Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.    2020, Vol. 14 Issue (2) : 411-434     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-019-0602-y
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Mechanical properties characterization of different types of masonry infill walls
André FURTADO1, Hugo RODRIGUES2(), António ARÊDE1, Humberto VARUM1
1. CONSTRUCT-LESE, Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Porto 4200-465, Portugal
2. RISCO, School of Technology and Management, Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Leiria 2411-901, Portugal
Download: PDF(7078 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

It is remarkable, the recent advances concerning the development of numerical modeling frameworks to simulate the infill panels’ seismic behavior. However, there is a lack of experimental data of their mechanical properties, which are of full importance to calibrate the numerical models. The primary objective of this paper is to present an extensive experimental campaign of mechanical characterization tests of infill masonry walls made with three different types of masonry units: lightweight vertical hollow concrete blocks and hollow clay bricks. Four different types of experimental tests were carried out, namely: compression strength tests, diagonal tensile strength tests, and flexural strength tests parallel and perpendicular to the horizontal bed joints. A total amount of 80 tests were carried out and are reported in the present paper. The second objective of this study was to compare the mechanical properties of as-built and existing infill walls. The results presented and discussed herein, will be in terms of strain-stress curves and damages observed within the tests. It was observed a fragile behavior in the panels made with hollow clay horizontal bricks, without propagation of cracks. The plaster increased the flexural strength by 57%.

Keywords masonry infill walls      experimental characterization      compression strength      shear diagonal strength      flexural strength     
Corresponding Authors: Hugo RODRIGUES   
Just Accepted Date: 17 January 2020   Online First Date: 31 March 2020    Issue Date: 08 May 2020
 Cite this article:   
André FURTADO,Hugo RODRIGUES,António ARÊDE, et al. Mechanical properties characterization of different types of masonry infill walls[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(2): 411-434.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-019-0602-y
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2020/V14/I2/411
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
André FURTADO
Hugo RODRIGUES
António ARÊDE
Humberto VARUM
Fig.1  Examples of buildings built with horizontal hollow clay bricks: (a) residential and commercial 5-storey building in Portugal (Portugal); b) residential 17-storey building in Coruna (Spain).
Fig.2  Examples of buildings built with VHCB315: (a) residential and commercial 4-storey building in Soure (Portugal); b) residential 8-storey building in Lisboa (Portugal).
Fig.3  Masonry units used in the experimental campaign: (a) HCHB110; (b) HCHB150; and (c) VHCB315.
material properties HCHB110 HCHB150 VHCB315
compressive strength fc,unit (MPa) ≥1.5 ≥1.5 ≥3.25
content of active soluble salts S0 category S0 category S0 category
fire reaction A1 Euroclass A1 Euroclass A1 Euroclass
masonry unit mass (kg/unit) 3.9 5.2 20
thermal transmission coefficient U (m²K/W) 0.29 0.42 0.51
acoustic insulation Rw (dB) 40 43 53
voids (%) 57.7 57.9 26.9
Tab.1  Summary of the masonry units’ material properties (information provided by the product datasheet)
Fig.4  Infill panels made with VHCB315 masonry units: construction methodology.
type of tested masonry infill panels A B C D
fc,m (MPa) ft,m (MPa) fc,m
(MPa)
ft,m
(MPa)
fc,m
(MPa)
ft,m
(MPa)
fc,m
(MPa)
ft,m
(MPa)
VHCB315 6.10 2.03 6.52 2.18 4.83 1.59 4.74 1.80
HCHB110 8.08 2.75 8.08 2.75 10.61 3.28 8.08 2.75
HCHB150 13.35 4.51 12.38 4.76 14.13 4.98 14.13 4.98
HCHB150P10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12.95 4.52 12.95 4.52
HCHB150 (existent) 11.90 9.03 11.90 9.03 11.90 9.03 11.90 9.03
HCHB150P10 (existent) 12.60 5.18 N/A N/A 12.60 5.18 N/A N/A
Tab.2  Summary of the mortar material properties of each specimens’ group.
