction you have the toothed joint at the two sides and
shuttering on the two edges; which then has to be held in position you can tie together
and ensure that tight watertight formwork for the RC tie element is available.
641
So the reference here is largely to what the national building code has for reinforced, for
confined masonry constructions. The second half of this presentation I would like to
focus on, the behavioral aspects of confined masonry construction, particularly under the
action of lateral forces. So, what really happens in a confined masonry wall, is something
that I would like to discuss; and see how we can then extend that to our estimates of in-
plane flexural capacity and shear capacity of the confined masonry wall.
So, the lateral load behavior in terms of ductility of a confined masonry construction; this
is expected to be lower than what are reinforced masonry construction can provide. But
definitely higher than what, an unreinforced masonry construction is going to provide;
why is it lower than the ductility of reinforced masonry construction? Simply because we
are not looking at spread reinforcements, spread reinforcement is going to give you
better ductility.
Spread reinforcement is not available, we are looking at tie elements, tie columns which
are coming at 3 meters or 4 meters centre to centre spacing. So, ductility is expected to
be lower than reinforced masonry. What about strength? This is expected to be more than
what an unreinforced masonry wall can give because of the interaction and because of
the confinement that the tie element can give.
So, premature cracking of the unreinforced masonry wall is prevented by the tie element;
thereby that confinement can improve the shear resistance of the unreinforced masonry
642
wall. Therefore, what becomes important if you are actually going to make rigorous
calculations on capacities, which the code does not require; but if you were to design
something which is not a simple confined masonry construction, you will have to make
calculations, you have to make ultimate capacity checks.
And any model that you look into must have the interaction effects of the unreinforced
masonry wall panel with the confining elements. And there is a body of literature
particularly coming from Eastern Europe; works by Tomazevic and group in Zagreb and
also from South America on analytical approaches for understanding the lateral load
behavior, strength and the deformation capacity of confined masonry constructions is
available
And you can, we are also looking at a couple of such works to understand the in-plane
flexural capacity and the in-plane shear strength of confined masonry constructions. So,
examining what actually happens in terms of the in-plane flexural resistance of a
confined masonry wall. As discussed earlier we are not looking at the elements, the RC
elements as providing flexural resistance, they are not providing flexural resistance, they
are meant to be providing, they act as tie elements, tensile strength is available and that
creates a confinement.
643
So, making calculations, assuming that these are flexural elements is erroneous; you will
not get that effect from the small amount of steel reinforcement in the small cross section
of RC elements that are being provided ok.
So, that is something to be considered. So, let us look at a masonry wall, with two tie
columns at it is two ends; the tie columns each are provided with four reinforcement bars
and have an area of cross section A rv. The depth of the confining element is d, as you
can see here; depth of the confining element is designated as d. And there are two
confining elements at the two ends and the confined masonry wall is at the center.
Now, to be able to establish what is the ultimate capacity in bending, in-plane bending of
this wall; there are different models available and the model that is being refered to here
is from a work of Tomazevic and colleagues from Eastern Europe. So, what is really
being considered here, the concept behind the estimate of the ultimate flexural resistance
is that with the presence of a confining element at the two edges of the masonry wall; An
unreinforced masonry wall at its ultimate, we have seen a flexural capacity estimate;
where you have the end stress block, when masonry reaches it is ultimate strength in
compression.
However now you need to make a modification to this end block in compression;
because you have right beside it, a concrete block which is the cross section of the tie
column, which has tensile resistance; and therefore, the edge block, the edge
compression block is a different geometry and also has two different materials - one with
steel reinforcement, one without steel reinforcement.
So, Tomazevic here makes use of an equivalent ultimate compression stress block and
the width of the stress block ‘a’; as you are seeing here, it has two resisting elements, it
has resistance in compression coming from the brick wall, the wall which is unreinforced
and the reinforced tie column element right.
So, the model here talks about how you can actually take into account the confining
effect of the reinforced concrete element and gives an expression for the equivalent
ultimate stress block. I will come to the; of course, here we are looking at the equivalent
stress block which is the same as in a reinforced concrete or a reinforced masonry stress
block that we looked at, where the axial force resultant, the axial force is equilibrated by
(a) (0.85fm) t.
644
So, that component remains the same, but you have this additional component where d is
the cross-sectional dimension of the confining element. And ‘n’ here is the other aspect
which brings in the role of two different materials which are resisting at this critical
location. So, this is called an equivalence factor n and this equivalence factor is arrived at
as the ratio of compressive strength of concrete to the compressive strength of masonry.
So, we are looking at two different materials; you have grout and you have steel
reinforcement and the other material is masonry. So, n can be 1, n can be greater than 1,
n should not be less than 1, typically. So, in the first case where the steel reinforcement
in the tie column, which is in compression is also considered; then the axial force
resistance, the total axial force equilibrium comes from the location of this stress block.
So, total N is equilibrated by 0.85fmt(a-d); which is the resistance coming from masonry,
the first part is resistance coming from the masonry at ultimate.
The second part is the resistance coming from the concrete block which is 0.85 f’c t d.
And you have resistance, you have to account for the tensile force and the compressive
force that the edge elements are going to be giving you. And that is why it is Arv, which
is the area of cross section of the reinforcement in the tensile side, in the compression
side plus and minus depending on whether that has yielded.
So, in this particular case we are accounting for the compression reinforcement in the
equilibrium itself. So, from this the estimate of the ultimate moment is arrived at as the
axial force, the total axial force into the eccentricities and each of these elements have
different eccentricities. And therefore, the total moment resistance at ultimate is arrived
at by multiplying each of these contributions into the lever arm that is available.
The lever arm for the steel reinforcement is l-d (which is 2 times d/2), which is d for the
steel reinforcement in the edge confining elements.
l a  l d
M u = A rv f y (l − d) + 0.85f m t(a − d)  − d −  + 0.85nf m dt  − 
2 2 2 2
So, in this calculation, we are considering the contribution of the compression

reinforcement.
645
You could conservatively neglect the contribution from the compression reinforcement;
if that is so, we are not considering in the axial force equilibrium, the contribution from
the compression reinforcement is not added. You see that only the minus A rv into f y
component is included. And therefore, from this estimate, if the equivalent stress block is
estimated; you will have to account for the fact that, you have only one force that you are
bring into the axial force equilibrium.
So, the stress block is estimated as a and similarly the total calculation of the ultimate
moment can be made where the difference will be the value of a being different now
with respect to the previous calculation; where we consider the contribution of the
compression reinforcement. So, this is you see that there is a contribution coming from
the confining element; but not treating the confining element as the flexural element
contributing to in plane flexural resistance itself.
646
So, this is as far as in plane flexural resistance is concerned; but if you were to consider
the shear resistance, the model that is most appropriate for calculating the in plane shear
resistance of confined masonry constructions is the shear strength model developed by
Tomazevic and Klemenc. In this particular model, we are looking at additional
contribution to axial compressive stress coming from the interaction between the tie
element and the wall panel.
So, when the wall is subjected to gravity plus lateral forces, there are compressive
stresses generated due to the gravity force; but there is an additional compressive force
and stress generated in a cross section due to the confinement and the interaction
between the tie column and the wall. So, we really looking at this portion, you have the
compressive stresses coming from the gravity forces; but due to the interaction between
the tie column and the wall, you have additional compressive stresses which are
generated.
And, if an estimate of these additional compressive stresses can be made and used in the
estimate of the shear strength of the masonry wall; you are implicitly accounting for the
effect of the interactions. So, that is the basis of this approach; here Ni is the additional
compression force that we are looking at, which is offering resistance to overturning, that
confining elements are offering resistance to overturning.
So, what is happening is, the masonry wall should actually be overturning; but you have
a confining element and that confining element is going to increase the compression at
647
the compressed toe. You are accounting for that and accounting for that, you are
implicitly bringing in the contribution of the confining element in the improvement of
the shear capacity of the masonry wall. So, here we are saying that the net, the total
compressive stress comes from two contributions. One is due to the gravity forces, and
the other is due to the interaction; v is due to the vertically align gravity forces and i is
due to the interaction itself.
So, compressive stress in masonry due to the vertical load is 0,v and 0 ,i is the
additional compressive stress in masonry due to the interaction forces. And these
interaction forces, actually the basis for these interaction forces come from studies which
are based on infill panel, masonry infill panel and RC column element interaction. And
so, it is an analogy and the analytical formulation borrows from studies on infilled RC
frames and their shear capacity itself.
So, in this calculation we are really looking at, if it is possible to analytically, if it is

possible to estimate how much Ni can be, and then use that in the estimate of total
compressive stress; and then go back to one of our shear strength models for
unreinforced masonry, and estimate the strength of the confined masonry wall. So, you
see an expression, where a geometrical parameter is introduced; a further geometrical
parameter is introduced.
648
And this takes into account how much of the interaction force is to be expected, because
of the shape of the wall itself. Because if you have a significantly large wall in terms of it
is length, so if you look at a h/l ratio; and if it is a very squat wall and you do not have
sufficient number of confining elements, the effect of the interaction is going to be
lesser. If you were to provide significant number of confining elements, the interaction
forces should increase.
So, it is link directly to the overall shape and you have a geometrical parameter that
comes into this estimate which takes into account what this value should be. So, based on
calibrations with experimental results this value is taken as 5/4. So, 0 = 0,v + 0,i ;
Nw
where 0 ,v = . And the other force is what we need to estimate, which is Ni /A w; this
Aw
Ni itself is established from the lateral force.
The lateral force acting on the wall, because it is based on how much lateral forces acting
on the wall that you get the confinement effect generated.
h n
Ni = H =H w
l 
So, looking at the final form of the expression by bringing this consideration; so, what
we really doing is, in our earlier theory in the third module we will looking at, how the
649
shear strength of a masonry wall can be estimated. And we have arrived at expressions
that for diagonal tension failure mechanism, we know what will be the closed form
solution for the ultimate shear strength of the masonry wall. So, here in the previous
expression we would have put lt here; but and replacing that with Aw which is the area of
cross section of the wall.
So, this is a familiar expression where ftu is the tensile strength of the referential or
conventional tensile strength of masonry. So, this is the expression for ultimate shear
force, when a diagonal tension mechanism is occurring. So, we use that as the basis of
the shear strength; but then enhance this, because you have 0 here and this 0 can now
be replaced with not only that coming from compressive stress due to the vertical load,
but also due to the interaction force.
Nw 1  Hn w 
0 = +  
Aw Aw   
So, what we merely do is, 0 which has these new expression, this additional component
comes in and, is introduced into the original unreinforced masonry shear strength
formulation and with the series of adjustments and removing H from the right hand side,
we get an expression for the shear force of a confined masonry wall based on the same
parameters ftu, area of the wall and the estimate Nw which is the part attributed to the
gravity forces. b is the width of the wall, there is another parameter C I which is brought
2 b
in, which is nothing but .
h
So, this is simplification alpha is the parameter that we talked about earlier and adopted
as 5/4. And, this is understood as the interaction coefficient, this is the one that actually
accounts for this contribution. Interaction coefficient that takes into account the
distribution of interaction forces along the entire, along the length of the wall where
interaction effects come into play. It is the interaction coefficient which takes into
account, the distribution of interaction forces and distribution of shear stresses along the
horizontal wall cross section itself
So, this helps us estimate one component of the shear strength of the confined masonry
wall, which comes because of this confinement.
650
There is another contribution which is actually due to dowel action. So, if you look at the
confining elements at these two locations, these have steel reinforcement; and as there is
shear deformation in the wall, they will be dowel action of the steel reinforcement. So, it
is found to be not a negligible contribution; and therefore, the total shear strength of the
confined masonry wall is the summation of a contribution coming due to the confined
unreinforced masonry wall and that coming due to the dowel action.
So, dowel action is considered in the bars of the confining elements. So, depending on
the number of reinforcing bars that are present in the confining element; this again comes
from studies on reinforced masonry walls with vertical and horizontal reinforcements.
And an analytical formulation that was developed for the contribution due to doweling
action in a reinforced masonry wall with distributed vertical reinforcement.
Priestley and Bridgeman’s work is what at it feeds into and basically you get an estimate
of what this contribution is. Each vertical reinforcing bar is expected to give that as a
contribution the value of 0.06d2rv ; which is the diameter of the vertical reinforcing bar
into square root of the compressive strength of the grout and the compressive strength
and the tensile strength of the steel itself.
So, you see that it is based on the overall mechanics of the dowel action and the
distributed bending moment that you will get due to the contact forces between the
dowel and the grout itself. And this is multiplied by the number of reinforcing bars that
651
you have in the cross section. So, finally, the total shear resistance of the confined
masonry wall is calculated as the summation of the earlier calculation that we made, to
understand what is the contribution to shear strength of the confining element and then
what is the contribution coming from dowel action.
So, together we will arrive at the overall shear resistance of the confined masonry wall,
which is expected to be higher than the unreinforced masonry wall shear strength itself.
With that I conclude the discussion on the behavior of confined masonry constructions. I
have discussed prescriptions that are mandated by the national building code for
construction of confined masonry constructions. But if you were to look at rigorous
approach by estimating the shear capacity and in plane bending resistance; then there are
simple analytical and semi empirical calculations based on mechanics that you can use to
be to make those checks.
And it is demonstrated by several experimental studies, and even actual earthquakes,

