See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304551829

STRENGTH CHARACTERISTICS OF FLEMISH

BOND BRICK MASONRY WALL ENCASED WITH
FERRO CEMENT

Conference Paper · June 2008

CITATIONS READS

0 120

1 author:

S V Venkatesh
PES Institute of Technology
25 PUBLICATIONS 26 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Earth quake View project

All content following this page was uploaded by S V Venkatesh on 29 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

STRENGTH CHARACTERISTICS OF FLEMISH BOND BRICK MASONRY WALL

ENCASED WITH FERRO CEMENT.
S.V.Venkatesh
Assistant professor, Department of Civil Engineering, PES Institute of Technology,
Bangalore –560 085, Karnataka, India.
E-mail: venkateshsv@yahoo.com, Mo-+91(80) 9343773569, Ph+91(80) 26721983 ex 255,
Resi+91(80) 26562547.

“ABSTRACT”
The brick is perhaps the oldest man made material of building construction. The strength of
brick masonry depends on compressive strength of bricks and mortar used. Brick masonry is
used as a load bearing wall primarily to carry vertical loads. Rehabilitation of old and
damaged brick masonry is a subject of wide range ongoing research. One of the methods of
improving or increasing the strength of these masonry walls is by encasing with Ferro
cement. In the present work an attempt has been made to determine the increase in the load
carrying capacity of failed Flemish bond brick masonry walls by encasing with Ferro cement.
In this investigation two brick masonry walls of Flemish bond, one straight wall and other ‘T’
Shaped wall, encased with Ferro cement were tested. Observations were made on surface
strains, crack pattern, crack width, first crack load and ultimate load. The results obtained
show substantial increase in load at first crack and ultimate load after encasement.

Keywords: - Rehabilitation, Strength, Brick masonry, Ferro cement.

1. INTRODUCTION
Strength of masonry depends on compressive strength of bricks and
mortar used. There are several types of structural elements with in a building, the most used
and subject to damages is the load bearing wall. These elements are solid planes, which are
designed primarily to carry the vertical loads within the structure.
The risk of damage to such damaged and old masonry walls, particularly
when unreinforced has made the masonry structure the subject of a wide range ongoing
research. The area that is very active is that of defining methods where by these structures
can be strengthened or upgraded in load carrying capacity. These methods are in many cases
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

effective in the repair or enhancing the load carrying capacity of brick masonry. Ferro cement
is a material ideally suited for retrofitting and is a highly versatile composite material of
reinforcing wire mesh, either in single or close packed layer, with or without reinforcing rods
in cement mortar. This paper present testing carried out on a full scale masonry wall encased
with Ferro cement. The objective of this study is to better understand the behavior of masonry
wall under gravity loading and to investigate the effectiveness of Ferro cement as
rehabilitation material.
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

2. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
The experiment was conducted in three phases. In the first phase the
constituent material were tested for preliminary tests. In the second phase walls were
constructed and testing carried out without encasing with Ferro cement up to predefined
degree of damage. In the third phase the damaged walls were encased with Ferro cement and
tested as before.
2.1 Characteristics of Constituent Materials
The testing of constituent materials was carried out which is listed below
along with test values in table 1.
Table 1
Brick units Cement Sand Wire Mesh
• Water absorption • Normal • Specific gravity • Proof stress
– 14.37% consistency – 32% – 2.55 – 340 mpa
•
Dry density • Initial setting time • Water absorption • Ultimate stress
– 1.54 g/cc - 135 mins. – 11.98 % – 406 mpa
• Comp. strength • Final setting time • Bulk density (loose) • Young’s
– 3.668mpa. – 400 mins. – 1.5 g/cc Modulus
• Finess– 4% • Percentage of voids – 2.5x104 mpa
• Specific gravity – 41.17%
– 3.076 • Bulk density
• Comp. Strength (compact) –1.66g/cc
–22.27mpa(7 days) • Percentage of voids
• Soundness – 34.90%
– 2 mm • Fineness modulus
– 2.367

2.2 Details of experimental study of masonry walls before encasement with ferro -
cement.
2.2.1 Test Specimen
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

The experiment was carried out on two one brick thick (225 mm)
masonry wall one straight and other ‘T’ shaped. The dimensions of the walls were chosen by
considering the slenderness ratio, height to width ratio and the loading facility available. The
IS 1905 – 1987 specifies the maximum slenderness ratio of masonry wall constructed using
cement mortar without buckling to 27 and height to width ratio not to exceed 2. To satisfy the
above requirements the dimension were chosen as given in table 2, with these dimensions the
slenderness ratio and height to width ratio were obtained as 8 & 1 respectively.
Table 2.
Type of Dimensions
wall LENGTH BREATH HEIGHT THICKNESS (T)
(L) (B) (H)
SWFB 1800 mm -- 1800 mm 225 mm
TSFB 1800 mm 900 mm 1800 mm 225 mm
SWFB - Straight wall Flemish bond
TSFB – ‘T’ shaped wall Flemish bond
For construction of walls cement sand mortar of ratio 1:6 was used. The bricks were kept
in water for 24 hours before it was used. After construction of walls they were cured for 28
days. Ten (10) sets and fifteen (15) sets of Demec points were fixed on the body of the wall
to measure strains both vertically and horizontally using 150 mm Demec gauge for straight
and ‘T’ shaped walls respectively.