type of masonry infill panels compressive strength tests diagonal tensile strength tests flexural strength tests parallel to the horizontal bed joints flexural strength tests perpendicular to the horizontal bed joints
VHCB315 3 3 5 5
HCHB110 5 4 5 5
HCHB150 5 5 5 5
HCHB150P10 N/A N/A 6 5
HCHB150 (existing) 4 1 1 3
HCHB150P10 (existing) 4 N/A 1 N/A
total 21 13 23 23
Tab.3  Summary of the experimental campaign: number of specimens tested
Fig.5  Compressive strength tests: (a) test setup specimens made with VHCB315 masonry units; (b) specimens made with HCHB masonry units.
masonry unit dimensions masonry infill panels’ geometric dimensions
lu (mm) hu (mm) length ls (mm) height hs (mm) thickness ts (mm)
≤300 ≤150 ≥(2×lu) ≥5 hu ≥3 ts and≤15ts and≥ts tu
>150 ≥3 hu
>300 ≤150 ≥(1.5×lu) ≥5 hu
>150 ≥3 hu
Tab.4  Masonry infill panels geometric dimensions according to the standard EN 1052-1 [11] recommendations
Fig.6  Compressive strength tests: specimens’ geometric dimensions according to standard EN 1052-1 [11] recommendations.
Fig.7  Compressive strength tests: specimens’ geometric dimensions and instrumentation: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB specimens.
Fig.8  Compressive strength test results: Stress vs Strain curves: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB110, (c) HCHB150 and (d) HCHB150 (existent); (e) HCHB 150P10 (existent); (f) global average curves.
statistical parameter VHCB315 HCHB110 HCHB150 HCHB150 (existing) HCHB150P10 (existing)
fc,mean (MPa) 1.82 0.66 1.09 0.806 0.894
SD (MPa) 0.094 0.131 0.140 0.102 0.176
COV (%) 5.11 19.68 12.81 12.62 19.68
fc,k (MPa) 1.52 0.54 0.91 N/A N/A
Tab.5  Compressive strength results: statistical parameters
statistical parameter VHCB315 HCHB110 HCHB150 HCHB150 (existing) HCHB150P10 (existing)
Emean (MPa) 3251 1837 1975 2067 2221
SD (MPa) 355 563 719 286 324
COV (%) 10.9 30.6 36.7 15.2 14.5
Emean/fc,mean 1786 2783 1811 2564 2484
Tab.6  Elasticity modulus results: statistical parameters
Fig.9  Compressive strength tests: damages observed: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB110, (c) HCHB150; (d) HCHB150 (existent) and e) HCHB150P10 (existent).
Fig.10  Diagonal shear tension strength tests: (a) test setup view; (b) instrumentation and geometric dimensions (mm).
Fig.11  Diagonal shear tension strength test results: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB110; (c) HCHB150; (d) HCHB150 (existent); and Global comparison.
statistical parameter VHCB315 HCHB110 HCHB150 HCHB150 (existent)
Ss,mean (MPa) 0.204 0.565 0.645 0.38
SD (MPa) 0.012 0.199 0.143 N/A
COV (%) 5.71 35.2 22.2 N/A
Tab.7  Shear stress statistical results: statistical parameters
Fig.12  – Diagonal shear strength test results: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB110; (c) HCHB150; (d) HCHB150 (existing); (e) global comparison.
statistical parameter VHCB315 HCHB110 HCHB150 HCHB150 (existing)
Gmean (MPa) 1389 1141 996 1198
SD (MPa) 500.5 135 88.7 N/A
COV (%) 36.1 11.8 8.91 N/A
Tab.8  Rigidity modulus results: statistical parameters
Fig.13  Diagonal tensile strength tests: Failure modes (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB110; (c) HCHB150; (d) HCHB150 (existing).
Fig.14  Flexural strength tests parallel to horizontal bed joints: test setup apparatus (a) lateral view; and (b) back view.
Fig.15  Flexural strength tests parallel to horizontal bed joints: specimens dimensions according to NP EN1052-2 standard (CEN 1999).