including large earthquakes in countries like Chile; that this is a typology that is
significantly simple to execute, you do not need heavy engineering input, but gives
extremely good performance in large earthquakes. So, with that I conclude this part,
which is the second special topic that I am addressing within module 5.
Thank you.
652
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 05
Lecture - 37
Special Topics – Masonry Infill in RC Frames
Good morning, we are in the last of the modules of this course. These are special topics
that we will examine within this, the last module, the last set of lectures. And the first
one in the Special Topics is an examination of Masonry Infill Panels and these are
typically within reinforced concrete framed structures. So, since a vast quantity of
masonry is today being used as infill panels in reinforced concrete constructions, framed
constructions, it is useful to understand the behaviour of the masonry infill, particularly
in relation to the frame itself. And the interest again is not necessarily from a gravity
design point of view, but from earthquake effects on reinforced concrete frames, and the
interactions that the masonry panel will have with reinforced concrete frames.
So, today we will look at the problem of infill interaction with the reinforced concrete
frame and whether we should be considering the modelling of the panel along with the
reinforced concrete frame. And, if we were not to be considering this interaction what
could be the implications of that sort of a modelling assumption. And again, what are
possible ways of damage limitation in infill, masonry infill panels.
653
So, the focus as I said is primarily from the earthquake response of reinforced concrete
frames. The role of the infill is going to examined as far as the earthquake response of a
reinforced concrete frame is concerned. But the standard practice is to consider this as a
non-structural element, and standard practice has been to considered this as a non-
structural element.
And use the role played by the infill only in terms of the mass modelling. That is the
mass of the infill panel is considered in the calculations of the seismic weight. And in the
model, this might be considered as a line load acting on the beams but very rarely was
this considered to be a structural part of the reinforced concrete frame.
However, the earthquake does not distinguish between a structural component and non-
structural component. There is always an effect due to the earthquake and every element
in a structure. And these tend to start interacting with the resisting, lateral load resisting
element which is the frame and that is where the problem arises.
So, in standard design, this is not considered to be a part of the structural system, which
is fair because we do not expect the infill panel to be a part of the load resisting system,
the lateral load resisting system. So, from that perspective not considering this as a
structural element within the structural design is meaningful; however, there are issues
654
that come because of the possible interaction that is what we are really interested in. So,
there is a mechanical interaction of the infill panels with the structure itself.
Now, you can have different scenarios, there could be a favorable outcome of this
interaction. But there could also be an unfavorable outcome of the interaction, which
means that at the global structural response to earthquakes, you could have a role that
this infill is playing to make the seismic behavior desirable or undesirable. And, this you
can compare with a bare reinforced concrete frame and understand if the effect is going
to be a favorable effect or an unfavorable effect.
So, it is important to understand that there can be a global interaction; an effect that is
occurring at the global level by the interaction of the infill panel with the structure. And
this interaction could lead to a favorable condition or could lead to an unfavorable
condition, but that again depends on a set of parameters which we will also examine.
You can have because of the interaction of the infill panel with the frame, with the
reinforced concrete frame; you can have local effects as well. Local adverse effects of
the interaction which actually can cause not only localized damage in the panel, but also
can cause localized damage in this frame, which is the lateral load resisting element. So,
that interaction causing local effects in the panel can have a repercussion on brittle
failure mechanisms in the lateral load resisting elements of the reinforced concrete frame
itself.
So, infill panels can get damaged right, infill panels can get damaged so, the mechanism
of damage of the infill panel needs to be understood. And this damage is occurring
because of the interaction of the frame with the infill panel and particularly because the
deformations in the infill panel and the deformations in the frame are not similar. When
the deformations are dissimilar, at a certain point the infill panel will start interacting
with the frame.
And that is where the deformation is really the key to understand when interaction begins
and will you have a desirable interaction or will you have an undesirable effect of the
interaction. Therefore, it is also since we are looking at deformation; different stages of
deformation would mean different levels of damage can be identified. So, damaged limit
states have to be identified.
655
So, if you look at the ultimate limit state of the damage in a masonry panel. The masonry
panel would have failed given a certain mechanism; can collapse and get expelled from
the frame and this can be a further problem which is a falling hazard. So, at ultimate if
the panel is completely failed and is no longer confined within the frame, you have an
additional problem of expulsion of the panel which can be a potential falling hazard.
So, the damage to infill panels needs to be understood within the context of deformation
demand which will have different effects in the panel, and in the reinforced concrete
frame damage limit states have to be identified. And in the ultimate situation failure of
the panel and collapse of the panel, expulsion from the frame is a potential falling hazard
which can cause a life safety situation.
So, the general way in which the panel is expected to behave, when there is a lateral
deformation of the frame is by the consideration of an equivalent strut behavior. So, let
us assume a reinforced concrete frame made out of the column and the beams within one
panel. Expected to deform due to the effects of the lateral force, the infill panel, masonry
infill panel which is stiffer because of the in-plane effect that you are looking at, will
have lower deformations compared to the reinforced concrete frame, you can consider
the bare frame.
656
These deformations; because these deformations are different, you will have a increase in
the compression that will occur across a compression strut that can form. And this is the
resisting mechanism once the interaction between the frame and the panel starts getting
activated. So, it is possible to examine the interaction between the frame and the panel in
the form of an equivalent compression strut that starts forming and starts creating an
additional resisting mechanism within the reinforced concrete moment resisting frame.
Now, you might ask what about the other diagonal? The other diagonal when there is a
lateral deformation in the reinforced concrete frame is in tension; however, you are
looking at an unreinforced masonry panel. And therefore, tensile resistance is far lower
than the compression resistance of the masonry panel. And hence the interaction and the
effect that comes into the lateral resistance of the frame is more meaningful when
considered in terms of the compression strut.
So, what basically happens is, if you where to look at every panel with an equivalent
strut it has a stiffening effect on the bare frame. So, if you were to look at your
reinforced concrete moment resisting frame as a bare frame, that bare frame is now going
to be stiffened due to the interaction of the masonry panels sitting within these frames
and the frame itself. So, there is a lateral stiffening effect that is definitely occurring.
What about the panel itself? The panel itself as I said can have different damage limit
states, we have seen how a masonry panel, an unreinforced masonry panel, when
subjected to lateral forces can have different failure mechanisms; depending on the
aspect ratios, depending on the overall geometry and aspect ratios and the different
material strengths be it the compressive strength of masonry of the joint shear strength or
the tensile strength of masonry itself.
So, similarly different failure mechanisms can be expected in the infill panel which is
really an in-plane shear wall; however, sitting within a frame. So, you can expect sliding
failure along the bed joints, you can expect diagonal cracking failure as we have seen
diagonal tension failure in masonry shear wall. Or you could even have a flexure
controlled mechanism, where you have the corners where the compression strut is fully
formed; the corners of the compression strut can actually crush; fail in masonry
compression and that could be another mechanism.
657
However, this does not happen independently, this happens within the confinement of
the frame. And therefore, there is an immediate effect of the failure mechanism or the
different deformation limit states on the frame itself; so it is these two together that we
have to actually examine.
So, if you look at typical failure mechanisms, you have a picture here; you can see that in
a multistoried reinforced concrete frame. The infill panel has actually reached its
ultimate; post ultimate with continued shaking you actually have a falling hazard which
is another important problem that occurs due to the interaction itself. Here again, you can
see that an infill is damaged, but then the size of the infill that is damaged is actually
going to be affected by the size of openings as well.
So, you might have infill panels which are punctured with openings. So, one has to look
at what happens when you have a blank panel, blank masonry panel or a masonry panel
which is then provided with these openings. So, immediately you would understand that
the equivalent strut that can form in a blank panel can be altered with the presence of an
opening. However, depending on the geometry of the panel, a partial strut can still form
given the position and the size of the opening itself, ok.
658
If the lateral load resisting system; in this case, the moment resisting frame, reinforced
concrete frame does not have adequate engineered resistance, right. We are talking about
earthquake resistance, so this is not designed to resist lateral forces. So, it is a gravity
frame and in many cases reinforced concrete frames even in seismic areas are defined as
gravity frames because of non-adherence to the code or because many of these structures
were constructed before the code actually had specific seismic design guidelines.
So, let us assume a structure does not have the adequate engineered earthquake
resistance, but if the infill panel is well confined within the frame, ok, then you could
actually have a beneficial effect coming from the infill and the frame interaction. So, the
infill panels as I said infill panel is basically an in-plane shear wall considered in the in-
plane direction, this has significant stiffness in comparison to the bare frame. And
therefore, the infill panel can actually reduce the seismic deformations, the lateral
deformation demands at the story and member because of the large in-plane stiffness.
So, it has a lateral stiffening effect to begin with. It can actually also increase the lateral
load resistance, lateral force resistance because, the panel is a masonry panel it is a shear
wall. And, it can actually because of its in plane strength enhance the in-plane resistance
of the frame itself in the direction that you are considering in the direction which is with
the panel being in the in-plane loading condition.
659
So, there is an effect in lateral stiffening, but there is also beneficial effect in terms of
additional in-plane strength available to the frame. But, these have not been considered
when the structure is being designed considering only the gravity loads. So, it is a gravity
designed frame; these effects have not been considered and if the infill is well confined
then you can actually have a beneficial effect.
And overall with minimum damage occurring in the infill panel, the panel actually
contributes to energy dissipation and the overall the global energy dissipation of the
reinforced concrete frame with the infill panel is now acting beneficially for the overall
structure under the earthquake action. But the problem comes, when you have good
quality infill panels, panels which are constructed well strong in comparison to the lateral
strength of the frame itself.
On the other hand, you might have poorly constructed infill panels with poor quality
bricks or poor quality material; it could be fly ash bricks or any other type of unit. Now,
if the strength of the panel is significantly low and workmanship is poor then, the panel
starts getting damaged and participates in global energy dissipation and in a way will
start protecting the frame.
However, if you have a frame which is not designed adequately for earthquake effect and
if you have a panel which is super strong, a panel which is built using strong units then,
damage will be limited in the panel and they will be an effect because of the interaction
on the frame and the inadequately designed frame can fail.
So, this is where I was talking about the interaction can lead to a favorable effect or an
unfavorable effect. What typically happens in western contexts, where frame is not
designed for earthquakes, but because of good quality units available and workmanship
being good. You will have a strong panel interacting with the frame leading to failure of
the frame. So, that is an unfavorable effect.
In the Indian context; often we have seen that since the quality of bricks is typically poor
and workmanship is also poor in areas in the rural areas, in the semi urban areas, where
construction procedures are not thorough. The frame is very often protected by the
damage occurring in the infill panels and there is a dissipation that comes from the panel
which then in a way protects the overall frame. So, that is the Indian context it has been
660
well documented in several of the recent earthquakes in the last few decades that the bare
frame. If the bare frame did not have, if the frame did not have infills, infill panels it
could have failed.
But, the presence of the infill actually limits the damage in the structure to non-structural
damage, which is damaged in the infills and the frame has survived. And we are talking
of frames which are not designed seismically. So, this is a scenario, which is particularly
not only in India, but in several of the developing countries this scenario is observed;
Turkey for example, with poorly engineered or non-engineered reinforced concrete
constructions.
So, the favorable and unfavorable is conditions come from in non-designed frames, what
is the quality of the units and what is the quality of the workmanship itself, ok.
So, when there is a relatively large contribution of the masonry infill to the lateral
strength or stiffness of the frame itself; what could happen is that, the infill panel would
override the seismic design; the reinforced concrete moment resisting frame could be
designed seismically. But, if the interaction is not considered, if the additional effect of
interaction is not considered then, these strong panels would then lead to a condition
where the demand on the reinforced concrete frame is higher than what was expected as
a bare frame.
661
And you will have inelastic deformation that will start spreading through the structure,
throughout the structure which was not expected because your modeling and analysis
was based on a bare frame. So, even if seismic design were to be considered in a moment
resisting frame, if the interaction is not considered. And if you have strong infill panels,
the problem is the demand will increase, because the stiffnesses are changing. And it can
cause inelasticity to spread in the moment resisting frame.
So, these local effects can occur, we saw the possible failure mechanisms in the infill
panels it could be sliding, it could be diagonal cracking, it could be corner crushing. And
those localized mechanisms, if the panel were to be taken to that state of failure, it could
cause additional shear forces in the frame which can cause brittle failure mechanisms in
the columns which is then undesirable in the overall, in the global behavior itself.
And again, if you have panels which are let us say failing once they reach the ultimate
are completely lost; then the distribution of stiffness in the structure suddenly changes.
You might have one story, which is then suddenly becoming a soft story. Whereas, the
other stories continue to have the infill panels you can have a sudden soft story failure
getting triggered in the seismically designed moment resisting frame, so that is again a
serious problem.
Again, if you are designing the moment resisting frame as a bare frame and have not
considered a non-uniform distribution of the infill panels in different parts of the
building, that has an effect in terms of additional torsional forces coming in. And you can
have concentration of damage in the flexible site of the structure, where infill panels are
sparse. So, this is a problem because of non-consideration of interaction effects in
seismically design moment resisting frames considered as bare frames.
662
Let us look at the global effects of the frame infill interaction because of an irregular
distribution of infill panels in plan. You might have regular distribution that could be one
case, but often you can even have an irregular distribution of infill panels in plan.
So, what is really happening is, you get additional torsional forces coming in because
there can be a shift in the center of rigidity to the center of stiffness that we talked about
and then the deformation demand starts becoming non-uniform. The stiffer side getting
smaller deformation, the more flexible side getting larger deformations and damage
concentration happening in regions where infill panels are not adequately provided.
What about in height? You could have a similar situation that let us say you have the
ground story which is meant for parking and it is a bare frame literally in the ground
story. Whereas, as you go to the upper stories of residential buildings, commercial
complexes, you have a large number of infill panels. Now, the stiffness of the upper
stories is very different from the stiffness of the ground story and unless this is
considered in the lateral force design.
Then you have an irregular distribution of stiffness is in elevation and can trigger soft
story mechanisms or the failure mechanisms that are typically seen with the open ground
story as you can see in these pictures. You can see that the upper stories have almost
survive without any non-linearity, any inelasticity. Simply because there is a certain
663
uniformity and higher stiffness in those stories whereas, the weakness is in the region
where it is a bare frame action and not the interaction that is available because of the
presence of the panel itself.
For all you know presence of the panel in the basement or in the ground story, would
have actually saved the structure. And this is what I was mentioning in the earlier slide
that it has been documented in Indian earthquakes that infill frames can actually; say
infill panels can actually save the structure under earthquake actions, ok.
What are the local effects of frame infill interaction and the how does this then have a
role to play on the additional demands coming onto the framing elements. Now, if there
is a failure in the panel, let us consider a first failure mechanism where the panel is
failing due to shear sliding, right. We consider shear sliding typically to occur in a
masonry wall, in a masonry shear wall unreinforced masonry shear wall at the ground at
the lower most courses, right. It can happen at the lowest course or one of the lower
courses.
However, here because of the deformation of the panel and the deformation of the frame
and the contact pressure typically you should expect the shear sliding to occur that mid
height. But, then when shear sliding occurs at mid height, then you have the shear force
and the shear deformation of the panel, causing at the mid height of the column itself
additional forces which can cause the formation of a plastic hinge, which is because of
664
the sudden increase in deformation demand at that zone. Plastic hinge can form and the
the column height is now one half and the shear demand on one half height of a column
suddenly increases and unless this interaction has been considered, you can have shear
failure occurring in the short column due to the way the panel fails.
So, this mechanism is occurring because of the failure mode in the panel, failure mode in
the panel is creating the effect of shortening the column. And in a shortened column the
shear demand is augmented and unless it is accounting for the interaction, you can have
premature shear failure in the column. So, this sort of a failure mechanism, what you see
here is due to the contact pressure.
The figure on the left, the contact pressure is established and increased deformation to
the frame is occurring after sliding failure of the panel itself. The figure on the left is
when an effective strut is formed, you have contact of the infill panel with the reinforced
concrete column. Here the contact is occurring close to the beam column joint and this
additional shear force that comes in at this zone.
If the reinforced concrete column is not adequately designed to have necessary links
necessary ties in that zone adequate number of ties in that zone can cause shear failure in
the reinforced concrete column itself. So, you can see that it is; this transfer of shear
forces due to contact pressures that has increased the shear demand on the panel it’s the
same in both the cases; even in the case of the where the panel is failing by shear sliding.
665
In several situations to provide ventilators or to provide windows, you might have a
partial infill. Again, the partial infill has the, has also the effect of creating a short
column or a captive column. In the previous case, the failure of the infill panel created
the short column effect or the deformation could cause, because of an effective strut,
contact pressures at the corners of the column and cause failure in the reinforced
concrete column in the corners due to shear failure.
In this case the panel itself, to begin with is of a geometry, because of the openings
creating a short column effect in the reinforced concrete frame. So, if you were to
consider bare columns, bare frame versus a frame which has a partial infill there are
additional moments coming at these critical zones. Like the sliding shear failure that you
saw earlier, you can see that additional shear forces in that reduced height column, where
the opening is going to cause shear failure unless you have accounted for this and
provided ties in that region.
So, you can see that presence of different height infills across the reinforced concrete
frame that is being considered; you can see the case one below we are sort of a sliding
failure has initiated, whereas in the other one you already have a partial height infill. So,
these because of the interaction create additional shear forces in the reinforced concrete
column. You can see the formation of the plastic hinge here in the reinforced concrete
column itself; you can see the shear failure that is caused because of the interaction with
the infill at the corner.
666
Out of plane expulsion of infill panels, let us say the predominant direction of shaking is
not aligned with the in-plane axis, along the longitudinal axis of the infill panels; if the
shaking is in the other direction, then you can get expulsion of the infill panel. And now
if the infill panel is not well confined, you can get expulsion. You can also get expulsion
due to the random nature of shaking; infill panel gets damaged and then the damaged
infill panel which is no longer confined can also fail in out of plane direction.
In this particular case, you can see how infill panels have been completely pushed out
that they have not been well confined within the frame could be one of the reasons. In
multistoried structures, you can imagine falling panel from a three or four story, five
story structure is going to be a serious life safety hazard.
667
In this context we have actually seen, how arching action, we have arching action in
masonry earlier and I did mention that, particularly with respect to infill frames, infill
panels in reinforced concrete frames, this is a beneficial mechanism and needs to be
considered. So, arching action you are talking of the infill panel trying to deform and fall
outwards deform and fail in the out of plane direction. But, if arching action is available
then the resistance of the infill panel to the out of plane action is significant.
So, we are earlier lectures we were talking of non-moving supports, here the reinforced
concrete frame can be considered to be the rigid support with respect to the infill panel.
And you have also seen how considering arching action, significantly increases the out
of plane capacity of a wall as against the conventional bending analysis in the out of
plane direction.
So, just to recollect; assuming that there is no gap; that the workmanship or and the
design is such that there is no gap between the infill panel and the wall, which is the infill
panel in the out of plane direction. Then it is possible to establish what the resistance is
the out of plane resistance being M u which is which can be estimated based on estimate
of the clamping force and the rise of the arch that can form. So, Pu ru will give you the
out of plane resistance.
And we have made some simple geometrical calculations to arrive at the estimate of this
arch in our earlier slides. So, I am just just summarizing it and typically when the l/t ratio
the length to thickness ratio, here we are considering the horizontal bending. If the
668
slenderness ratio is less than 25 and as long as we are assuming small deflections these
formulations are acceptable.
So, the rise of the arch we have estimated to be about 93 percent of the thickness of the
wall itself and that significantly increases the out of plane capacity of the infill panel
with respect to non-moving supports. If the gap is not present, we are really considering
rigid arching mechanisms.
However, if you actually have a gap, if you have a gap then we have seen from geometry
that if you want this arching action to be available. There is a limitation geometrical
limitation on what the gap should be; we have seen that as well. And then we can
estimate what this Δg should be to close the gap. Here we are assuming that g/2 and
g/2 is the size of the gap on the two ends of the panel itself.
So, primarily by looking at the geometry, where αt is a percentage of the total thickness,
where the clamping force is actually acting and this αt is to consider some amount of
softening that can occur in the masonry due to the additional compression. If you were to
consider the similar triangles in this case, we can actually write down an estimate of
what; how much of deformation of the panel is essential Δg in this case such that, the gap
is closed and arching action can actually be made use of.
669
So, an estimate of Δg can be made as gL/4αt. αt here we have been considering about 90
percent of the total thickness itself.
Now, the other thing that can happen is they can be axial shortening, if there is
significant deformation, they can be axial shortening due to compression. And then you
can look at the deflection itself being treated as a gap that is forming right, that is what
will happen. Let us say to begin with there was no gap, but then with the wall deforming
and if the out of plane deflections are significant, then there will be axial
shortening which means a gap can form and within the limits of what that formation of
the gap is going to reduce the effectiveness of the out of plane resistance itself. And
when the gap exceeds the allowed geometrical limit, you will have no longer resistance
of the infill panel in the out of plane direction and that is when you get expulsion of the
masonry panel itself.
Recent studies and this is something that has caught the attention of several researchers
worldwide which is, it is important to limit the damage in the infill panel. Particularly,
because of the hazard of a panel getting expelled from a masonry, from a reinforced
concrete frame. So, if the panel can be retained within the reinforced concrete frame then
certain limit states can be achieved particularly, the life safety limit state against falling
hazards.
670
So, recent works have looked at bringing in construction detailing to limit infill damage.
Now, I would like to mention that constructions in India, in reinforced concrete frames,
if you look at CPWD manuals, this is a detail which has been around for 50-60 years
now. Infill panels are constructed with a small RC band; a small RC band at every one
meter height ok. And these RC bands are sitting within the infill panel.
Now this is meant to limit the out of plane deformation of the infill panels. Actually,
prevents the expulsion of the infill panel in seismic areas. So, there has been, there are
detailing requirements which actually take into account damage limitation and infill
panels. There are some recent procedures or recent detailing requirements which try to
limit the damage in the out of plane direction in the infill panel. So, wire mesh is placed
in the plaster and this can be a steel or a plastic wire mesh with lot of these geogrids
available today; it is possible to have rather thin joint.
So, steel or plastic wire mesh is placed in the plaster and you connect it across the entire
thickness of the wall panel. Basically, what is going to do is, the wall is now, the panel is
now divided into smaller sub panels within which the strut will develop. So, each of
those have to fail for further, I mean to reach the ultimate limit state and further
expulsion to occur. So, by splitting these into sub panels, the capacity of the infill also
can be enhanced.
So, other examples are trusses being placed in the bed joint. These are all in the infill
panel; these are all non-structural elements. There were also been new innovative designs
where the panel starts working as sliding sub panels, you have some energy dissipation
that is available in the joints.
So, these help in energy dissipation, limit the damage occurring to the infill panel. And
hence you have enhanced behavior this is one recent work where you actually have this
sliding joint capable of dissipating some energy. But, the whole idea is to work on sub
panels you are not having the large masonry panel which transfer significant forces to the
contact pressures with the reinforced concrete frame. By breaking it down to sub panels
the contact points then transmit smaller pressures to the reinforced concrete frame and
thereby you protect the reinforced concrete frame as well, ok.
671
The final thing that I would like to look at is, it is required that these infill walls, infill
panels are considered in the seismic design. Because, you have seen the possible effect
infill panels can have on the lateral load resisting system in the case of a moment
resisting frame itself. This is an area which is received adequate research focus, but is a
subject which has a significant amount of uncertainties. Because, there are several
parameters that govern the behavior of an infill panel and then its interaction with a
reinforced concrete frame.
Hence, you have a number of approaches available to model infill panels, and the several
studies look at comparing these many of them are empirical, many of them are semi
analytical or semi empirical. So, those of you are interested in looking at understanding
how infill panels can be modeled. You should be prepared look at a very large body of
research in the subject both experimental and analytical.
One of the most cited and the most used with respect to codes, with respect to
international codes is a formulation by Mainstone in 1971; however, this formulation has
then been modified by several successive works, but also simplified by code
formulations. The IS code formulation follows a similar; the IS code, IS 1893 part one
2016 version gives one method by which an equivalent strut can be modeled in the frame
modeling. And the calculations which can be adopted to arrive at the width of the
equivalent strut is based on the Mainstone formulation.
672
So, the equivalent strut, strut that we are talking about is with the deformation of the
panel; masonry panel being lesser because it is stiffer than the framing element. You will
have partial contact, you will not have full contact of the panel with the frame you can
see that there is joint opening; there is joint opening that is occurring here between the
panel and the frame. The contact, the effective contact is limited to an equivalent strut is
limited to a strut a compression strut that forms, which means the whole panel is not
resisting, but it is only an equivalent strut of the panel it is only a partial strut of the
panel.
Now, effort has been dedicated to model this interaction between the frame and the
masonry panel using this equivalent strut. So, if the size of the equivalent strut
particularly the width of the strut can be established, then you can model the moment
resisting frame with additional braces, whose cross sectional dimensions come from the
equivalent width of the strut and the thickness equal to the thickness of the panel itself,
right.
So, this is basically what the approach is, important parameters here are definitely the
aspect ratios the wall. What is the, is the panel actually having a minimum slenderness
ratio. And then slenderness ratios are between 12 and 20 we are comfortable that it can
give significant stiffening effect and the length of the strut the length of the strut is taken
as the length of the diagonal itself.
So, dm is the length of the diagonal that you talking about and that is the effective length
of the strut, w is the width of the strut, which is what is established based on mechanics
and based on experimental tests and observations from experimental tests. So,
Mainstone’s work again is to be able to arrive at the width of this equivalence strut. And
then you can use this width of the equivalent strut to model and additional brace, which
has a cross-sectional dimension w/t which is the thickness of the masonry panel itself.
So, if the wall thickness, which is the thickness of the masonry panel is tm and elastic
modulus of the masonry can be estimated as E m; it could be 550 f’m if you do not have
the actual modulus of elasticity of the masonry. Then considering the angle of the strut
with respect to the frame θ, the width of the panel can be written down semi-empirically.
Where λh is actually the lateral stiffness of the panel, which is the critical element; the
lateral stiffness of the panel which is a contribution to the interaction itself.
673
So, λh is then estimated; lambda h is then it estimated based on the relative stiffness’s Em
to Ec, where Ec is the modulus of elasticity of concrete E m is the modulus of elasticity of
the masonry. And this is arrived at based on observations of the mechanical behavior and
also experimental results. In case they estimate of the modulus of elasticity, there are as I
said several versions of these formulations; some of them become very rigorous, some of
them can actually give you an estimate of the modulus of elasticity, effective models of
elasticity that must be considered depending on the geometry of the panel.
And the modulus of elasticity of the panel considered in an angle with respect to theta at
theta itself can be estimated from the modulus of elasticity of masonry in the horizontal
and vertical direction. So, these are additional steps that are available to make the model
more rigorous and match experimental results. The modulus of elasticity of masonry in
two directions can be different. And if you were to look at the behavior of the strut, then
you are interested in compression along the strut and the modulus elasticity needs to be
estimated based on what the angle θ is.
So, there are formulations there are specific details of these formulations. The simplified
version of this is what the IS code actually has. When you do not have an estimate of the
models of elasticity along in the vertical direction and the horizontal direction of
masonry depending on the bed joint orientation, then simplified versions are available;
where simple simpler that available where you can actually use E m as 550f’m.
Or in this case it is also been seen that the width of this strut is typically between 10 to
20 percent of the length of the strut within limits of the aspect ratio of the wall itself. So,
most importantly it is about λh; λh is the effective lateral stiffness of the panel arrived at
considering the masonry modulus of elasticity, its relation to the concrete modulus of
elasticity and the angle that the strut makes with the frame itself.
674
There have been other studies that looked at; they have looked at the earlier study the
earlier expression was to arrive at a width of the equivalent strut. So, that you then go to
your model and you can actually model the interaction using braces in the design itself in
the model of the reinforced concrete moment resisting frame itself.
So, therefore, that was more from a stiffness point of view. In terms of strength, the
strength of the infill panels; the axial strength of the infill panel is estimated based, you
are looking at the equivalent strut. And you want to know, what is the force at which this
equivalent strut is going to fail? So, you are interested in looking at the failure in the
infill panel in shear and then correspondingly estimate based on the angle theta what the
failure force of the panel itself is. So, the in-plane strength of the infill panel can be
estimated.
Now, V u is the ultimate shear force in the panel which is then associated to the failure
mechanism. It could be sliding shear failure, it could be diagonal cracking failure or it
could be a flexural failure mechanism with the ends failing in masonry compression. So,
again there are different formulations available to be able to arrive at the in-plane
strength of the infill panel. As I said this depends on the aspect ratio.
Aspect ratio of the wall panel and different mechanisms can form depending on the
aspect ratio, which is true even for unconfined load bearing masonry shear wall itself.
So, one of the works that you could go back to estimate strength of the infill panel is by
675
Bertoldi, where the factors that you see K 1 and K 2 have been arrived at calibrated from
experimental results of different panel sizes.
So, the strength of the infill wall panel in this strength criterion, that you looking at;
different strengths of the infill panel are worked out based on the type of failure
mechanism that you see. So, depending on whether the panel has failed by compression
failure, at the center of the panel you can have the strut failing in compression at the
center. Or you can have the strut failing due to compression because of contact at the
corners, or you could have sliding shear failure or you could have a diagonal tension
failure as you have seen earlier.
So, these formulations are formulations which are based on an understanding of how the
panel is failing, but by interactions with the frame itself. So, there are works which can
help you arrive at semi empirically estimating in plane strengths. And in plane stiffnesses
which can contribute to modeling the interaction of the panel with the frame in your
seismic analysis and design of reinforced concrete frames.
So, this is a special topic, I have not gone into details of formulations, but is intended to
give you an idea of what considering the interaction or not concerned considering the
interaction can lead to and possible ways of looking at strength and stiffness modeling of
the panels themselves, when you are designing frames, moment resisting frames for
seismic resistance. I’ll stop here and take questions if there are any.
676
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 05
Lecture - 38
Special Topics – Assessment of Existing Masonry Structures
Good morning, we will look at the last of the topics for this course and that is one of the
Special Topics, the third of the special topics which will focus on Assessment of Existing
Buildings; Existing Masonry Structures. And the key reason for looking at assessment of
existing masonry structures is primarily the very large stock of existing masonry
structures that a country like India has; that while there may be opportunities for design
of masonry structures in your career as a structural engineer, very often you might
encounter the problem of structural assessment, retrofit, extension of masonry buildings
which are existing facilities. And therefore, in the next three lectures including today's,
we will look at a basic framework for structural assessment; a quantitative approach to
structural assessment of existing masonry structures.
So, when does an existing building require structural assessment? This can be
necessitated due to different situations. Typically, we are looking at when an existing
building requires a structural audit to be performed right. It may be because of a new
677
tenant moving into the building, going to take over the building as a licensee; that a
company requires that the safety audit of a building be carried out.
So, when a structural audit is required it is essential that a quantitative structural

