پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 21 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 687 |
| تعداد مقالات | 9,985 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 70,957,399 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 62,422,645 |
Strength Comparison of Unreinforced Masonry Wall Made of Different Types of Brick | ||
| Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering | ||
| مقاله 9، دوره 11، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 32، بهمن 2023، صفحه 159-179 اصل مقاله (1.74 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Regular Paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22075/jrce.2023.28394.1711 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Mohammad Rafiqul Islam1؛ Abul Hasnat* 1؛ Raquib Ahsan1؛ Ahmed Tohameem Alam2 | ||
| 1Department of Civil Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh | ||
| 2Faculty of Environment and Natural Sciences, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, Cottbus, 03046, Germany | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 21 شهریور 1401، تاریخ بازنگری: 07 فروردین 1402، تاریخ پذیرش: 14 تیر 1402 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| An attempt has been made in this study to correlate compressive strength, shear strength, and wall stiffness for clay burnt bricks with frog mark and machine-made bricks without frog mark. In this experimental study, 8 prisms and 8 unreinforced masonry (URM) walls (254 mm) with a size of 1524 mm X 914 mm were constructed with two different types of bricks, i.e., clay burnt brick with frog mark and machine-made brick without frog mark. Two types of mortar thicknesses 13 mm and 19 mm were used in the test specimens. The prism specimens were tested under axial compression load normal to the bed joints and the wall specimens were tested under horizontal incremental cyclic loading along with the constant axial compressive load. Lateral loading was applied using a loading control pattern. The specimens were tested under cyclic loading conditions displacing them laterally, along the axis of the walls and their load-deformation behavior was measured by dial gauges. It is observed that with increasing mortar thickness prism, ultimate strength increases 18.0% for clay burnt brick and with increasing mortar thickness prism, ultimate strength increases 1.3% for machine-made brick. On the other hand, with increasing the mortar thickness, ultimate shear strength decreases 9.6% for clay burnt brick with frog mark and with increasing mortar thickness ultimate, shear strength decreases 8.0% for machine-made bricks without frog mark. In clay burnt brick shear strength is 12.5% more than machine-made brick. With increasing the mortar thickness, ductility decreases 22.0% for clay burnt brick and 20.0% for machine-made bricks. Based on the findings, it is stated that clay burnt brick is preferable to machine manufactured brick. This study will aid in the comprehension of the behavior of both types of bricks used in masonry construction, given that masonry is a common building material. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Axial compression؛ Brick masonry construction؛ Clay burnt brick؛ Compressive strength؛ Cyclic Loading؛ Load-deformation behavior؛ Shear strength | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
[1] Drysdale RG, Hamid AA, Baker LR. Masonry structures: behavior and design. (No Title) 1994.
[2] Messali F, Esposito R, Jafari S, Ravenshorst G, Eguren PK, Rots J. A multiscale experimental characterisation of Dutch unreinforced masonry buildings. 16th Eur. Conf. Earthq. Eng., 2018.
[3] Bruneau M. State‐of‐the‐Art Report on Seismic Performance of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings. J Struct Eng 1994;120:230–51. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1994)120:1(230).
[4] Rehman MU, Ahmad M, Rashid K. Influence of fluxing oxides from waste on the production and physico-mechanical properties of fired clay brick: A review. J Build Eng 2020;27:100965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100965.
[5] Borah B, Kaushik HB, Singhal V. Development of a Novel V-D Strut Model for Seismic Analysis of Confined Masonry Buildings. J Struct Eng 2021;147. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002941.
[6] Polese M, Verderame GM, Mariniello C, Iervolino I, Manfredi G. Vulnerability Analysis for Gravity Load Designed RC Buildings in Naples – Italy. J Earthq Eng 2008;12:234–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460802014147.
[7] Page AW. Finite Element Model for Masonry. J Struct Div 1978;104:1267–85. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0004969.
[8] Pandey BH, Meguro K. Simulation of brick masonry wall behavior under in-plane lateral loading using applied element method. 13th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., 2004, p. 1–6.
[9] Hasnat A, Ahsan R, Yashin SM. Quasi-static in-plane behavior of full-scale unreinforced masonry walls retrofitted using ferro-cement overlay. Asian J Civ Eng 2022;23:649–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-022-00447-7.
[10] Vasconcelos G, Lourenço PB. In-Plane Experimental Behavior of Stone Masonry Walls under Cyclic Loading. J Struct Eng 2009;135:1269–77. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000053.
[11] Alecci V, Fagone M, Rotunno T, De Stefano M. Shear strength of brick masonry walls assembled with different types of mortar. Constr Build Mater 2013;40:1038–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.11.107.
[12] Léopold M, Désiré TJ, Germain M. Strength characteristics of earth bricks and their application in construction. Int Res J Eng 2014;2:1–7.