Fig.16  Flexural strength tests parallel to horizontal bed joints: (a) instrumentation and specimens’ dimensions VHCB315; (b) HCB110, HCB150, HCB150P100, HCHB150 (existing), HCHB150P100 (existing).
statistical parameter VHCB315 HCHB110 HCHB150 HCHB150P100
fb,mean,paralell (MPa) 0.083 0.117 0.139* 0.218
SD (MPa) 0.014 0.005 0.018 0.038
COV (%) 14.2 4.26 12.63 17.64
fb,k,paralell (MPa) 0.055 0.078 0.093* 0.145
Tab.9  Flexural strength parallel to horizontal bed joints: statistical parameters
Fig.17  Flexural strength tests parallel to horizontal bed joints: Flexural strength vs OOP displacement: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCB110; (c) HCB150; (d) HCHB150P10; (e) HCB150 (existing) and HCHB150P10 (existing); (f) global results.
Fig.18  Flexural strength tests parallel to horizontal bed joints failure modes: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB110; (c) HCHB150; (d) HCHB150P10 (existing); (e) HCHB150 (existent).
Fig.19  Flexural strength tests perpendicular to horizontal bed joints: test setup apparatus: (a) lateral view; (b) back view.
Fig.20  Flexural strength tests perpendicular to horizontal bed joints: specimens dimensions according to NP EN1052-2 standard (CEN 1999).
Fig.21  Flexural strength tests perpendicular to horizontal bed joints instrumentation and specimens’ geometric dimensions: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCB110; HCB150; HCB150P10; HCHB150 (existing).
statistical parameter VHCB31.5 HCHB110 HCHB150 HCHB150P100 HCHB150 (Existent)
fb,perpendicular,mean (MPa) 0.166 0.271 0.322 0.303 0.261
SD (MPa) 0.042 0.083 0.058 0.024 0.074
COV (%) 25.2 30.3 18.1 7.9 28.4
fb,k,perpendicular (MPa) 0.111 0.181 0.215 0.202 N/A
Tab.10  Flexural strength perpendicular to horizontal bed joints: summary of test results
Fig.22  Flexural strength tests perpendicular to horizontal bed joints stress vs OOP displacement: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB110; (c) HCHB150; (d) HCHB150P10; (e) global results.
Fig.23  Flexural strength tests parallel to horizontal bed joints failure modes: (a) VHCB315; (b) HCHB110; (c) HCHB150; (d) HCHB150P10 (existing); (e) HCHB150 (existing).
mechanical properties VHCB315 HCHB110 HCHB150 HCHB150P10
fc,mean (MPa) 1.82 0.66 0.806 N/A
Emean (MPa) 3251 1837 1975 N/A
Ss (MPa) 0.204 0.565 0.645 N/A
G (MPa) 1389 1141 996 N/A
fb,parallel,mean (MPa) 0.083 0.117 0.139 0.218
fb,perpendicular,mean (MPa) 0.166 0.271 0.322 0.303
Tab.11  Summary of mechanical properties obtained from the experimental campaign
fc, m mortar compressive strength
ft, m mortar flexural strength
fc masonry infill panels compressive strength
fc, mean masonry infill panels mean compressive strength
fc, k masonry infill panels characteristic compressive strength
Emean mean masonry infill walls elasticity modulus
m average value
σ standard deviation
CoV coefficient of Variation
Rw masonry unit sound insulation resistance
Rt masonry unit thermal resistance
fc, unit masonry unit compressive strength perpendicular to the holes
Ss masonry infill panels shear stress
Ss, mean masonry infill panels mean shear stress
γ mhear straining
Gmean mean masonry infill panels rigidity modulus
fb, parallel masonry infill panels flexural strength parallel to the horizontal bed joints
fb, parallel, mean mean masonry infill panels flexural strength parallel to the horizontal bed joints
fb, parallel, k characteristic masonry infill panels flexural strength parallel to the horizontal bed joints
fb, perpendicular masonry infill panels flexural strength perpendicular to the horizontal bed joints
fb, perpendicular, mean mean masonry infill panels flexural strength perpendicular to the horizontal bed joints
fb, perpendicular, k characteristic masonry infill panels flexural strength perpendicular to the horizontal bed joints
  
1 A Furtado, H Rodrigues, A Arêde, H. VarumOut-of-plane behavior of masonry infilled RC frames based on the experimental tests available: A systematic review. Construction and Building Materials, 2018, 168: 831–848
2 M Di Domenico, P Ricci, G M Verderame. Experimental assessment of the influence of boundary conditions on the out-of-plane response of unreinforced masonry infill walls. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2018 (in press)
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1453411