assessment of the existing building particularly its structural safety considering the use to
which it is being, its proposed use and also the existing loads as per the codes that are in
rigor.
So, often you will be called to do a structural assessment in the context of doing an audit;
a structural audit of an existing building. And here the focus is primarily on structural
safety, you are establishing if the existing facility given the number of years it has
already been in service, does it have the essential structural safety to be put to use for a
new purpose or for continuing the use of the building itself.
There are several situations where existing infrastructure, this is the second situation
where I would think structural assessment becomes fundamental, when an existing
infrastructure is being extended. These could here the reference is primarily to vertical
extensions, when you are doing lateral expansions, when you are doing horizontal
expansions typically, we would going for a construction joint and ensure that the old
structure and the new structure do not directly interact with each other.
And, there are requirements of how much gap you must actually leave and what detailing
you must do between an old part and the new expansion in the structure. Whereas, when
you have vertical extensions of existing buildings, then you would have to check
quantitatively the adequacy of the existing structural system for the new loads that you
are going to design this structure for.
So, the second situation would be when you have vertical expansions and adequacy of
the existing structural system would have to be checked. The third situation is often
encountered again, is when safety check is required to a new core dual requirement,
right. A classical example that I can give you is a city like Chennai, which was till 2002
in seismic zone 2, moves in 2002 to seismic zone 3. Which would mean that the
earthquake demand prescribed by the code is now different, seismic zone 2 as per the
original code requirement pre 2002 for zone 2 you do not have to do a seismic design,
but, was zone 3 seismic design is mandatory.
678
So, you are looking at existing buildings which have been designed in the pre 2002
regime where seismic design might not have been addressed at all. So, these are all
gravity frames, therefore these buildings would actually fall short of requirements of
earthquake safety. Now, that is true for public buildings and that is true for private
buildings. So, it starts becoming the prerogative of the public authorities or the private
owners to want to ensure compliance of the existing facility to the new code requirement.
For public buildings it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that important
public facilities- schools, public buildings are all catering to the new code requirements
and therefore, it might require some strengthening and retrofit. So, that is the third
situation in which you are going to require a quantitative structural audit. It is very rarely
that code, particularly structural codes would require that the code prescriptions are
applicable retrospectively. It very rarely happens and it is not something that is
practically feasible that you go and fix all existing buildings which have not been
designed as per code requirements to the new code prescription.
So, this is typically not done, but when you are looking at structural safety it might so
happen that to ensure particularly seismic safety you might have to do some retrofit of
existing masonry structures and that would depend on existing retrofit programs in the
country; in the territory.
Now, an important point to note is while codes do not require compliance of existing
buildings to new coded regulations, if the building is not undergoing any alteration.
When, a building is going through structural alterations in the horizontal plane or in the
vertical plane with additional floors being added. There is a requirement that the new
building that is whatever is the altered building complies with the new coded
requirements.
So, whenever there is alteration there is a requirement that you comply with the new
codal requirements though the existing building might have been constructed in the pre
codal regime. So, this is something that you must keep in mind. So, particularly when it
comes to safety checks for seismic safety checks public facilities, existing facilities may
fall short of basic requirements of seismic safety. And, within earthquake risk reduction
programs they may be a retrofit program of identifying, what are the vulnerabilities and
679
how can you overcome the vulnerabilities by strengthening and retrofitting the
structures.
So, this is the third situation in which a third of structural assessment becomes required.
So, it is within this context that we are going to be talking about. The focus as I said even
earlier is primarily on seismic safety because life safety matters and very often masonry
constructions, unreinforced masonry constructions as we have seen unless there are
specific earthquake resistant features built in, do not have seismic safety.
So, the importance of structural assessment in our last set of lectures within the special
topics is focused on seismic assessment, is focused on achieving seismic safety in
existing buildings.
Let us say you have one of these situations, let us say you are looking at verifying the
seismic safety of an existing masonry construction. Focus is typically paid to 3 aspects
within assessment. The first stage is called condition assessment; since you are looking
at a building or an infrastructure that has been in service for a number of years before
your intervention.
So, the first stage is called condition assessment, where you would try to prepare or get
the drawings of the building and then on the drawings of the building map what is the
condition of the structure, is there existing damage? If there is existing damage, that must
680
go into any repair and strengthening program that you are going to be proposing for the
structure.
And more importantly, what becomes important is to understand, what is the residual
strength of the masonry that you are looking at right. So this condition assessment is one
on one hand trying to map, if there is any existing damage which you should take care of
to ensure that the structural health is not compromised; structural health of the building is
not compromised. The second aspect that you have to look at, since a quantitative
structural assessment is being carried out you need to know what is the residual strength
of the masonry in the structure.
When you design as a designer you are free to choose the design strength of the
structure, but when you are looking at assessment of existing buildings, this is not
something that is in your hand. The existing strength of the structure, strength of the
structural materials is something that you should be able to assess, evaluate and use in
your structural assessment. So, the first part is condition assessment.
Today, we will focus on this aspect of estimating the residual strength in particularly in
compression and then we will also examine shear. The second aspect is if you have to
make a quantitative check, you must have a model for the structure this can be a simple
model based on hand calculations, it could be a complex model where you are using
finite element methods or any other appropriate method. And then carry out an analysis,
be gravity load analysis or a dynamic analysis considering, lateral forces.
So, you require structural modeling and analysis, but here an important aspect that one
must keep in mind is the type of analysis that you choose. The level of intricacy the
complexity of the analysis that you choose must be commensurate with the knowledge
level on the structure that you have. In the sense that if you have a thorough knowledge
on the structure, its materials, the strengths of it is materials the dimensions of all the
structural members, then the knowledge level that you have on the existing structure is
rather high. When the knowledge level is rather high, uncertainties are reducing and
therefore, you can adopt complex analysis methods.
So, if you want to adopt a non-linear finite element analysis approach, you cannot be in a
situation where you do not have information on the structure, you cannot use a complex
sophisticated analysis technique, when the level of knowledge on the structure is very
681
low, this is not commensurate. You have high uncertainties as far as the geometry and
material is concerned, but you are using a very sophisticated analysis technique, this is
not commensurate.
So, if you want to use a sophisticated analysis technique the knowledge level must be
much higher, you must make an attempt to get more information on the geometry verify
the structural system, dimensions get residual strengths of the material as much as
possible. Then, you have a better knowledge level on the structure, on the structural
system, on the structural materials uncertainties are reducing, then you can adopt a
highly sophisticated highly complex analysis method or analysis platform.
Let us say knowledge level is low; you are not able to get adequate information on the
structural geometry, adequate information on the structural strengths keep the analysis as
simple as possible, then it is commensurate. So, knowledge level with the choice of
analysis option must be consistent. This is an important point that needs to be
communicated.
Few codes today address this aspect and permit certain types of analysis based on the
knowledge level you have on the structure. The eurocodes for example, and the FEMA
standards require that you classify into which knowledge level you would fall and then
adopt the allowable options for analysis and modeling and analysis within that level of
knowledge.
And therefore, you will have to make some decisions when you are doing structural
modeling and analysis, am I going to be using a linear static analysis, am I going to use a
linear elastic model, am I going to use a non-linear analysis tool or non-linear analysis
method, am I going to be happy with static analysis or should I do dynamic analysis.
There are different decisions that one would have to take, when it comes to the modeling
and analysis, and this is linked to how much information you know or have about the
structure.
The third aspect, is you have done your condition assessment, you have got your residual
strengths you have carried out an analysis for different loads. Let us say you are talking
of a public building sitting in a newly classified earthquake zone, you are doing a seismic
verification, you have actually carried out a seismic analysis on the model of the
682
structure. Now, you need to verify whether the structure has adequate earthquake
capacity.
So, the last stage is actually the verification, now what you are doing is, you are
checking what is the demand or capacity ratio available in the structure, at the structure
level at the different component level you are trying to add identify, is this demand to
capacity ratio favorable. Are we seeing situations where demand is higher than the
capacity of different components that is when you will be able to establish a
strengthening or a retrofit strategy you know which elements are weak, which elements
need strengthening, which elements needs stiffening and this leads to a strengthening or
retrofit strategy.
And therefore, you are looking at a quantitative approach to arriving at the strengthening
strategy. This quantitative approach is also useful depending on the weaknesses you have
identified in the structure, you can evaluate one design versus another design, alternative
designs of strengthening and retrofit based on quantitative approaches. Are you able to
achieve with a certain type of intervention a better demand to capacity ratio and
economical design or do you have another alternative which you could use for achieving
the same goals.
And when you are looking at strengthening and retrofit strategy we are really talking
about you might have to improve the quality of the material if you can; grouting that is
typically done is to improve the strength of the material locally at the material level. You
might have to strengthen walls, beams, columns they are really working at the
component level, structural component level. And then finally, you might have to tie up
the entire structure and masonry we have seen the importance of making the structural
walls work together.
The earthquake design requirements, the earthquake design and detailing requirements
mandate that you must have lintel bands, you must have plinth bands, you must have
roof bands and these are basically, at the system level trying to hold the entire structure
together and ensure integral action against earthquakes, so that is at the system level.
So, you would have to look at your strengthening strategy or the retrofit strategy both at
three different levels, at the material level, at the component level and at the system
level. And therefore, assessment is the quantitative pathway that leads you to this goal of
683
achieving risk reduction by intervening on a structure which is identified to be
vulnerable, ok.
So, as I said I would like to focus on this aspect of estimation of residual strength of
masonry today. So, condition mapping as I said earlier would require that you get
drawings of the structure and then start marking what are the damages that you might
notice are there, cracks are there, loss of cross sections, all that is mapped and that is a an
initial documentation that you would do. The second aspect is coming and estimating the
residual strength of masonry. Because very often, the important query that comes to
anyone's mind is does the structure that you are working on have sufficient strength in
terms of its structural materials to resist the combination of loads that is expected to be
serviceable against.
So, as far as your residual strength estimation for masonry, I would classify approaches
as indirect approaches and direct approaches, ok. And what are these indirect approaches
that I am talking about. In the indirect approach have one first possibility of estimating
the strength it is an estimate, it is an you are estimating what could be the residual
strength, but by correlation. That you really do not know exactly what the strength is or
you do not have the means of going in identifying what the strength of the material in the
existing structure is. This could be limitations of resources, financial, time and several
others or sometimes the structures that you are working on are so important that you
684
cannot want you can go and say I need to take some material out of the structure it might
just not be permitted.
So, in such situations where due to resource crunch/ time crunch you are not able to get
actual strength from the structure that you are working on you can work by correlation,
but to work by correlation you need to know you need to have information and
knowledge on the typology of the materials that are there in the structure. You need to
have knowledge on what is called wall morphology; you need to know what the
structural load-bearing walls are made out of, and then you have some basis to correlate,
we will examine that in a moment.
The second method is by homogenization right, we have seen homogenization of