2.2.2 Test setup and loading system

The walls were tested under point load on spreader beam. The beam was
placed on the top of the wall to ensure uniform transformation of load, over which I sections
were placed, load was applied through hydraulic jack of 30 tons capacity placed on the I
section. The gap between the concrete beam and the wall due to the undulation of wall was
filled with cement sand slurry, which was forced in the gap by hand pump to ensure uniform
distribution of load. The positions of the jacks were placed such that the centroid of jacks
coincides with that of wall (Typical calculation for ‘T’ shaped wall is given below in figure
01 and 02). The number of jacks for straight wall was two (2) and that for ‘T’ shaped wall
was three (3). The position of the jacks for ‘T’ shaped wall was calculated as given below.
The loading arrangement is shown in plate 1, 2.
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

A1 = 1800 x 225 = 405000.00 Y = 405000 x 1012.50 + 202500 x 450

A2 = 900 x 225 = 202500.00 405000 + 202500
Y1 = 900 +112.5 = 1012.50 Y = 825 mm
Y2 = 450.00 825 = 2 x 1012.5 + 1 x Y3
Y = A1 x Y1 + A2 x Y2 2+1
A1 + A2 Y3 = 450.00 mm.
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

Plate 1. Loading set up of - straight wall, Plate 2. Loading set up of - ‘T’shaped wall,
2.3 Details of experimental study of masonry walls after encasement with Ferro
cement.
2.3.1 Test specimen
The specimens which were damaged earlier were used for encasing with
Ferro cement of 12 mm thick. The 4/20 gauge wire mesh was used, with a cement sand
proportion of 1:2, water cement ratio of 0.55. According to the minimum volume fraction
formula
σmt x Am = fy x Amesh
where
σmt = Tensile strength of mortar,
Am = Area of mortar, fy = proof stress of mesh,
Amesh = Area of mesh = As the number of layers of wire mesh was calculated and found to be
two (2).
The wire mesh was fixed to the walls by nails and by placing 6 mm diameter M.S. rod dowels
through the holes drilled at regular intervals as shown in plate 3, 4. The cement mortar was
forced manually so as to see that it fills in the gap between the wall and the mesh. Cement
mortar was then leveled with a float. The walls were cured with water for 28 days by covering
it with gunny bags. The surface strains both vertically and horizontally were measured at the
same point as before. The details of walls are given in table 3.
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

Plate 3. Drilling of holes to insert 6 mm Plate 4. Wire mesh fixed to ‘T’ shaped
Ms Rods. wall with nails and M.S.Rods.
Table 3.
Type of Dimensions Thickness of Method of fixing
wall L mm B mm H mm T mm Ferro Cement wire mesh
SWFB 1824 -- 1812 249 12 mm Using M.S. Rod
TSFB 1824 900 1812 249 12 mm Dowels & nails.

2.3.2 Test setup and loading system

It was same as before.

3. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
3.1 Results of walls before and after encasing with Ferro cement.
The values of strains were recorded for every 10 kN and 15 kN interval
of load until crack developed to a width of 0.27 mm for straight wall and for ‘T’ shaped wall
respectively. The crack pattern was noted. The load at first crack and maximum load was
noted down; the corresponding stress values were calculated. The stress vs vertical strain and
stress vs horizontal strain was plotted from the values of the measurement taken at the demec
points mentioned earlier. A best fit curve was plotted as shown in Fig 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d for walls
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

before encasement and Fig. 4a, 4b, 4c & 4d for walls after encasement. Young’s modulus and
Possion’s ratio was calculated. The values are given in table 4 and 5.

Fig 3a. Stress Vs vertical Strain graph Fig 3b. Stress Vs Horizontal Strain graph
for straight wall before encasement. for straight wall before encasement.

Fig. 3c. Stress Vs vertical Strain graph Fig. 3d. Stress Vs Horizontal Strain graph
for ‘T’ shaped wall before encasement. for ‘T’ shaped wall before encasement.
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

Table 4. Results of walls before encasing with Ferro cement

Type Load at Stress at load at Stress at Young’s Possion’s
of wall first crack first Crack failure failure load modulus ratio
kN Mpa kN Mpa Mpa
SWFB 14.00 0.035 284.00 0.701 340.21 0.1
TSFB 24.55 0.036 309.55 0.510 352.38 0.081

The cracks appeared on the interface of the brick and mortar both
horizontally and vertically as shown in plate 5, 6.Crack pattern for both type of walls seem to
be same. Observing the crack patterns which are like open loops it can be concluded that these
cracks are due to very high stress concentration at the interface of brick and mortar. The high
stress concentration is due to lateral tension in mortar and compression in bricks, this is
because of difference in Young’s modulus value of brick and mortar, when subjected to
uniaxial compression. The stress-strain plot shows (Fig 03 & 04) that brick masonry can be
approximated to linear elastic material. The typical low strain value is indicative of the brittle
nature of brick masonry. The lateral strains are much lower that the linear strain as indicated
by Poisson’s ratio. The results show not much difference between straight wall and ‘T’ shaped
wall in load carrying capacity and Possion’s ratio values but there is substantial variation in
Young’s modulus.
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

Plate 5. Crack pattern of – Straight wall Plate 6. Crack pattern of – ‘T’

before encasing, shaped wall before encasing.

Fig 4a. Stress Vs vertical Strain graph Fig 4b. Stress Vs Horizontal Strain
for straight wall after encasement. graph for straight wall after
encasement.
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

Fig. 4c. Stress Vs vertical Strain graph Fig. 4d. Stress Vs Horizontal Strain
for ‘T’ shaped wall after encasement. graph for ‘T’ shaped wall after
encasement.
Table 5. Results of walls after encasing with Ferro cement
Type Load at Stress at load at Stress at Maximum Young’s Possion’s
of wall first first failure failure load modulus ratio
crack Crack kN load kN Mpa
kN Mpa Mpa
SWFB 134.00 0.30 604.00 1.33 604.00 484.36 0.094
TSFB 416.46 0.61 716.46 1.06 911.46 945.50 0.101

The structural behavior of composite materials depends up on the

bonding between the two materials in this case between brick masonry and Ferro cement. The
cracks formed are vertical rather that isolated loops before encasement as shown in plate 7, 8.
The cracks on the surface started appearing after partial de-bonding or de-lamination of Ferro
cement from brick masonry. As the load application increased further the Ferro cement
encasement started bulging perpendicular to the face of the wall which is a clear indication of
de-bonding, This also indicates that the load is taken by the stiff outer member which is Ferro
cement as the inner core is soft (cracked brick masonry).
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

Plate 7. Crack pattern of - straight wall Plate 8. Crack pattern of ‘T’ shaped
after encasement, wall after encasement.
Table 6. Comparison of Results of walls before and after encasing with Ferro cement
Type Increase in Load Percentage Increase in load Percentage
of wall at first crack kN Increase in Load at failure Increase in Load
at first crack kN at failure
SWFB 120.00 857.14 320.00 112.67
TSFB 391.91 1596.37 406.91 131.45

The failure load increased to an extent of 112% and 131.45%, and load at
first crack also increased to an extent of 857.14% and 1596.37% in case of straight wall and
‘T’ shaped wall respectively when compared to walls before encasement. The difference in
load at first crack and failure is 350.74% and 72.04s% in case of straight wall and ‘T’ shaped
wall respectively which is mainly because of the ductility of Ferro cement and the ability to
carry load after cracks of smaller width which is one of the advantages of using Ferro cement.
The value of Young’s modulus also increased when compared to values before encasement,
 The International Conference on Social Sciences and
Humanities 2008 (ICoSSH’08)
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 18-20 June 2008

which is an indication of improved ductility. There is not much difference in the value of
Possion’s ratio after encasement.
4. LIMITATIONS
• The walls are subjected to vertical load only.
• Loading of wall is only up to a crack width of 0.27 mm.
• Only one type of fixing of wire mesh was explored.
• Experiment is carried out only on English bond.

5. CONCLUSION
• The load carrying capacity of the walls increased both at first crack and at failure.
• The ductility increased after encasing.
• The cracks were straight and vertical after encasement rather than isolated loops
before encasement which indicates proper distribution of stress.

REFERENCE
[1.] A.M.Rehihorn, S.P.Prawel and Zi-He Jia “Experimental study of ferrocement as a
seismic retrofit material for masonry walls”, Journal of Ferro cement, Y 1985, V15,
S3, pg 247-259.
[2.] K.K.Singh, S.K.Kaushik, Anand prakash “Strengthening of brick masonry columns by
Ferro cement” proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Ferro cement. Y 1988, pg 306-313.
[3.]Ravikant Shrivastava, “Seismic retrofitting and restoration of masonry
buildings” Workshop on recent advances in masonry construction, Y 1998, pg 333-
340.
[4.] Verrappa Reddy “Studies on Strength, behavior and cracking of lightweight Ferro
cement in tension and flexure, and pre-tensioned Ferro cement flexural elements”,
Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. ,
Y 1987.
[5] S.V.Venkatesh ”Rehabilitation of Brick Masonry Wall using Ferro cement” National
Level Technical Paper Presentation Contest (Stapana 2k7), Y 2007, pg 24.
[6] S.V.Venkatesh, Dr. Veerappa Reddy” Strength Characteristics of English Bond Brick
Masonry Wall Encased with Ferro cement” proc. Int. conf. on Recent Developments
in Structural Engineering (RDSE -2007), y 2007, No 174, pg 313.

View publication stats