[13] Dabaieh M, Heinonen J, El-Mahdy D, Hassan DM. A comparative study of life cycle carbon emissions and embodied energy between sun-dried bricks and fired clay bricks. J Clean Prod 2020;275:122998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122998.
[14] Ikechukwu AF, Shabangu C. Strength and durability performance of masonry bricks produced with crushed glass and melted PET plastics. Case Stud Constr Mater 2021;14:e00542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00542.
[15] Hasnat A, Das T, Ahsan R, Alam AT, Ahmed H. In-plane cyclic response of unreinforced masonry walls retrofitted with ferrocement. Case Stud Constr Mater 2022;17:e01630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01630.
[16] Hasnat A, Das T, Ahsan R, Alam AT, Ahmed H. Efficacy of Ferrocement at retrofitting URM walls. ResearchGate 2022. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.15679.79525.
[17] S. Mohammed M. Finite Element Analysis of Unreinforced Masonry Walls. Al-Rafidain Eng J 2010;18:55–68. https://doi.org/10.33899/rengj.2010.31528.
[18] Ashraf M, Khan AN, Naseer A, Ali Q, Alam B. Seismic Behavior of Unreinforced and Confined Brick Masonry Walls Before and After Ferrocement Overlay Retrofitting. Int J Archit Herit 2012;6:665–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2011.599916.
[19] El-Diasity M, Okail H, Kamal O, Said M. Structural performance of confined masonry walls retrofitted using ferrocement and GFRP under in-plane cyclic loading. Eng Struct 2015;94:54–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.03.035.
[20] Hegemier GA, Krishnamoorthy G, Nunn RO, Moorthy T V. Prism tests for the compressive strength of concrete masonry. Proc. North Am. Mason. Conf., vol. 1, 1978, p. 181–7.
[21] Concrete Masonry Prism Testing. ACI J Proc 1979;76. https://doi.org/10.14359/6957.
[22] Concrete Masonry Under Combined Shear and Compression Along the Mortar Joints. ACI J Proc 1980;77. https://doi.org/10.14359/7008.
[23] Brown R, Whitlock A. Compressive Strength of Grouted Hollow Brick Prisms. Mason. Mater. Prop. Perform., ASTM International100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959; 1982, p. 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP30118S.
[24] Lee R, Longworth J, Warwanik J. Concrete masonry prism response due to load parallel to bed joints. Proc., 3rd North Am. Mason. Conf. Arlington, TX Univ. Texas, 1984.
[25] Wong H, Drysdale R. Compression Characteristics of Concrete Block Masonry Prisms. Mason. Res. Appl. Probl., ASTM International100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959; 1985, p. 167–77. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP34554S.
[26] Khalaf FM. Blockwork Masonry Compressed in Two Orthogonal Directions. J Struct Eng 1997;123:591–6. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1997)123:5(591).
[27] Haach VG, Vasconcelos G, Lourenço PB. Experimental Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Block Masonry Walls Subjected to In-Plane Cyclic Loading. J Struct Eng 2010;136:452–62. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000125.
[28] Soon S. In-plane behaviour and capacity of concrete masonry infills bounded by steel frames 2011.
[29] Maheri MR, Najafgholipour MA, Rajabi AR. The influence of mortar head joints on the in-plane and out-of-plane seismic strength of brick masonry walls 2011.
[30] Venkatarama Reddy B V., Uday Vyas C V. Influence of shear bond strength on compressive strength and stress–strain characteristics of masonry. Mater Struct 2008;41:1697–712. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-008-9358-x.
[31] Yi W-H, Oh S-H, Lee J-H. Shear capacity assessment of unreinforced masonry wall. 13th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., 2004, p. 1–12.
[32] Churilov S, Dumova-Jovanoska E. In-plane shear behaviour of unreinforced and strengthened masonry walls, Macedonian Association of Earthquake Engineering; 2010.
[33] Ali Q, Badrashi YI, Ahmad N, Alam B, Rehman S, Banori FAS. Experimental investigation on the characterization of solid clay brick masonry for lateral shear strength evaluation. Int J Earth Sci Eng 2012;5:782–91.
[34] Voon KC, Ingham JM. Experimental In-Plane Shear Strength Investigation of Reinforced Concrete Masonry Walls. J Struct Eng 2006;132:400–8. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2006)132:3(400).
[35] Maheri MR, Sherafati MA. The effects of humidity and other environmental parameters on the shear strength of brick walls: evaluation of field test data. Mater Struct 2012;45:941–56. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-011-9809-7.
[36] BSTI. BDS EN197-1:2003 2005.
[37] Priestley MJN, Seible F, Calvi GM. Seismic Design and Retrofit of Bridges. Wiley; 1996.
[38] Hose Y, Silva P, Seible F. Development of a Performance Evaluation Database for Concrete Bridge Components and Systems under Simulated Seismic Loads. Earthq Spectra 2000;16:413–42. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586119. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 806 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 316 |
||