masonry strengths earlier on in the course, where you know that if you know the strength
of the mortar and if you know the strength of the unit you can in a way arrive at the
strength of the masonry assembly, right.
So, you might not be able to directly estimate what is the strength of the masonry, but if
there is a way of knowing what is the strength of the mortar and strength of the unit,
there are methods of arriving at a homogenized strength of masonry. But, here the
strength of the constituents has to be known, you should have some basis for arriving at
the strength of the constituents in the actual structure.
The third is something which is probably the weakest and it is better that we do not adopt
that approach and I will in a moment tell you why you should be careful about that third
technique, which is strength estimate for nondestructive testing. In fact, that phrase itself
is not appropriate because you cannot estimate strength from non-destructive testing.
So, if you were to depend on nondestructive testing and arrive at strength estimates you
are only looking at correlations and calibrations and you will not get a direct strength.
So, that is why you find this non-destructive testing, strength estimates sitting under the
indirect approach, ok. Here correlation and calibration of the non-destructive test and the
possible strengths; that correlation is essential and you have to calibrate the non
destructive test outcomes with actual strength test. So, it is a rather involved way of
arriving at the strength estimate.
685
But please remember, I have placed it under an indirect approach, we will discuss this in
a little detail in a moment. The final approach, probably the most appropriate approach is
the direct approach where you are in a position to do in-situ or laboratory tests on
extracted specimens and you make strength estimates from these extracted specimens by
carrying out experiments.
Of course, the question will be how many such samples will I be able to take from a
building, should I be taking it from a certain part of the building or representatively from
all parts of a building. There are several questions that you as an engineer will be faced
with in that sort of a situation, but if there is a possibility of extracting material and
testing it in a laboratory or carrying out a test in situ that is the best option that is
available to you.
So, we will examine some of these, I would like to look at the issue of non-destructive
testing to start with because I would like to exclude it as much as possible. It is a useful
technique, it is a very powerful technique, but not for strength estimates and that is
something I would like you to carry home as a message. So, pulse velocity tests are
typically done for concrete as well; as you know you do this ultrasonic pulse velocity test
UPV test, we are talking about the same technique the dynamic pulse velocity test
dynamic because you are creating an impact and waves that are generated by impact.
686
So, it is actually dynamic pulse velocity test that we are talking about and
instrumentation is typically simple for a dynamic pulse velocity test, you need a
transmitter of sound because sonic waves are being transmitted; you need a receiver of
sound. And then you are basically estimating how much time is the pulse taking to go
from one end of the specimen that is being tested to the other end of the specimen, and
then based on the distance which is nothing, but the cross sectional dimension that are
arriving at what the velocities are.
If you remember from ultrasonic pulse velocity tests used in concrete, once you establish
what the velocity of the primary wave p wave is you basically classify whether that is
good quality concrete, moderate quality concrete or poor quality or doubtful quality of
concrete. Now, that is really all that you can do with non-destructive testing such as
pulse velocity test.
You will know, you will have some information on the quality of the masonry not
quantitative strength. If you need quantitative strength what you should actually be doing
is take a certain typology, do a actual compression test, carry out non-destructive testing
using pulse velocity on that specimen and arrive at a correlation, and then use it for the
rest of the structure. That means, it is a really involving and depends on several other
parameters which you should be in control of as far as a test like this is concerned.
So, basically this is a powerful technique if you were to use pulse velocity test to
understand the homogeneity of the construction materials, right. An existing structure
might have been constructed at different times might undergo different levels of
deterioration in different parts of the structure; such a technique can be quickly used to
arrive at whether or not there is homogeneity in the construction materials.
So, you could do these pulse velocity tests on different parts of a wall and different walls
in a structure and arrive at whether or not you see homogeneity in the structure. If there
is lot of heterogeneity in the velocities through these structural load-bearing walls, it
starts giving you a basis that some parts have been affected due to aging and some parts
have been are in better conservation, better state of preservation. And this will start
giving you a basis for some strength values that you must use in a reduced manner in
some parts in a way that is not reduced in other parts, where deterioration has not
actually happened.
687
And therefore, if you are studying a wall cross section you are really trying to understand
since the wave velocity is directly proportional to the density of the material, you are
getting an information on the cross sectional property of the wall or the material that is
being studied. And basically, if you want to further elaborate on these tests one can take
the waves that come out, receive at the receiver, and you can carry out your wave
propagation studies on that and basically you are characterizing the medium.
A little more involved way of doing this as you know in a pulse velocity test, you could
either have the receiver and transmitter placed on two sides of the wall, we call that the
direct measurement. But, if the opposite sides of the wall are not accessible you might
want to go in for the semi direct measurement where the transmitter and receiver are on
two adjacent sides of a wall. And, you can even do an indirect measurement which is the
three other sides or two the opposite side is inaccessible and you can use the receiver and
transmitter on the same side.
However, in all these you are actually looking at wave travel from the transmitter to the
receiver and a single array; a single array going from the transmitter to the receiver. You
can use dynamic pulse velocity test in a more efficient, but more cumbersome manner
where you can create an array as you see in this test here, I have transmitter points on
one side, I have receiver points on the other side. And I can look at multiple arrays which
means I get a lot more information on the cross section and I can use all that information
and with the use of algorithms it is possible to arrive at a contour of velocities of the
cross section.
So, this is a much more involved technique it is referred to as tomography; sonic

tomography, because sound waves are used to study a slice which is a tomo and here you
are getting a contour of velocities. And as I said with a contour of velocities like this, I
am not able to arrive at strengths, I still will only be able to understand if there is
homogeneity in the construction material in the cross section that I am studying. If there
is let us take a brick wall and a brick wall has parts where the velocity is really low and
parts where the velocity is significantly high; it means that there is loss of material
leading to reduced density in some portions and it necessitates grouting in that location.
So, I am getting a qualitative information from such a test, it can help me decide a certain
intervention like grouting to strengthen and improve the quality of the material in the
688
masonry wall. So, it is a very powerful technique, but as long as you understand what it
can be used for, it cannot be directly used for strength.
So, important limitations of non-destructive testing is that strength information is

possible only if you correlate empirically with wave velocity. Another test which is a
non-destructive test that all of you would be aware of is the rebound hammer or the
Schmidt hammer test that you use for the concrete. The rebound hammer test or the
Schmidt test actually gives you the hardness, the surface hardness of concrete. It does not
give you the compressive strength of concrete, you arrive at the compressive strength of
concrete by calibration of that surface hardness with the compressive strength of
concrete itself.
So, this non-destructive test, most all non destructive testing techniques, if you want to
derive strengths you need to be able to calibrate and you will get empirical correlations
because material to material those correlations will vary. So, this is something which is
of an important limitation and if you were to use charts that are available with the
instrument, without correlating it to the type of material that you are looking at, your
correlations the calibration values can be unreliable.
So, strength estimates from non-destructive testing is a red flag. So, it is very involved
and we have a lot of variability even if you are going to be using calibration using
empirical correlations. The variability in a material like masonry something that we have
689
always seen. If you remember the initial lecture, we looked at the kind of variability in
the modulus of elasticity from the compressive strength that you can get in brick
masonry and concrete block masonry.
So, we are looking at a material which is rather strongly affected by uncertainty in a

material like that if you are going to calibrate for one type of masonry it may not be valid
for another type of masonry. Let us say you are using fly-ash bricks with cement versus
clay bricks with cement these are different as far as the way velocities are going to be
through the cross section.
So, variability in masonry something that you want to keep in mind even if you want
look at calibrating empirical coefficients. Therefore, when you are not left with this
option of non destructive testing for strength estimates what do you do, you have to
make recourse to semi destructive testing or destructive testing to arrive at residual
strengths.
So, there are some tests; one of the tests that we will be looking at is called the flat jack
testing which is the semi destructive test. You could also do something else which is you
can extract material from the structure which is rather invasive, but in some cases it is
possible that this works you can extract a core, you can extract a prism and a small
wallete and test it in a laboratory and you will be able to get the residual strength. So,
this is something that we need to look at a little bit in detail because there are some do's
and don'ts clearly as far as semi destructive and destructive tests are concerned.
690
Now, let us say we are going to do some limited destructive testing in a structure, how
can we go about it. Let us say you are allowed to do only limited destructive testing in
the structure that you are working on. With that information, how will I will be able to
arrive at some residual strength, my aim is very clear, I need to do a quantitative
structural assessment; I need strengths, I need to be able to arrive at that from the
situation of the structure.
Let us say you extract masonry cores; have you seen extraction of cores from concrete
structures that is something that is done quite often? You have a core extraction machine
which is fixed on to the structure, structural member and then a core is drilled out. You
can take this core examine it in the field you can take it to a laboratory and do tests on it
or on you can make it disintegrate and then do a test on it is constituents also. So, you
can do a lot of tests with cores.
Now, we need to speak about masonry cores for a few minutes; what we could do is if
you were to extract a core, it gives you a good information on what the unit is, what the
binding material is the mortar is and what is the condition of these two constituents of
masonry. So, it helps in establishing what is the morphology of the masonry and what are
the, what is the condition of the material where you have extracted it from.
Now, why is it essential to understand the wall morphology? Most often walls are
plastered; you have no idea of what the type of unit, size of unit, quality of unit what is
691
the mortar what is the type of mortar and what is the condition of the mortar sitting
within the wall cross section. An extracted core can help you establish one what is the
wall morphology, is it brick masonry with lime mortar, is it brick masonry with a lime
plus cement mortar or is it brick masonry with cement mortar or is it a concrete block
masonry construction is it any other type of unit or mortar constituent.
So, it helps you establish what is the morphology of the cross section and then you can
also look at the condition of the masonry, condition of the units and condition of the
mortar. This knowledge on the wall morphology is essential for correlation. So, the first
method that I talked about under the indirect approaches. Once, I know what morphology
of material I am looking at in the structure that I am going to study, I can by correlation
establish what may be the ranges of strength from literature. So, for that you need to
have some information on the wall morphology.
So, let us say you have to do this what can you do; this involves extraction of material
from the wall from the load bearing walls you would decide how many are possible, you
would decide which locations, you would like to get this done from. It is quite
cumbersome, but can be done, and you can decide on what sizes of cores you want to
extract and what depth of core you want to extract.
Once the core is extracted it is possible if you carry it out in a systematic manner you
know from what depth you are getting what material. It is possible to reconstruct and
understand what is the cross-sectional morphology of the wall that you are looking at,
then you know what typology of masonry this is and then that information is extremely
crucial.
What you are seeing here is a wall cross section coming from a historical structure, it is a
structure which is 180 years old. But a formal masonry construction where the use of
mud mortar and the use of lime mortar has been there. So, it is important to know
information of the cross section and extraction of a masonry core can help you arrive at
that.
692
Once you do that then you know what is the typology of masonry you are examining.
Now since it is understood worldwide that you cannot go and do tests on existing
structures all the time. There are certain codes which have established a range of
mechanical parameters, typology wise based on extensive databases collected over time
which can be a useful resource for you to establish what may be lower bound and upper
bound strengths of a certain typology of masonry, right.
So, I am making reference here to the building code; it is called the building norms
technical norms for buildings, for constructions, the Italian building norms and you have
tables like this which based on the masonry typology will give you compressive strength
upper bound, lower bound compressive strength.
So, as you can see there is a lower bound strength and an upper bound strength, the shear
strength, the modulus of elasticity, the shear modulus and the density of the material
itself. So, depending on your understanding of what morphology of construction you are
seeing you can then look at lower bound estimate an upper bound estimate of those
strengths.
And you can work now with a lower bound estimate and an upper bound estimate right,
you do not have to work with one value that is coming out of the structure, but you have
a range of results. So, you can do a factor of safety check lower bound value, factor of
693
safety check upper bound value and you have a quantitative scientific basis to establish
safety in the structure itself.
So, you can look at the different typologies here; of course, there are historical masonry
constructions the first few are all irregular stone and uncut stone and all that. But, you
can also see if you have full brick masonry with lime mortar you have hollow bricks, you
have concrete block masonry, you have masonry with cement and brick masonry with
cement. So, you have an information an important resource here with which you can
actually establish as I said lower bound and upper bound estimates of compressive
strength, shear strength modulus of elasticity shear modulus and density which is
sufficient from most of your calculations.
This is also supplemented by correction coefficients; this same code also gives you
correction coefficients. Let us say you have identified the morphology, but then when
you extracted a core you found that the quality of the mortar is very good or the quality
of the mortar is so bad, that you are uncomfortable using just the upper bound, lower
bound strengths mentioned in the previous table without any reference to what is the
quality of the mortar joint; we have seen that this the mortar joint has a very important
role to play in the strength of masonry.
So, if based on your observations on the structure from the extracted masonry cores, you
are able to establish are you looking at a good quality mortar joint, are you looking at a
694
poor mortar joint then you can actually use correction factors to improve the values that
you saw in the previous slide.
So, let us say I have done this test I find that the mortar is average it is poor it is nothing
that is holding the structure in the location so well together, then I continue to use the
factors that are there in the values that are there in the previous table. But, then if I see
that the quality of mortar is really good then I can actually increase those values by a
factor; for example, 1.5 multiplied by the lower bound and the upper bound values in the
previous slide.
And then of course, you can see there are many other possibilities here, if it is grouted, if
it has some plaster which is got some reinforcement there are different values that you
can use and these have been calibrated against experimental tests. So, it is an important
resource which one can feed into in the absence of actual strength estimates from the
structure that you are working in, but knowledge on the morphology of the structure is
extremely important.
By homogenization, strength estimate by homogenization here it is essential that we