3 S, Kadysiewski K M. Mosalam Modeling of unreinforced masonry infill walls considering in-plane and out-of-plane interaction. In: The 11th Canadian Masonry Symposium. Toronto: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, 2009
4 A Furtado, H Rodrigues, A Arêde, H Varum. Simplified macro-model for infill masonry walls considering the out-of-plane behaviour. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2016, 45(4): 507–524
https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2663
5 P G Asteris, L Cavaleri, F Di Trapani, A K Tsaris. Numerical modelling of out-of-plane response of infilled frames: State of the art and future challenges for the equivalent strut macromodels. Engineering Structures, 2017, 132: 110–122
6 F Di Trapani, P B Shing, L Cavaleri. Macroelement model for in-plane and out-of-plane responses of masonry infills in frame structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2018, 144(2): 04017198
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001926
7 V Singhal, D C Rai. Suitability of half-scale burnt clay bricks for shake table tests on masonry walls. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 2014, 26(4): 644–657
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000861
8 D Ferretti, E Michelini, G Rosati. Mechanical characterization of autoclaved aerated concrete masonry subjected to in-plane loading: Experimental investigation and FE modeling. Construction and Building Materials, 2015, 98: 353–365
9 L Cavaleri, M Papia, G Macaluso, F Di Trapani, P Colajanni.Definition of diagonal Poisson’s ratio and elastic modulus for infill masonry walls. Materials and Structures, 2014, 47(1): 239–262
10 C L Knox, D Dizhur, J M Ingham. Experimental study on scale effects in clay brick masonry prisms and wall panels investigating compression and shear related properties. Construction and Building Materials, 2018, 163: 706–713
11 CEN. EN 1052-1: Methods of Test for Masonry, Part 1: Determination of Compressive Strength. London: British Standards Institution, 1998
12 ASTM. E 519-02. Standard Test Method for Diagonal Tension (Shear) in Masonry Assemblages. West Conshohcken: American Society for Testing and Materials, 2002
13 RILEM. RILEM TC 76-LUM. Diagonal Tensile Strength of Small Walls Specimens. RILEM Publications SARL, 1994
14 CEN. EN 1052-2: Methods of Test for Masonry, Determination of Flexural Strength. London: British Standards Institution, 1999
15 CEN. EN 1015-11: Methods of Test for Mortar for Masonry, Part 11: Determination of Flexural and Compressive Strength of Hardened Mortar. London: British Standards Institution, 2004
16 P Pereira, M Pereira, J Ferreira, P Lourenço. Behavior of masonry infill panels in RC frames subjected to in plane and out of plane loads. In: The 7th Conference on Analytical Models and New Concepts in Concrete and Masonry Structure Cracow. Poland, 2012
17 S Sahlin. Structural Masonry. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1971
18 B P Sinha, R Pedreschi. Compressive strength and some elastic properties of brickwork. International Journal of Masonry Construction, 1983, 3(1): 19–27
19 S A Bartolomé , D Quiun, K Barr, C Pineda. Seismic Reinforcement of Confined Masonry Walls made with Hollow Bricks using Wire Meshes. In: The 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Lisbon, 2012
20 A W Hendry. Structural Masonry. London: Macmillan Education Ltd., 1990
21 T Paulay, M J N Priestley. Seismic design of RC and masonry buildings. New York: Wiley Interscience, 1992
22 European Committee for Standardisation. Eurocode 6: Part 1-1–General Rules for Buildings–Rules for Reinforced and Unreinforced Masonry. Brussels: European Committee for Standardisation, 2005
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Rakesh DUMARU, Hugo RODRIGUES, Humberto VARUM. Seismic fragility assessment of revised MRT buildings considering typical construction changes[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(1): 241-266.
[2] Mingxue LIU, Jiaru QIAN. Moment-curvature relationship of FRP-concrete-steel double-skin tubular members[J]. Front Arch Civil Eng Chin, 2009, 3(1): 25-31.
[3] BU Liangtao, SHI Chuxian, SONG Li. Consumption of carbon fiber plates in the reinforced concrete beams strengthened with CFPs[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2007, 1(4): 393-398.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed