Experimental Comparison of Cracking in Four Masonry Walls with Different Boundaries and Material
Paul Korswagen (TU Delft - Applied Mechanics)
M.B. Gaggero (TU Delft - Applied Mechanics)
JG Rots (TU Delft - Applied Mechanics)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Within the context of light damage to unreinforced masonry structures, recent tests have shown that the cracking behaviour of calcium-silicate brick masonry walls makes them more vulnerable to in-plane loads when compared against fired-clay brick walls. To further explore this observation, four nominallyidentical walls have been tested. Two of the specimens (3m wide and 2.7m tall) were built with calcium-silicate bricks and twowith fired-clay bricks. Additionally, two boundaries were compared: a top cantilever boundary, and a doubled-clamped configuration. The quasi-static, in-plane, two-way cyclic tests imposed small (0.03 to 0.1%), repeated drifts on the walls to investigate the initiation and propagation of small cracks. To monitor the cracking behaviour, high resolution Digital Image Correlation was applied. At the end of the tests, large drifts up to 2% were exerted to compare the near-collapse behaviour of the walls. The tests revealed that thewalls with the more restrictive boundary, deforming mostly in shear, behaved the stiffest and also developed cracks earlier than the cantilever walls. Additionally, this constraint also led to more vertical cracks that split bricks, while the cantilever walls saw more horizontal and diagonal cracks along mortar joints and at mortar-brick interfaces. While the calcium-silicate-proved to be more brittle than the fired-clay masonry for the cantilever test, the claymasonry exhibited similar brick-splitting cracks in the double-clamped configuration. In general, there were fewer but wider cracks in the calcium-silicate specimens, while the clay brick samples showed less localisation and more smeared-crack behaviour. In terms of stiffness, the calcium-silicate walls were initially stiffer and achieved a higher capacity. Moreover, these walls also presented a higher hysteresis associated with more frictional failures. In sum, while cracks on the calcium-silicate walls were confirmed to be more serious, their increased stiffness could lead to smaller drifts during dynamic loading, and the walls would develop less damage; this requires further study.