understand the strengths of the constituents that we are using, ok. So, it might be possible
that you are not able to take an entire wallete to test in a laboratory, but you are able to
take some amount of mortar you are able to take some brick units and have some
estimate of the strength of this constituents. And, with the estimate of the strengths of the
695
constituents we have seen that you can arrive at the compressive strength of the material,
we have seen different theories that you can use to arrive at the compressive strength of
material from it is constituents.
The example that I can give you here is the Haller-Francis theory that we have seen
earlier, the Hilsdorf’s theory that we have seen earlier where the modulus of elasticity of
the mortar, modulus of elasticity of the brick, poissons ratio of the constituents and
tensile strength of the unit and the compressive strength of the unit known, you will be
able to establish what is the failure strength of the masonry in compression.
So, and this will basically depend on the geometry thickness of the mortar joint and the
size of the unit as well. So, homogenization is possible there are established theories we
have also seen the Hilsdorf’s theory, where there is an additional constituent- the non-
uniformity coefficient depending on the type of masonry that you are looking at. So,
homogenization is another approach that you can adopt, but constituent strengths are
essential and then you can arrive at what is the compressive strength of the masonry
itself in your residual strength calculations, ok.
The third is from strength estimates from experimental tests. So, what experimental tests
can be done and how would you go about it and there are two things that I am focusing
on. One is the masonry core, can I take the masonry core and claim that I will be able to
do a strength test on the masonry core and the second thing is this flat jack test that I
696
mentioned a few moments earlier. So, strictly speaking for a new construction you are
required to look at a prism test, right.
So, you need to, we have seen how the basic compressive strength can be arrived that
you make a prism get the compressive strength and then to get the basic compressive
stress you take 25 percent of the basic compressive strength, of the compressive strength
coming from the test and then you use it for a permissible stress design. So, you need a
standard prism, you need a standard prism now when you are working on an existing
structure does that mean extracting a standard prism from the structure.
Second question, can you get a standard prism from the existing structure? A standard
prism is made by stacking one brick over another and having about 5 or six bricks in one
stack right, but when you construct a structure it depends on the bond that you adopt for
the wall cross section. So, you are not going to get a stack of bricks from the structure
itself you will have to extract a wallette. A small wallette from the structure to be able to
conduct anything that is like a standard prism test to establish the compressive strength
of masonry itself.
So, the Indian codes, many other codes internationally also are silent on this if you know
it only says if you actually have to establish the compressive strength of the masonry
then you have to adopt techniques similar to what could be adopted for a new
construction what does that mean for a new construction you would make a standard
prism, for an existing construction go get something comparable to a standard prism
from the structure that is easier said than done.
So, this is what the code would say make a standard prism, do a compression test and
based on h by t ratios that you are aware of; for example, appendix-B of 1905 would give
you these correction factors you can use the correction factors and arrive at the
compressive strength for brickwork or block work. So, clearly these are prescribed for
new constructions right and as I said we normally go for one unit and 5 or 6 of them
placed one on top of the other, stack bonded and use the correction factors itself.
So, can this be a basis for us, yes it can be a basis for us, but one has to be careful about
what we are getting and how we go about doing it.
697
Well, a few moments earlier we were talking about extracting a core from a masonry
wall. Can I use the core to arrive at the strength? That is what we typically do for
reinforced concrete structures; we would extract a core and then do a compression test on
the core and use the compressive strength coming from core tests. Possibly take three
cores at three different locations get an average compressive strength and that becomes a
compressive strength, that I can use for the concrete in the structure and this is coming
from the cylindrical cores extracted from the structure. Can that be applied to walls is the
first question.
There is a problem here a or significant problem here and one has to be conscious of this.
Let us say you extract a core from a structure; you see a picture here from a historical
masonry arch bridge and core is being extracted from the piers of this 180-185 year old
masonry arch bridge not very far from here in Pondicherry and this is brick and lime.
So, you see a core is being extracted; now, what do we do with the core? I can examine
the core understand the morphology and say it is brick good quality brick and good
quality lime and use correlation, but if I were to use the core for strength what are the
precautions. It cannot be used as we would use in concrete because you know that the
compressive strength of masonry is going to be different depending on the direction that
you test it in yes, there is a correlation to the direction of the bed joint.
698
So, if one way to look at extracting this core taking it to a laboratory and then conducting
a compression test on the cylinder extracted, then you would realize that the direction of
loading with respect to the bed joints is 90 degrees different to what the actual structure
is subjected to, would agree with me. The core has been extracted in this direction, the
bed joints are in that direction the bed joints are now perpendicular to the direction of
compression and then I take this to a laboratory. But to test a cylinder in a universal
testing machine I need to put it the other way around and now the direction of loading is
different to the bed joints.
So, question is what compressive strength do I get? Is this compressive strength the true
compressive strength that I need to use depending on the direction of the bed joint itself.
Answer is no, you cannot; what else can I do, if I want to maintain the directionality of
the bed joints then I should not be testing it in this manner, I should be testing it in the
other manner, right. I should be testing it like the bed joint is with respect to the
compression loading itself, but if you do that what you are actually doing is called a
modified Brazilian test or a split tension test.
And, what does that give you, it gives you the tensile strength of the material you wanted
the compressive strength, you get the tensile strength again you are going to be you have
taken material from the structure, but you are getting tensile strength you will have to
make some correlation to arrive at what the compressive strength is. So, uncertainty over
uncertainty; you are really not making use of good material that you have actually got
from the structure. So, this is a fundamental problem. So, if one way to blindly use
extracted cores and get compressive strengths out of masonry constructions beware of
the compressive strengths that are being used for structural assessment.
699
What else can you do, you actually have to extract a wallette then because that is what
the code silently says extract something that is comparable to what a prism is for a new
construction. But, you cannot extract a prism because of the bonding therefore, you
extract a wallet which is a small wall. Now, do you have prescriptions on what
dimensions these should be, yes there are some prescriptions, there are at least two codes
internationally that give you an idea of what these can be, but there are significant
problems here.
So, we are looking at a small wall of reasonable length, height and width such that it is
representative of the masonry that you are looking at, the bond pattern also will become
representative depending on where you extract the masonry wallette. But, this is not that
easy to execute, if you take a small wallet you should be able to handle it this is going to
be quite heavy as well.
So, you have issues one it is difficult to extract, basically you will have to cut it and as
you see the picture on the bottom, right you can see that you will have to slice the wall
you will have to cut it at the top at the bottom at the side and then extract it, right. So, it
is in it is rather involving a lot of in machinery is required and I am not over-
emphasizing, but it is really expensive to get two or three such wallettes extracted from a
structure. And the other question is if it is an old building you are also worried if you are
going to damage the structure in the process of extracting.
700
One fundamental problem is in the process of extracting there are vibrations; the wallet
itself can get damaged; the picture that you see here, you can see the part of the wallet
has refused to come out and then all the effort that you have taken to extract one prism is
gone. The wallettes can be heavy, you need to handle it carefully one man cannot handle
it one person cannot handle it you actually have protocols for how this has to be fitted
confined within a cage, within a timber box, if possible. If you want to transport it from
one place to the laboratory and test it and there is also potential damage during
transportation apart from that potential during cutting itself.
On the left side you see a tested wallette that it can be done, but it is quite a cumbersome
exercise. Of course, it also depends on how many samples you can take, you cannot take
unlimited number of samples, but if you have a certain wall in a masonry structure which
is going to be dismantled anyway then that is a good location to take a number of
samples from. So, you can extract some samples.
Are they codes as I said that regulate the extraction of samples yes, there are RILEM
standards. RILEM is a network of European laboratories and they have examined what
should be done if you are going to remove masonry from existing structures for testing
purposes and how should you go about compression testing of such prisms. And
interestingly, the code actually also underlines that this is a feasible, but difficult and
expensive approach which comes back to the first point that I made, it depends on the
701
resources that you have at hand. Time and financial resources, if they are limited you
might not want to go for such approach, but if the resources are available this is
something that can be done.
So, the code actually tells you what should be the minimum height, minimum width and
minimum cross section of such a prism and then you can take it to a laboratory and test
it.
The other thing that can be done is if you were to take a prism to a laboratory; if you
were to take a wallette to a laboratory you can get the compressive strength, but in the
process with enough instrumentation you can also get the modulus of elasticity and
poisson’s ratio from the stress strain curves. So, it is possible that if you take such a
wallette to a laboratory, in your compression test you can also get an estimate of what the
modulus of elasticity is and with adequate instrumentation even the poisson’s ratio of the
material which are parameters that you can directly use in your calculations for strength
estimates for the safety assessment itself.
702
And coming back to the question of course, in some work that was conducted
experimental work that was conducted within our master’s thesis here at IIT Madras, we
looked at how do prisms and cores correlate, are we going completely wrong if we adopt
cores and should that not be done when you cannot extract wallettes right it is easier to
extract cores whatever said and done. So, we looked at construction of walls from which
cores were extracted and then compared it to prism strengths, right.
So, you can see how these how a wall has been constructed and from the wall several
cores have been extracted of different diameters, those are the cores and they are being
tested in a compression machine as a cylinder and then a number of prisms are also
constructed. These prisms are constructed with the same units and the same mortar as the
wall it has been constructed and then these prisms are tested in a compression machine as
well.
703
Very interesting results from this test indicated that if you are actually looking at
specimens which have a diameter of 200 mm at least right, if you are extracting a small
core 75 mm, 100 mm, 150 mm they could be a problem, but if you are extracting 200
mm; minimum 200 mm core diameter two hundred mm; then the prism to core strength
ratio is higher than 1, that the core is always going to give you a strength marginally
lower than what this prism will give you despite the direction being different in the prism
versus the core.
If you look at anything lower 150 or smaller sizes this ratio goes to less than 1; which
means, practically speaking if you are looking at a significantly large diameter core like
200 mm or higher. You can use this to establish the compressive strength of masonry and
you will err on the conservative side; whereas, if you go for smaller diameter cores you
are making a mistake on the non-conservative side. So, if you are using cores do not use
anything less than 200 mm, use cores that are large, at least 200 mm or larger otherwise
go for extraction of a prism itself. I will stop here and continue with the other tests that
we were talking about in the next class.
704
Prof. Arun Menon
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Module - 05
Lecture - 39
Special Topics – Assessment of Existing Masonry Structures
Continuing with the in-situ experiment tests, we will focus on a test called the flat jack
testing today. So, the flat jack testing; there are two types of flat jack testing. You will
appreciate the differences between the two types of testing depending on what you are
actually looking for from the structure. The flat jack testing is classified as a semi-
destructive test technique ok.
Because you can actually call it a destructive test but the level of intervention in the
structure is minimal. And therefore, it can be classified as a semi-destructive test
technique. What it is, primarily giving you is the level of in-situ vertical stress ok. So,
what a flat jack test can actually measure is in situ compressive stress.
And this is of value because you can actually use that in situ compressive stress, which is
measured from the structure and make a check against the model that you are using. See
if you are getting similar in situ compressive stresses. But, a modified version of the flat
jack testing actually gives you a significant advantage in being able to establish the in-
705
situ stress-strain curve of the masonry of the composite masonry from which you can
actually establish modulus of elasticity and the Poisson’s ratio.
And, these are values that definitely you will use for your structural models. So, we will
examine both these versions of the flat jack testing. What you see here is the
instrumentation that is typically required. Our laboratory regularly does this sort of a test
on existing masonry structures, but this is not a test limited to masonry structures. It is
actually test testing technique that has come from geology.
This is used a lot in rock mechanics; flat jacks are used in rock mechanics. And, it can
also be used in concrete structures if required. So, what you see are the flat jacks here of
different shapes. You can have a semi-circular flat jack or rectangular flat jack. Now the
flat jack is primarily two sheets of metal; two independent sheets of metal, which are
connected to each other by welding at the edges.
So, that you create a small receptacle which can be filled with a fluid. So, what you see
here attached at the ends are an inlet and outlet pipe ok. Typically oil is used, you pump
oil in and then you lock the other end. So, that oil is retained you keep increasing the
pressure and the flat jack will deform based on how much of oil you are actually
pumping in. You need measuring devices- a simple DEMEC gauge, demountable
mechanical gauge can be used.
Or you could actually have instrumentation done with linear variable differential
transducers fitted on to the wall as well with LVDTs. So, the basic flat jack, the
instrumentation to measure deformations and then, you can automate the whole set up
with the data logger, which is constantly recording the deformations induced in the
masonry.
And of course, you need a pump, you need a manual pump your operating this test at
manual pressures. We do not use, we do not use motorized pumps because the level of
pressures that you can generate a significantly high which can actually damage the
masonry. Your intention here is not to damage the masonry and that is one of the
fundamental reasons why we are calling this is a semi-destructive test.
Your intention is not to take the masonry in the wall that you are testing to failure, which
is what you do in a laboratory. Here you stop probably at 50 percent or lesser of what
706
could be the failure stress. So, you cannot go to failure, you cannot characterize till
failure, but you can characterize to an extent which is sufficient for you in terms of your
structural analysis ok. So, with that as the basic instrumentation, let us understand the
two different types of flat jack testing called single flat jack testing and double flat jack
testing. We are basically you are using one flat jack versus two flat jacks.
So, the single flat jack testing is meant to estimate what the in-situ axial compressive
stresses. So, if I want to make an estimate of the, what is the vertical stress in a wall? Of
course, vertical stress levels compressive stress levels are going to be different in
different locations. So, you would make a specific choice on where you want to do this
test and carry out this test.
Typically, you choose locations where compressive stress is expected to be high enough.
Because when you have very low compressive stress, let us say you are testing a single
storied wall or upper story of a multi storied structure in-situ compression levels will be
low. The method adopted here does not work very well when the level of compression is
low. So, that is something you might want to keep in mind. So, how do you go about
doing this in-situ single flat jack test?
So, what you see here in the slide is the elevation of a wall. In the wall you make a slot
into which the flat jack is inserted. So, you saw a flat jack is almost like a piece of paper;
it is thicker than the piece of paper it is like a thin book. You are actually inserting that
707
book into the wall. Typical dimension of a flat jack is about 25 centimeters by depth of
about 15 to 20 centimeters.
So, they can actually be manufactured to sizes that you really want to work with ok.
Look at the elevation of the wall, the exposed brick work is shown here. Let us say you
have decided which joint to work on, it is prescribed that the flat jack be inserted in a
mortar joint. You can even insert it into stone or brick unit locations; however, that
would be difficult.
You would actually be damaging the masonry construction significantly to avoid that, it
is prescribed that you target the mortar joint bed joint is the horizontal continuous plane
available to you and insert the flat jack there. So, what is typically done is, once the
location where the flat jack test is going to be conducted is identified. Before a cut is
made across the line within which the flat jack is going to be inserted which is this thick
black line.
Let us assume that the flat jack is not get inserted there, I established four gauge lengths-
L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 across the length of the flat jack location. And make those initial
measurements before a cut is introduced. So, L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 are measured and noted
down that depends on the gauge length that you are working with depends on the size of
the DEMEC gauges that you have or the instrumentation for an LVDT that you actually
have.
So, you make the measurements L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 and then introduce a cut at the joint
that you have selected. You make a cut, now this cut would have to ensure is large
enough to hold the entire flat jack that you have made. You have actually with you; the
fabricated flat jack but not too large compared to the flat jack itself.
So, the size of the cut that you make, the area of the cut that you make must be as close
as possible to the flat jack itself. So, how do you make this cut? You need a rotary drill
or you could use a regular drill and try to make a cut which is in the shape of the flat jack
itself. So, in the previous slide you saw two shapes; one is the semicircular shape and the
other one is a rectangular shape.
If I use a rotary cutter, if I use a rotary drill then I can actually get a semicircular shape as
a cut. It is difficult to get a rectangular cut, in an existing wall. You can actually make it
708
by making several punches using a drill but it is quite a messy job. A rectangular flat
jack is typically used in a new construction. If you want to make a new if you want to
measure something in a new construction, you can actually place the flat jack and make
the construction of that joint.
However for existing buildings, the choice is typically on semi circular of flat jacks. So,
the cut has to be made such that the area of the cut is not too large in comparison to the
size of the flat jack; you will appreciate the reason why this is important in a moment.
And then you also have to ensure that the thickness of the cut that you make is not too
large in comparison to the maximum size that the flat jack itself is.
So, this flat jack is as I said thin as paper it is about 4 millimeters in thickness or 6
millimeters in thickness depending on the thickness of the two plates and the void that is
there in between. So, if the flat jack is about 4 millimeters you should not make a cut
which is more than about 5 to 6 millimeters. So, there is dimensional control required for
the cut that is being prepared there.
Because, if you make two large a cut, the flat jack will loosely fit in the cut and then
when the flat jack is inflated the contact will be lesser than the overall area of the flat
jack. So, you do not want that sort of a situation, you do not want concentration of
contact of the flat jack with the masonry. You want the entire area to be in contact and
therefore, workmanship of the cut is an important parameter ok.
So, once the cut is made let us say the entire cut has been executed you wait typically for
a few minutes. Because, now with a cut made there is going to be redistribution of loads
and the stress path in the structure itself right. You have made a cut that was a resisting
path now that is not carrying load anymore and there has to be redistribution occurring,
there will also be deformation.
So, let us say you make a cut of 5 millimeters after a few minutes if you measure the size
of the cut, it should be lesser than the 5 millimeters of the original cut, which means
deformation will happen over a period of time. So, you wait for some time and then re-
measure the gauge length L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4. So, lengths L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 before cut
length L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 after cut are recorded and then the flat jack is inserted.
709
The flat jack is inserted it is connected to the pump the oil pump the manual oil pump.
And you start slowly in pressurizing the flat jack such that oil start circulating and filling
up the flak jack. As you start filling the flat jack, the flat jack starts exerting pressure
against the masonry. And as this pressure increases, you decide at what resolution you
are going to start taking measurements.
You pressurize to a few bars and then let us say 0.25 bar and then make a measurement;
make these measurements of L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 increased again by 0.05 make the
measurements. So, what you are going to be doing is, make continuous measurements of
deformation L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 as you keep pressurizing the flat jack.
At a certain point the flat track is now pressurizing deforming the masonry. The
deformation it lost when you made the cut will be regained by the pressurizing that you
are doing right. So, at some point, the pressure that the flat jack is at is adequate for the
gauge lengths L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 to be equal to what it was before the cut. At that
precise point the understanding is that the flat jack is now carrying the stress, which the
masonry originally was carrying.
So, your intention is to reach that level of original deformation measured by the gauge
length by the gauges L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 which was before the cut. And at that point the
pressure corresponding to that deformation is really what the in-situ compressive stress
is. However, that in-situ is compressive stress actually has to be corrected by a couple of
parameters will examine that in a moment.
So, this is what an in situ axial compressive stress flat jack test would look like right. So,
once you have established the pressure in the flat jack at which the deformation is same
as the measurements L 1, L 2, L 3 and L 4 are same as in the original wall you stop the
test. You can continue and do a double flat jack test and what this double flat jack test is
really doing is giving you the possibility of measuring in-situ what is the modulus of
elasticity of the masonry and the Poisson’s ratio of the masonry, both parameters that
you will use for your structural analysis. But how do you do that you actually use two
flat jacks now not one flat jack? With one flat jack you have established what is the in
situ compressive stress; with the second flat jack. The area that is between the two flat
jacks, you have two flat jacks.
710
And, you have an area between the two flat jacks you will compress and decompress that
area in increasing cycles of compressive stress you start with small compressive stress.
And, then go to larger cycles compress and decompress go up to about an estimated 50
percent of the compressive strength of the material. As I said you do not want to make
the masonry fail in this test, it is an in-situ test; it is not advisable that the wall that you
are working on. You take it to failure as you are standing there and testing.
So, you take it to about 50 percent of the peak strength that you think the masonry should
have in this particular case. And then go through loading and unloading cycles and you
arrive at the stress strain curve from this from this from this double flat jack test. From
the stress strain curve if you have instrumentation along the vertical axis, you will be
able to arrive at the modulus of elasticity with instrumentation in the lateral direction.
If you have LVDTs in the lateral direction lateral bulging can also be measured and you
can get an estimate of the Poisson’s ratio. So, in-situ deformability characteristics you
require a double flat jack test single flat jack test is particularly for the axial compressive
stress.
So, there are a couple of standards well established standards for how single and double
flat jack tests can be estimated; can be conducted. One of them is the RILEM standards
we were talking about RILEM in the previous lecture. It is a network of European
laboratories and a number of test techniques are formalized through RILEM.
711
And the second standard is the standard from the united states- the ASTM standards that
you can refer to the numbers are reported here. So, what you see here is a historical
masonry structure in brickwork and lime mortar in which a double flat jack test is being
carried out. And you can actually see how the gauges the pumps are connected to the
wall.
And you can actually see four vertical gauges, LVDTs which are measuring the vertical
deformation. And you can see one horizontal which is actually measuring the lateral
deformations in the masonry. So, I have axial deformations, I have lateral deformations I
can estimate both modulus of elasticity and the Poisson’s ratio in-situ. So, this is how the
test is executed it is cumbersome.
And as you can see plaster is removed, the brickwork is exposed and then you conduct
this test. So, a single test may take a few hours four to 5 hours to actually execute. But,
can give you valuable in-situ information because the sample now is an undisturbed
sample. The state of stress in it is actually not disturbed.
So, how do you arrive at what the stress levels are? So, you need as I said earlier, couple
of correction factors, these correction factors come from two physical quantities that you
really cannot physical parameters that you cannot overcome beyond a certain point. So,
what you actually do is, take the pressure that the hand pump is actually giving you at a
certain point in time in making measurements.
712
And use that to calculate what the in-situ compressive stress is, by multiplying it with to
correction factors, the first correction factor. So, that is what the stress strain curve would
look like as I said the blue line shows you the stress strain curve, but these are actually
compressions and decompression.
So, loading and unloading, loading and unloading. And each cycle we are taking the
masonry to a higher and higher level of compression that is why these loops are
increasing in size. And, as you see we are still in the linear elastic range we do not go
beyond the linear elastic range. Because we do not want in situ damage due to this test.
And so from this test from the backbone curve it is possible to arrive at the modulus of
elasticity and use that in your calculations.
If you have two or more locations you can actually take an average of these values and
you have valuable information coming from the structure itself. So, the correction factors
the first correction factor is a stiffness correction factor. It basically reflects the
geometrical and stiffness properties of the flat jack material. So, the flat jack as I said is
two metal plates which are welded to each other.
And therefore, as you pump oil and this starts expanding, it depends on the stiffness of
the metal before it starts deforming. So, if you have a very stiff metal plate with which
the flat jack is made, the stiffness of the plate will contribute to the in situ stress level ok.
If the plate is highly deformable, of very low stiffness, then it will not contribute
significantly to the in-situ stress level.
But, if the plate is really strong and stiff and strong, then it will take additional pressure
for the plate to deform before the masonry comes into contact and the actual in-situ
pressure level is measured. So, this is called the jack calibration constant. This jack
calibration constant is typically provided to you by the manufacturer of the flat jack by
doing a standard test and estimating what should be this correction factor.
So, typically a correction factor which is less than 1 is arrived that and you multiply that
with the in-situ stress level p. So, it is a flat jack pressure let us say the flat jack pressure
is p; you multiplied the K m factor to this and it will reduce the in situ pressure; we actual
estimate of the in situ stress f m. The second parameter and that is the reason why I said it
is important that the areas of the flat jack and the area of the cut are as close to each other
as possible.
713
Because, if you make a large cut and then insert a small flat jack. The actual
redistribution area of load is much larger and that is going to be carried by a flat jack
which is significantly smaller which could mean concentration of stresses. You do not
want that sort of a situation and therefore, there is a cap on this ratio between area of the
flat jack to area of the cut itself.
And typically we target about 80, 85 percent as the size of the flat jack area of the flat
jack to the area of the cut itself, but this also must be measured. So, the K a factor is
nothing but area of the flat jack divided by area of the cut; again less than 1 and try to
keep this value at about 80 percent or higher. And then you are in situ stress level at each
point that you take the measurement is nothing but the in situ flat jack pressure p
multiplied by these two factors.
So, you know that fm will therefore, always be less than p; but that is that is how it is
because these two factors actually contribute to. The higher stress than actually there is
in the wall itself because of the stiffness of the plate and the differences in the areas. So,
this is how you actually carry out the double flat jack test in the single flat jack test.
And, as you see you have very valuable information, which you can use in your
structural modeling. In fact, the in-situ stress level can be used for your checks, even
your hand calculation in terms of what the axial compressive stress level should be can
be compared to values coming out of the flat jack test. And the double flat jack test
values can directly be used in terms of modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio in your
structural modeling calculations ok.
714
Continuing with in-situ tests, this first test is actually looking at compression behavior
right. We looked at wallettes, we looked at cores which are looking at compression
behavior. We looked at the flat jack tests which is again looking at a compression
behavior right and deformability under compression.
But you know that when you are looking at earthquake assessment, shear strength
becomes important. Now, you can establish the shear strength knowing the compressive
strength; because typically compressive strength and shear strength are correlated ok.
However, remember that any of these correlations are empirical and which would mean
given the variability of masonry these empirical coefficients can also be different.
So, in the worst case you can arrive at the shear strength, knowing the compressive
strength by correlation. However, there are also some where you want to be rigorous,
you can actually conduct some in-situ tests. And arrive at what the shear strength of the
masonry is which is again very valuable as far as your seismic assessment is concerned.
So, couple of in-situ tests the first one is to estimate the shear strength of masonry by the
diagonal compression test. We have looked at the diagonal compression test and an
ASTM standard that actually regulates the diagonal compression test. You can arrive at
the tensile strength of masonry; because failure is by diagonal tension mechanism
principle tension mechanism.
715
Similar tests can be done in-situ, it requires a lot of gymnastics in the site. But, it is
something that is feasible. And, particularly when you are working on existing buildings
seismic assessment of such buildings, where you have sacrificial walls; where walls are
actually going to be toned down because of alterations being made or because of heavy
damage.
So, building is going to be pulled down then that presents you a wonderful opportunity to
actually execute such a test; because it gives very valuable in situ information of shear
strength of masonry. So, this test requires that if you remember the laboratory tests
required a wallette of size 1.2 meters x 1.5 meters ok. Now when you are doing this test
at the site it again requires that you have 1.2 meter x 1.2 meter wall panel on which you
are working.
Now let us imagine that there is a load bearing wall on which you are allowed to do this
sort of a test. It means that you should be able to isolate this wall panel, but not
completely right. So, what you see here is, almost four fifths of the panel has actually
been isolated, what you see here is a gap in the wall that irregular area around the wall
panel of 1.2 x 1.2 meters is a gap that is running all around.
Because you actually need to introduce diagonal compression to introduce diagonal

compression you need the loading frame. So, you need a cut sufficient enough to be able
to insert the jack and the bolting mechanism. So, what you see here is the jack that is
introduced at this end the reaction frame here and bolting. So, you have the steel rods
running on two sides of the wall, which is then tightened.
And then the jack can actually introduce the necessary diagonal compression. And then
you make measurements along two diagonals that being one diagonal and that is the
other diagonal. Of course, there is going to be a certain difference between such a test
and the laboratory test because of this area which is still in contact with the wall.
Because, if you isolate the whole thing; it is as good as taking it out taking it to a
laboratory and testing it.
So, this is as in-situ as you can actually get as far as this test is concerned but mind you,
we are getting the shear strength of masonry by this test. You can actually see a picture
here where the cut is made you can see how large the cut actually is. And, then the jack
is introduced and you can conduct this test on the wall; there are some interesting.
716
There are some interesting research work that is available which you can use to
understand are there any other variations to this test that is possible and what are the
basic recommendations in terms of conducting this test itself? You do not have a
standard to conduct this test, it feeds into the ASTM standard, which is the standard
required for testing diagonal compression the testing masonry wallets in diagonal
compression itself.
And as we had seen earlier, the failure load is then used to estimate the shear strength of
masonry. And if you remember this 0.5 is really coming from an understanding of at
what levels of stress is the diagonal tension. The principal tension failure expected to
occur and comes from some non-linear finite element studies as well.
Because it is not it is not the entire area of cross section of this diagonal but something
lesser. So, Plt/2 is what you would actually used to estimate the shear strength of
masonry here. And, as I said there is some interesting studies that you can actually look
into if you are further interested; I have reported the reference here. So, that is for the test
on masonry shear strength: but if you want to actually get the joint shear strength right.
We talked about the difference between the masonry shear strength versus the shear
strength of a mortar joint in masonry. Even that is a test that can actually be executed. In-
situ it is less scarier than the previous test in terms of its requirements. But, you have
717
standard test method here; I am referring to ASTM 1531. ASTM 1531 actually gives you
the possibility of conducting this test in three different ways.
I am discussing a couple of them here test method A requires that in a wall in which you
want to actually establish what the joint shear strength is, you have to make two cuts; this
is the jack what you see at the centre is the jack. But on either sides of the jack on the
two sides of where the jack is the jack is actually fixed on to a central brick unit.
Where the red dot is one brick unit that brick unit is retained. The two brick units on
either sides on the left and the right of the central brick unit are removed ok. You
physically remove the two brick units by cutting along all the sides. And, then on one
side the jack is introduced and the other side is left vacant right. So, this is a gap this also
was a gap.
But that is where the jack is introduced; because that is the jack that is going to provide
the shear force required for the two joints upper and lower bed joints of the brick in the
middle right. So, test method A the important difference of test method A are these two
flat jacks right. If you remember the lecture on joint shear strength, there is a sensitivity
to the level of pre compression.
So, test method A requires that, you introduce flat jacks at the top and bottom of the test
location and control how much of in-situ compressive stresses being applied. You cut an
isolate put flat jacks there and measure exactly how much of pressure you want to
introduce in the masonry. So, that an estimate of the in situ compressive stress is known
to you as you do the test for the shear stress.
So, once the flat jacks have been pressurized, you know what the in-situ axial stress is
that you are maintaining in the masonry panel. Then conduct the shear test the brick fails.
There are two surfaces upper surface and lower surface together which is the shear
area, you would be able to estimate the shear stress corresponding to a certain level of
axial compressive stress.
So, here for each level of vertical compression, you will establish, what is the average
joint shear strength which is the pressure at failure P hi. That is the horizontal pressure at
failure I referring to the level of pre compression that you have established using the flat
718
jacks divided by A j. A j is nothing but the sum of the areas of the top and the bottom of
the brick which are the two bed joints which are subjecting to shear.
Once you do that, you keep doing it for several levels of pre compression. And you
remember this picture, where for different levels of pre compression you have different
levels of failure stress. All those black dots are what you will get once you have all those
black dots. Then the intersection of the best fit line this red line being the best fit line
intersection of the best fit line will give you tau naught.
This τ0 is the cohesion that we have talked of earlier. In format where you have the shear
strength is c+μσv. So, the joint shear strength with this technique from the graph that has
all the points different levels of σv you will be able to establish what τ0 is, which is
nothing but the intersection with the vertical axis.
And then the slope of the best fit line is going to give you μ. Slope of this best fit line is
going to give you mu. So, you have μ you have τ0, you know the level of pre
compression at each level. And therefore, you will know the joint shear strength from
such a test. If this test cannot be implemented with the presence of flat jacks, the problem
is you do not know what is the in-situ compression level, that is the problem.
So, method B actually allows you to do this test, but without the flat jacks. So, in this
case you are actually removing a masonry unit in this slot, you are creating a cut here.
So, that head joint is removed and you do not remove the unit next to it, you do not
necessarily need to remove the unit next to it if you want you could remove it.
But even if you remove the head joint that is sufficient and then only the jack is the
horizontal jack is operated, when the joint fails you will see movement. And here the
problem as I said is you do not know what is the vertical compressive stress level. So, in
this technique the average joint shear is calculated as the failure load P h now there is no
index ‘i’ because it is at one level of pre compression, divided by A j that remains
unchanged but you get only one value. And then you will actually have to assume the
value of mu you do not know the value of μ. You will also have to make an estimate of
what σv is and then get an estimate of τ0 as τ which will establish from here; minus
assumed value of μ into estimated value of σv.
719
So, the two test methods are useful test methods to give you joint shear strength. And
they operate in different ways with or without the knowledge of the with or without the
knowledge of the in situ vertical stress. So, where you have the possibility, these are
tests, are minimum tests that can be conducted. In situ to make your assessment
quantitative assessment robust with values coming directly from the field sigma v is
determined.
So, in this test you saw the flat jack test that we are looked at earlier; you will actually be
able to measure what is the pressure in the flat jack. So, you determine how much
pressure you want in the flat jack and that determines how much that masonry panel is
subjected to in terms of pre-compression. So, you would want to choose 5 or 10 different
levels of pre compression.
And change the amount of pressure you put the flat jacks into and change the pressure in
the and therefore, change the pressure in the masonry. So, you have a measure of the in-
situ stress and use that value keep it at that value and then conduct the.
Student: Pre-compression.
It is pre-compression, it is like the point is if you look at one world in a structure, it has
one at is given point it has one value of pre-compression. But, you know that the shear
strength joints shear strength varies with the pre-compression. You want to establish that
relationship to establish that relationship but not in the laboratory in the site, you need to
be able to regulate the vertical pre compression level. And this is a method which allows
you to be able to use flat jack plus the lateral jack together to establish that.
720
Having spoken of in the last few slides, from the last lecture on estimating residual
strings and I think that is one of the fundamental things that you need to be aware of as
far as structural assessment or seismic assessment is concerned. The second important
thing that I want to focus on is the possibilities and the requirements of structural
modeling and analysis right.
So, you do you are working on existing buildings. And, you are working on existing
masonry buildings which I hope you will agree with me. Now, have a structural behavior
which is different from moment resisting frames right. So, most modeling software are
designed are configured keeping in mind moment resisting frames. If you look at your
standard structural software like: STAAD or SAP or any other ETABS and so on.
Most of them have actually been conferred configured keeping in mind structural
behavior of a moment resisting frame. Or shear walls, reinforced concrete shear walls or
reinforced shear walls. Masonry structures have a different lateral load resisting
mechanism as we have been seeing during the course of this course, during the lectures
of this course.
So, when it comes to structural modeling and analysis there are certain things that we
need to keep in mind. And also examine what possibilities we have. So, I am going to
spend some time looking at these aspects. So firstly, should be we doing linear elastic
721
analysis is it to do linear elastic analysis. As far as masonry is concerned or should be
actually we doing non-linear finite element analysis for example, right.
The fundamental question is linear elastic analysis when you are doing seismic analysis
ok. That's the fundamental question. And, you know that code will actually allow you to
do linear elastic analysis. The code is ok, seismic code is actually allowing you to do
linear elastic analysis. You can do an equivalent static analysis, you can do linear
dynamic analysis, you could do a response spectrum analysis these are all permitted by
the code.
Now the question I am examining here is it to do linear elastic analysis as far as masonry
constructions are concerned ok. What dissimilarities should you be aware of when
looking at seismic analysis for masonry constructions? If you compare them to non-
linear finite element analysis, let us look at a simple example that is a masonry wall. You
could look at a full structure but we are interested in looking at a wall here; it is multi
storey, it is two storied and it has openings.
So, we are looking at a perforated shear wall two storied which is subjected to its own
self weight and lateral forces ok. So, we are looking at a wall which is subjected to
increasing lateral forces under its own gravity force. So, pushover analysis to be specific.
You have seen in the examples that we were looking at when examining system
level design of masonry constructions; we looked at how when you are looking at
seismic analysis, the lateral forces create overturning moments because of which
different piers here you have three piers and outer pier and inner piers two outer piers
and one central pier. Because of the lateral force and the overturning movements in the
the three piers the axial load levels are going to be different in the three piers they are not
going to be the same; they are not going to be the same.
So, the piers actually because of different levels of axial force, you have an axial force
coming from gravity over and above. That you have an axial force, which could be
compression or tension coming from the lateral force the earthquake force. Now, because
of that the pre compression level in the masonry pier is different at each location, which
means the capacity is going to be different and is going to depend on whether or not the
overturning effect is accounted for ok.
722
Now if you were to do linear elastic analysis, this aspect is not accounted for because the
same pier at different levels of pre-compression can fail at different levels of shear force.
So, this is something which needs to be accounted for which a non-linear analysis
program, Non-linear analysis method will actually be able to account for which is this
pier here.
And this pier here will not fail at the same values of lateral force that difference can be
captured only if you use a non-linear approach to estimate the response of the wall to
lateral forces. Now so, what your question is why would these forces be different the
question is why would these forces?
Student: Similar specification of the pier.
Yes, see the geometry is exactly the same the material is exactly the same. But the axial
load the axial load, which is due to the overturning effect for coming from the lateral
force is going to a situation where the left pier maybe in tension, the right pier may be in
compression. Now, because of the changed pre-compression levels the force at which it
fails will be different.
So, if you were to go with a linear elastic analysis, the linear elastic analysis is going to
tell you that two piers pier one and pier three will fail at the same level of lateral force.
However, the non-linear analysis will tell you that pier one is actually going to fail at a
significantly lower level of lateral force; because it is decompressed that can be captured
only with a non-linear analysis.
And, the problem is not so much in terms of the distribution of forces initially based on
the elastic stiffness. But, what happens at ultimate and what happens at ultimate
determines the failure and that cannot be captured in an elastic linear elastic analysis. So,
this particular the distribution of forces at ultimate depending on the level of: so the
strength capacity being determined by this unequal distribution coming from the effect of
the axial force coming from the overturning effect cannot be captured by the linear
elastic analysis. Linear elastic analysis we will just use the linear elastic stiffnesses and
tell us that the level at which the two piers are expected to fail is the same, but it will not
be the same. So, fundamental issue that you will have to confront is is it to use linear
elastic analysis approaches modeling and analysis approaches for doing seismic
assessment of masonry constructions?
723
And, it is best if you take an approach which accounts for the non-linearity in the
construction. And, this is something which is which is important for you to understand.
You can go completely wrong in terms of loads at which these individual elements can
fail ok.
So, therefore, what options do you have? And this is something that gives you the basis
to choose a certain modeling and analysis approach versus another. So, we have seen that
the role played by a rigid diaphragm and the role played by a spandrel is critical in terms
of how the pier behaves in terms of its boundary conditions right.
We looked at how a perforated wall has fixed boundary condition versus a cantilever.
Boundary conditions when these openings are not present. Plus, it is also important to
have rigid diaphragm action. And, if it is a structure which has a flexible diaphragm then
we have seen how this critical difference changes the way the forces are distributed to
the walls; the lateral force is distributed to the walls.
So, it is important to understand that depending on the structural configurations you can
have differences. So, if you were to look at case where you have no openings for
example, and just a shear wall which is multistoried shear wall in the masonry
construction. You could have a deflected shape due to the lateral forces which is closer
to a cantilever deflected shape right.
724
So, you have the maximum overturning movement, maximum base shear at the bottom
and reducing all the way to the top of the structure. So, it is possible to idealize in this
particular sort of a scenario it is possible to idealize the masonry structure as a cantilever
beam; if you were to adopt the sort of a frame modeling approach. However, if you have
openings if you have openings then the possibility is that it would not behave like a
cantilever.
It will start behaving closer to a shear deformation profile and the piers will now start
undergoing double curvature ok. So, how do you tackle this? This is an important
understanding of how the structure will behave. And the modeling option should be able
to capture the possible double curvature that is expected in the in the piers themselves.
And, you could have a situation which is actually in between the two. The second one
that you looked at is again an extreme where the spandrels are really strong and acting as
rigid couplers between the piers. And so, you have a uniform double curvature between,
I mean in each pier along the height.
In reality the spandrel also will deform it is not a rigid element and that can
actually, bring us to a situation which is actually in between these two. It can it is
somewhere between a cantilever profile and a shear deformation profile, which means
you must have apart from the piers some way of handling, how much the spandrel is
deforming and how much coupling is happening between the piers.
So, this is the realistic, the third case is really what is closer to reality where you do have
boundary effects, because of the stiffness and strength of the spandrel. And, you must
have a model that can actually account for both the strength of the pier stiffness of the
pier; strength of the pier spandrels and the stiffness of the spandrel.
725
And therefore, what we will examine from the next lecture is how you could actually
model a masonry structure using an equivalent frame approach. That is, you make a
frame model, but based on the understanding of how these horizontally aligned spandrels
and vertically aligned piers can actually be modeled. So, we look at that in the last
lecture on how you could do an equivalent frame modeling with non-linear parameters
for the masonry itself.
Thank you.
726
Prof. Arun Menon
Module - 05
Lecture - 40
Special Topics – Assessment of Existing Masonry Structures Part – III
Good morning, this is our last lecture on the remaining portion which is on the special
topic of assessment of existing Masonry Structures. Let me continue what we were
talking about in the last class.
We started looking at this aspect of structural modeling and analysis. And I was basically
introducing to you the different approaches that are appropriate considering the specific
lateral load mechanisms of resistance that load bearing masonry constructions typically
have.
So, we were talking about possible modeling approaches and one of the more popular
and appropriate approaches for modeling and analysis, particularly seismic analysis of
masonry constructions, is what is referred to as equivalent frame modeling where the
masonry construction is considered as an equivalent frame.
727
You make necessary modifications to consider the load bearing masonry wall as an
equivalent frame, a combination of horizontally aligned elements which are the
spandrels. And the vertically aligned elements which are the piers and so similar to what
a moment resisting frame would actually do to resist lateral forces.
We are looking at a masonry load bearing construction as being an equivalent frame.

Now, you can see that there is an additional phrase here with rigid offsets and we will
examine the reason why we need to have rigid offsets when we consider equivalent
frame modeling particularly with masonry constructions.
So, what is happening here is you can look at a masonry wall that is shown in the figure
at the top. This masonry wall is composed of the vertical load resisting elements which
are which also are the gravity load carrying elements the piers and then you have across
the openings spandrels which span and act as couplers between the piers. So, what is
actually being done in equivalent frame modeling is that the piers is, the vertical piers are
being considered similar to columns and these spandrels are being considered as similar
to beams.
And then you have beam column joins like in a frame building and those are the corners
between the piers and the spandrels. So, this sort of an equivalent frame idealization of a
masonry wall is done and then you attribute properties of the pier and of the spandrel to
the frame elements which may be the column element or the beam element. And the
beam column joined typically you know is, in a moment resisting for your beam column
joint in a steel or a concrete frame is a rigid node.
Similarly, here because of lower deformations at that joint between the pier and the
spandrel you will have to constrain the deformations and possibly model it as a rigid
joint as well. So, we will come back to that in a moment, so if you look at how do you
arrive at the equivalent frame for a given wall; a wall may have openings of different
sizes. You will have door openings, you can have ventilator openings, you can have
window openings they could be of different sizes.
And we have seen that the shear resistance of a masonry pier can be in a blank wall.
When you look at a shear wall with no openings in a shear wall with openings where the
perforation is determined what is the height of the deformable shear element and what is
the width of the deformable shear element.
728
So, if you look at the sketch below this is a sort of a guideline that helps us to establish
what is the height of the resisting pier right. So, you can see that in this figure there are
three different openings, there are two windows and one door opening of different sizes
right. Each of them is of a different size, what then happens to the resisting masonry
between these piers.
If I were to model them as equivalent columns what should be the height of that column,
because the column is now the deformable resisting element between these openings. So,
here is a rational procedure that is prescribed to identify what should be the height of the
element itself. So, you can see that it is purely based on geometry; geometry of the
opening and the distance between the edge of the wall and the opening determining what
this width D is. And H’ is established which is nothing but the average height
considering an angle of 30 degrees subtended from the opening itself from the top of the
opening itself.
And H’ is nothing, but the average height between each of these openings. So, from the
width of the opening the total inter storey height and the average height between the
openings it is possible to arrive at what the effective height you should be considering in
the equivalent frame modeling. So, basically once you establish what could be an
effective deformable height of the pier you use those to assemble the equivalent frame
model.
But, since these piers are all going to be possibly of different heights you need rigid
joints which will then ensure connections with the horizontal elements at the locations
where you have a floor diaphragm or the spandrel itself. So, you can see that the rigid
joint is of different dimensions and that is what will equalize the inter storey height with
respect to different sizes of piers.
So, basically as an assembly of spandrels or the beam elements, column elements of

varying heights and the joint elements you are converting the wall with openings into an
equivalent frame. And now this equivalent frame can be treated like you would treat a
regular portal frame and carry out an analysis. But the column element and the beam
elements will have cross sectional properties based on the actual cross section which is
the pier cross section or the spandrel cross section.
729
And elastic modulus and shear modulus based on the actual material and cross section
itself. That since the deformable heights could be different because of the sizes of the
openings the deformable length that you see in this next figure here; the deformable
length of the frame element could be different. Now, this deformable length being
different, you need these rigid offsets to ensure that the inter storey height is then
completely covered.
And that makes it uniform across of the different frame elements, so you see that how the
different lengths of rigid offsets is then used to ensure your total frame along the height
is modeled as an equivalent frame. So, what this rigid offset basically means is that the
calculated Heff is only a deformable part of the original pier; the rest of it because it is
part of the joint is where deformations are lower. And hence it is considered as a rigid
joint like you would consider a beam column joint in a regular moment resisting frame
and reinforced concrete elements.
So, it is it you see the equivalence coming between what the frame modeling or a portal
frame modeling would be versus a load bearing perforated masonry wall being converted
into an equivalent frame. So, this is a standard procedure that is adopted and there are
there are programs that are available that would assist you to do this.
Then you can assemble the entire three dimensional model of the structure in this form of
equivalent frames and carry out a gravity and a lateral load analysis like you would for a
regular framed structure. So, you can see how the element the equivalent frame model in
the undeformed and deformed geometry would actually look you see that the rigid nodes
have no deformation, the rigid joints have no deformation.
Whereas, deformation is actually happening only in the deformable length of the

masonry or the deformed length of the frame itself. Now, the other important aspect to
remember is the pier elements are provided with an idealized force-displacement
behavior and similarly a spandrel element is also provided a non-linear force-
displacement behavior.
So, each of these deformable elements the pier element in this case and the spandrel
element in this case are defined with a non-linear force displacement behavior. This can
also be considered as a hysteretic behavior and then cyclic response also can be carried
730
out considering non-linear within a non-linear analysis. So, one part of it deals with how
to convert the load bearing perforated shear wall into an equivalent frame.
And the other part actually requires that the masonry pier and the masonry spandrels
lateral load behavior in the form of some idealized force displacement non-linear curve is
available for you to be able to carry out non-linear static or even cyclic analysis for
which you will require a hysteretic curve; positive and negative cycles also available. So,
this is one standard approach that is adopted for masonry modeling and analysis.
There are commercially available software to perform this, not only in 2 dimension, not
only the plane analysis. But, also for 3 dimensional analysis where you can actually
assemble the connections in the three dimensional model between the different planes
and carry out a gravity load analysis or a static pushover analysis which is a lateral load
analysis.
And get the lateral load curve or the capacity curve of the structure itself, some of the
pushover analysis. Some of the analysis programs that are commercially available there
is one called seismic analysis of masonry which is a commercially available program.
731
There are other approaches which are based on a similar basis; again there are
commercially available software that can do this. Where you get into a slightly different
class of modeling called macro element modeling where again the equivalent frame that
modeling is being carried out. But, now you have the piers in the spandrels referred to as
macro element and at the macro element is provided non-linear characteristics which will
then help you to assemble the frame and carry out non-linear analysis.
So, in this particular case I am talking of a specific program called 3MURI which is 3
dimensional analysis of masonry walls. So, in this particular case as you can see a single
masonry wall with perforations is modeled as vertical macro elements which are the
piers the horizontal macro elements which are the lintels. And then the rigid node which
is again like the rigid offsets you had in the previous case the part which is non
deformable. And then an assembly of the rigid node, the lintels, and the piers can then
give you basically a frame modeling of the perforated shear wall itself.
So, in this particular approach there are two nodded macro elements which are
representing the piers and the spandrels or the lintels. And the corners as you can see the
gray colored corners are the joints which are assumed to be rigid bodies this is an
assumption you can have some deformation there, but it is small in comparison to what
happens in the piers the spandrels. The floor diaphragms, the floor diaphragm can be
732
considered to be rigid, but the floor can also be considered to have some deformability
and different in different directions.
So, you can also model that as orthotropic elements, so this particular approach allows
you to consider differences of a flexible diaphragm, semi rigid diaphragm and so on. So,
the macro element looks something like this for the pier you would have an assembly of
three parts. The central portion is the one that accounts for the shear behavior in the
macro element, and the top and the bottom ends particularly the zones where cracking
due to flexure and crushing due to flexure can happen.
Those locations are controlling the flexural behavior, so the assembly of 1, 2 and 3
elements which specific degrees of freedom required for the flexural behavior and the
shear behavior would then formulate the macro element which is then what is part of the
overall frame assembly itself.
So, even here by assembling 2 dimensional walls that are discretized in the form of
several macro elements, it is possible to arrive at a 3 dimensional model of the masonry
construction. And carry out static, linear, non-linear, static, and dynamic analysis and the
program that was referring to is another commercially available program called 3MURI.
Having said that, should you always be depending on commercially available programs;
is the behavior of masonry something that can be captured using simple calculations?
733
And the answer is yes to a large extent; the behavior of the simple masonry
construction can be captured even in the non-linear elastic range using simple
calculations.
But with assumptions that you should be aware of in terms of what goes into such
modeling and analysis. I am making reference to a simple equivalent static procedure the
modeling and analysis that will that will lead to a simple equivalent static procedure and
this is referred to as. So, this was a simple technique that was developed about four five
decades ago. But is a very simple, but powerful techniques to carry out non-linear
analysis on simple masonry construction.
Of course, once the configuration starts becoming complicated a number of factors come
into play and these may not be, so easy to carry out by hand calculations. So, I will take
you through the simple hand calculation-based procedure and it is relevant for me to
speak about this. Because, you have actually carried out calculations to estimate what is
the shear capacity of a masonry, unreinforced masonry wall.
This procedure just depends on the assembly of a number of piers which are shear walls
and arrive at the capacity of a storey of masonry. So, in this procedure what you are
basically doing is if you are looking at a masonry wall which has perforations you have
pier 1, pier 2, and pier 3. Now, this wall is subjected to lateral force and each of the piers,
the 3 piers from the lateral load resisting system of the wall itself.
Now, we know that if we were to look at one of these piers at a time knowing the
geometry of the piers and with assumptions on the boundary conditions; yes if it is a
blank wall you might want to assume that it has a cantilevered deformation profile. If it
is between openings with the perforated shear wall between openings, then you might
want to consider the role of the spandrel in considering a fixed-fixed deformation profile
or shear deformation profile for the pier.
So, you take each pier and for each pier estimate what is the shear capacity of the pier
right. We went through the process of estimating the shear capacity of piers you will try
to look at what is the mechanism that governs the failure of the pier. It could be a flexure
dominated mechanism, it could be a shear dominated mechanism, so you will estimate
what is the capacity of the pier.
734
Now, that is only giving you strength of the pier right, it is the giving you only the shear
capacity, but to be able to do analysis you also need the you also need the deformation
capacity. So, to be able to establish what the deformation capacity is you need two other
things, one is what is going to be the stiffness of this pier. This is what is coming from
the H-N interaction diagrams that you have carried out for the shear walls will help you
establish for this geometry with the boundary conditions consider.
And for the axial load that is acting on this wall on this pier considering the single story
or two storey structure, you will be able to establish what is the axial load. And then
calculate what is the lateral force capacity or shear capacity of this wall, we will also
know what mechanism it has failed in right; it is meant to fail in.
Now, given the geometry of the wall you will also be able to establish what is the
stiffness of the wall the lateral stiffness of the pier right. You assume shear deformation
profile or a cantilever deformation profile you will be able to establish what is the elastic
stiffness lateral stiffness of this wall.
Once that is established you are basically able to say what is the slope of this line. You
know what is Hu of this particular pier; you will be able to establish what is the elastic
displacement at the end of the elastic deformation the lateral deformation at the end of
the elastic cycle. We are considering that the behavior is linear up to this point, so you
will be able to establish what is the elastic displacement, lateral displacement knowing
the capacity of the wall and knowing the lateral stiffness of the wall.
Once that is done you need to know what is the maximum deformation capacity of this
wall, how do I arrive at the maximum deformation capacity of this wall? Approaches are
available; simple empirical approaches are available to establish what should be the
maximum capacity in deformation of the wall. And what is typically done is given the
simplicity of the procedure a simple empirical approach is prescribed that you assume
that if the wall is failing in shear, it has lower ultimate deformation capacity of about 0.4
to 0.5 percent drift. It is in terms of drift which is nothing but the lateral displacement Δ
over the height of the pier that you are considering, Δ/h. So, your drift is nothing but Δ/h,
so if the masonry pier is failing in shear assume it has a drift capacity of about 0.4 to 0.5
percent at ultimate.
735
And if it is failing in shear failing in flexure assumed that the drift capacity is higher
almost two times which is about 0.8 to 1.2 percent and these are numbers that are coming
out of experimental tests. You will agree with me that we had looked at the hysteretic
behavior of a masonry pier failing in shear versus a hysteretic behavior of masonry pier
failing in flexure or rocking.
We had seen that deformation capacity is much higher when it is flexure or rocking
control behavior, shear behavior the deformation capacity is significantly lower. And that
is why the ultimate drift is about 0.4 for masonry wall failing in shear whereas, the
ultimate drift in flexure or rocking is twice that value.
So, knowing the initial elastic displacement, the ultimate displacement is nothing but
drift ultimate drift into h and then you will be able to establish what this second point is.
But, there the curve is considered to be plastic, perfect elastic perfectly plastic, so you
have elastic perfectly plastic behavior this point is determined from your hn interaction.
This is established after you know the stiffness of the lateral stiffness of the wall and the
ultimate displacement capacity is known by making an assumption of what the failure
mechanism is and what the corresponding drift limit should be. And therefore, you get a
bi linear curve for each pier, so for each of these piers pier 1, pier 2, pier 3 you are able
to establish the bilinear curve.
Once you have the 3 bi linear curves you see that the total capacity of the wall is nothing
but a summation of the capacities of the pier. So, finally, what you are doing is for each
of the piers pier 1, pier 2, and pier 3 you are establishing what will be the force
displacement, the bilinear force displacement curve of each pier. Now, the total capacity
of the wall is nothing but the summation of these three, so you have the lateral force
displacement curve for pier 1, pier 2, and pier 3 for every point you will merely add up
all the values.
But, when you come to this displacement you come to this displacement the first pier has
gone into in elasticity. And therefore, you see that there is a change of slope here when
you then add there is a change of slope between the initial versus the second phase.
Because, the first pier has now plastified then you continue adding all the capacities you
reach the second point and at that point the pier here this pier here has now gone into
736
inelasticity. And therefore, you see a next change of slope keep adding, but after that you
do not have piers at this point you reach the third pier also going into inelasticity.
And therefore, you reach the plateau of the overall curve of the wall itself. Then continue
adding the displacements, but when you reach this displacement at this displacement pier
3 has reached its ultimate value that pier is no longer active. So, you see a sudden drop in
capacity third pier is out of the picture you have only two more piers left. Further
displacement, further displacement occurs you come to this point after which this pier;
pier 1 has failed you come down.
And you are left only with the pier 2 capacity and at the end of which pier 2 is also failed
pier 2 has flexural mechanism and that is why pier 2 has larger deformation capacity. So,
merely by adding up the 3 bilinear curves of each pier in this case we have arrived at the
lateral force capacity of this wall itself right. You can then look at, if you have two
parallel walls then, can the two parallel walls be added to give you the total capacity of
the storey itself.
And by this you are really arriving at the capacity of one story, knowing the capacity of
that storey you can then check against the shear demand on that storey whether the
whether each of these elements will fail for the level of shear demand that is coming onto
the wall itself. So, from your shear demand you will be able to estimate how much of
shear demand is expected on pier 1, pier 2, and pier 3. You know the capacities of pier 1
pier 2 and pier 3 you will be able to check if the demand with capacity ratio is less than 1
or greater than 1.
So, this is one simple approach that is available for carrying out non-linear analysis in
simple masonry constructions. However, what as I said; this comes from work that was
conducted quite a few decades ago. And this was a program that was developed called
pushover analysis of masonry developed in Slovenia 1978 by Tomazevic. And you could
do some further reading if you are interested in the book by Tomazevic on earthquake
resistant construction of masonry.
So, this approach this sort of an approach is actually helping you establish a global
capacity. Now, we looked at one wall; it could be an assembly of several walls in
situations you might have torsion. In some situations, you might not have torsion if the
737
eccentricity between the center of mass and center of stiffness of that storey is
coincident. So, you could actually do a 3 dimensional storey mechanism; a three
dimensional storey mechanism is possible.
We have seen how torsional effects can be considered by making an estimate of the
center of mass and center of stiffness and the eccentricities thereof. But if you are
making an assumption, if you are making calculations on the 3D storey mechanism. We
are assuming that you have a rigid diaphragm that is actually holding all the walls
together and resulting in torsion or a situation where there is only translation and no
torsion.
So, using such approaches and the two methods that I showed you earlier the equivalent
frame modeling or the macro element modeling approaches which are computer-based
calculations, you arrive at the total the global lateral capacity estimate of the masonry
building right. You want you will be able to establish what is the overall lateral force
capacity of the force capacity and deformation capacity of the masonry building as a
whole with the lateral load the horizontal elements and the vertical elements working
together.
However, if you remember in our earlier lectures, we have talked about the fact that a
masonry building may not necessarily work together right. Unless the connections
738
between the walls are good and unless you have a rigid diaphragm that is connected to
all the walls well, the masonry walls will actually act independently. So, this is
something that we have talked about earlier which means if you try to do a global
analysis on a system where the walls are not well connected to each other.
You have a problem; you are assuming that the masonry is actually acting integrally, but
it may not act integrally. And therefore, it is recommended that in conditions where you
know that the masonry structure is not well constructed for integral action. Particularly
with bands or well connected corners, what is necessary to be done is that you make
checks which are called local checks to see if a single wall can fail before the overall
structure can resist the lateral forces itself.
So, what we have seen in the last three approaches will lead us to a global estimate of the
capacities. However, if the masonry building is not well connected in terms of its wall to
wall connections and floor to wall connections, individual walls will start failing. And if
you see the two pictures here at the bottom you see that there is one wall separating off
from the other and having a tendency to overturn in the out of plane direction.
That is a local mechanism the whole structure is not responding it is only one wall which
is actually failing. So, local out of plane mechanism can occur, but if you were to see the
picture on the right, you have shear cracks formed in the masonry walls that is an in-
plane mechanism. But that in-plane mechanism is happening simply because the whole
building is able to act as one and the shear walls are resisting. The global estimate that
we saw in the previous slides is appropriate for such behavior; not for the behavior that is
on the left.
It is a problem if you were to use those approaches to estimate the global capacity of a
system like this. So, in such cases what is done is called a local mechanism and I am just
introducing this to you, so that you know that apart from the global checks you also need
to do these local checks particularly in buildings where connections are very poor.
So, what is done is that each of these elements are behaving as rigid blocks that can
simply overturn and fail in out of plane direction. So, here it is really not depending on
the strength of that element, it is just collapse that is due to loss of equilibrium of that
element. And therefore, rigid body dynamics can be used and that is exactly what is used
739
in such cases collapse is mainly due to loss of equilibrium rather than material strength
that is being exceeded.
As you can see in the shear failure formation in the picture on the right bottom corner.
So, what is normally done is you assume rigid body behavior of those elements here this
wall for example, is acting like a rigid body and just overturning. And principle of virtual
work is used to estimate what is the lateral acceleration required to make that block
overturn; to develop a mechanism.
And the overturning force is equilibrated to the resisting force from which you will be
able to establish what the acceleration, the horizontal acceleration required to cause this
overturning is going to be. So, if you see this little example here limit analysis is used
here in this piece of the wall which is expected to fail in the out of plane direction.
So, you know the geometry, you know the total weight and you are able to estimate what
is the resistance of that element. And calculate what is the force coming on to that
element and the ratio between the overturning force to the resisting force will be able to
tell you at what level of acceleration is the failure expected.
And that level of acceleration is considered as a percentage of the total weight of that
small element we you are looking at. So, if P1 is the self weight of the wall itself at a
lateral force equal to some α times P you are getting the mechanism formation. So, it is
simple rigid body dynamics that is being considered here and that check can be done.
In addition to the global check to see if there are there are susceptible and vulnerable
elements, vulnerable to out of plane failure mechanisms in the masonry structure. So,
local mechanism check becomes necessary particularly when connections are poor in
masonry constructions ok.
740
To close how do you then go about carrying out your verification. Let us say you are you
have got the material strengths; that is what we looked at originally we get the geometry
you have to get the you have to get the residual strengths.
And then make your capacity estimates; once you have got your capacity estimates and
you know what is the demand coming onto the structure you need to do this verification
of the demand to capacity of the whole structure. How is the structure going to survive
for a level of lateral action that the structure is going to be subjected to. There is this
interesting flowchart which then actually captures how you go about estimating the
lateral capacity and make checks on whether the structure would be able to survive or
fail under a given level of seismic excitation.
This is with reference to the New Zealand standards and the New Zealand standards its
version in 2016 actually looks at existing buildings, and how you could go about doing a
seismic assessment of existing buildings. And now this very nicely captures all the
concepts that we have been examining earlier in our course as well.
So, for seismic verification you begin by; you estimate the component capacity you are
talking of walls you want to start estimating the lateral capacity of each wall right it can
be walls that can be diaphragms. So, first you need to be able to establish the capacity of
each component in the earthquake load path, the seismic load path.
741
So, you determine the component capacities that is your first step, your second step is to
understand whether the diaphragm that is there in the structure, is it a rigid diaphragm or
is it a flexible diaphragm? And we have seen the definition of were flexible diaphragm
based on how much in plane deformation is going to happen delta max versus delta min
being within a certain specific value.
Now, the diaphragm stiffness if it is rigid you have a certain approach, if it is flexible
you have a different approach simply because, if it is rigid your lateral force distribution
is going to be based on the stiffnesses. So, second question is are there any eccentricities,
if there are eccentricities apart from the direction you also get some caution has here. So,
first question is if the diaphragm stiff; if it is classified as a rigid diaphragm then you do
a lateral load analysis by distributing the shear force demand to the respective
components based on their stiffnesses.
And also check if torsional shear is expected due to eccentricities, then at that stage you
can go and check if the demand to capacity ratio for each component is acceptable. You
know the capacity of a component, you know the shear demand coming to the
component you will check if the shear demand to shear capacity is less than one. And
that will tell you that the component is going to be able to resist the demand seismic
demand coming on to it.
If it is a flexible diaphragm you know that it is the tributary area that is going to be what
determines how much of earthquake demand is going to the going to the element to the
component. So, you make an analysis based on that and then check what the demand to
capacity ratio for that component is. Now, what is important is you need to check for
every component, but the most critical component then determines what is the total
capacity of the structure.
So, when you are making the calculations for each component or for each stock of
component is one wall with several piers or the wall together several walls together in
the seismic load path itself. So, identify which is the most critical load path in this in the
structure.
That will then determine what is going to be the capacity that the structure what is going
to be the shear demand that the structure is going to be able to resist. So, you might have
742
to then say the total base shear that the structure will get is a certain value from your
analysis. But, the critical component is able to resist only a part of that; that means, the
capacity of the structure is now less than the expected demand coming onto the structure.
So, you are basically going to scale the base shear based on the capacity of the critical
element or the critical load path. Once you do that if that has to be transmitted
successfully; if that shear force resistance has to be successfully transmitted from one
component to the other finally, to the foundation, the connections have to be good. So,
this stage for this level of base shear capacity you will go and check what the connection
adequacy is.
So, this continues and you have to check if this shear force can now be transmitted
successfully by the diaphragms and also the connections the shear connections between
the diaphragms and the components and the load resisting components. So, at this stage
we have to check if the diaphragm is adequate, if the connections are adequate and here
if the diaphragm is going to be able to transmit the lateral forces through adequate
connections, then you now have to check if the diaphragm deformations are within
acceptable limits. But, if the diaphragm and the connections are unable to transmit the
base shear capacity that the component was able to take you have a problem, because the
connectivity is now not provided by adequate connections.
743
Therefore, you will establish how much shear force can that connection actually
transmits that becomes the shear force that the building will resist not the shear capacity
of the component. So, you would basically have to now scale down the shear force that
the building will be able to resist, because the connections are not able to resist the shear
capacity that the components have.
So, you factor down the global capacity and then so you either come down this way or
come down the other way depending on the adequacy of the diaphragms and their
connections. And then at that stage check if the horizontal diaphragm when it receives
the lateral force that we are talking of, whether the diaphragm displacements are within
acceptable limits.
So, this is the final check that is done if the horizontal diaphragm’s deformation limits
are within are acceptable, then that shear force is really the capacity global capacity of
the structure. If it is unable to then you will have to establish that this is the shear force
that takes the deformation of the horizontal diaphragm to its limit, that is the actual
capacity of the structure.
So, you will compare that capacity to the overall base shear that the structure is being
subjected to and you will see that in in many cases if the connections are not adequate, if
the diaphragm is not adequately stiff, the overall structure’s capacity is severely
compromised with respect to the total base shear that the structure will be able to resist.
So, this simple frame work gives you a possibility of respecting the importance of
connections. And then, also considering the capacities of individual elements in the
masonry load bearing construction.
744
So, of course all this basically leads to identifying whether there is a need to strengthen
the structure, need to retrofit the structure. So, that is something that I am not touching
upon within the within this course, even in the special topics. But, these are two
standards that you can refer to, to get a basic idea of how then would you start ensuring
earthquake risk reduction in the structure that you are assessing.
And of course, focus again has to be on adequacy of connections, adequate stiffness of

the diaphragms, and adequate shear capacity of the components. So, you will basically
work on all these three levels connections should be good, diaphragm should be capable
of transmitting forces and each component must be able to resist. And therefore,
interventions would have to focus on these three aspects. There are two standards we
have an Indian standard that looks at evaluation repair and strengthening of masonry
buildings.
This is a guideline document and there are in fact, not many calculations that go into
designing the interventions or the strengthening measures. But is a broad document that
looks at evaluation to strengthening of masonry constructions. The ASCE document,
ASCE 41 is a document that actually looks at if you were to do seismic rehabilitation of
existing buildings; different types of building.
745
And of course, one of them one of the chapters deals with masonry buildings; you have
the different steps that have to be followed and different options that can be looked at ok.
So, with that we conclude the course and that was the last module in the last part of the
module on special topics looking at assessment of masonry constructions. I hope you
enjoyed the course.
746
THIS BOOK IS
NOT FOR SALE
NOR COMMERCIAL USE
(044) 2257 5905/08 nptel.ac.in swayam.gov.in

APznzaYQIFhGd7 IiReqz4MyRPR9wy3cDmmlaM3q6yYd4SMUhwHkMKY8-AYK1HDpBjNFPCuXTV-VrMhijWRmtaaabouojvr6HlT6kizHe7gTl39fcRHOxT4kQfRjAlvcJ7zVAXW6n-TluxK0waJkoyFkIip Zr8fQoBzo0x6NEptmyHDj6 39muOvdVLScMLFgtGsttXJtutzvsRgPasFrlp N

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

APznzaYQIFhGd7 IiReqz4MyRPR9wy3cDmmlaM3q6yYd4SMUhwHkMKY8-AYK1HDpBjNFPCuXTV-VrMhijWRmtaaabouojvr6HlT6kizHe7gTl39fcRHOxT4kQfRjAlvcJ7zVAXW6n-TluxK0waJkoyFkIip Zr8fQoBzo0x6NEptmyHDj6 39muOvdVLScMLFgtGsttXJtutzvsRgPasFrlp N

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INDEX

S. No Topic Page No.

(Refer Slide Time: 03:47)

Student: (Refer Time: 10:24).

(Refer Slide Time: 13:49)

Student: (Refer Time: 19:20).

Student: (Refer Time: 19:21).

(Refer Slide Time: 21:43)

In that context it becomes interesting to examine how historical masonry constructions

Student: (Refer Time: 23:25).

(Refer Slide Time: 30:11)

(Refer Slide Time: 36:59)

(Refer Slide Time: 45:15)

(Refer Slide Time: 00:31)

(Refer Slide Time: 03:01)

Now, if we were to examine modern constructions in this context of response to lateral

(Refer Slide Time: 08:45)

(Refer Slide Time: 14:05)

(Refer Slide Time: 18:35)

(Refer Slide Time: 25:59)

(Refer Slide Time: 30:13)

(Refer Slide Time: 35:41)

(Refer Slide Time: 37:55)

(Refer Slide Time: 39:13)

(Refer Slide Time: 41:19)

(Refer Slide Time: 48:49)

(Refer Slide Time: 49:03)

(Refer Slide Time: 49:37)

(Refer Slide Time: 00:14)

(Refer Slide Time: 06:28)

So, this is a rather challenging, it is a good flooring system; however, from a

(Refer Slide Time: 17:32)

(Refer Slide Time: 24:14)

Typically, we would provide symmetrical reinforcement. So, this zone in compression

(Refer Slide Time: 33:58)

Again, when we talk of reinforced masonry it is a combination of both horizontal and

(Refer Slide Time: 42:55)

(Refer Slide Time: 46:41)

(Refer Slide Time: 00:41)

(Refer Slide Time: 08:53)

(Refer Slide Time: 16:47)

(Refer Slide Time: 01:20)

(Refer Slide Time: 07:12)

(Refer Slide Time: 10:56)

Now, in terms of the properties of masonry, we are going to be examining of few

(Refer Slide Time: 19:18)

(Refer Slide Time: 29:20)

Morning. So, we will continue looking at the properties of the constituents. We

(Refer Slide Time: 01:25)

(Refer Slide Time: 05:07)

(Refer Slide Time: 09:57)

(Refer Slide Time: 13:49)

(Refer Slide Time: 19:13)

(Refer Slide Time: 28:05)

(Refer Slide Time: 30:02)

(Refer Slide Time: 32:41)

Student: (Refer Time: 35:43) water.

(Refer Slide Time: 38:24)

Of course, another property that is of importance, knowledge of these properties useful is

(Refer Slide Time: 41:16)

(Refer Slide Time: 43:55)

Compressive strength can be estimated. Transverse strength can be estimated. Drying

(Refer Slide Time: 46:13)

(Refer Slide Time: 48:28)