Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of Aspect Ratio and Boundary Condition with Respect to the Bed Joint Orientation of Clay and Modified Concrete Brick Masonry Walls Against Impact Loading

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Vibration Engineering & Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Masonry infrastructure has been found to be deficient in resisting out-of-plane loads, such as vehicular collisions, rockfalls, and debris impact. Therefore, the manuscript is focused on studying the behaviour of clay and concrete brick masonry walls against low velocity out of plane impact loading. The influence of varying aspect ratio and boundary conditions were studied in detail for both clay and concrete brick walls.

Methodology

The impact tests were conducted using a pendulum drop weight impact testing machine. Four different types of wall configuration were tested in order to check the influence of boundary conditions and aspect ratio. The aspect ratio of the clay brick wall designated as CW1, CW3 and CW4, whereas the concrete brick wall designed as CoW1, CoW3 and CoW4 was varied as 1, 2 and 4.8, respectively. The effect of boundary conditions was studied with respect to the parallel and perpendicular to the bed joint of clay brick masonry walls are designed as CW1 and CW2, respectively. Similarly, the boundary conditions were studied on concrete brick masonry walls designed as CoW1 and CoW2, respectively.

Objective

The study focused to understand the impact response of masonry walls with concrete bricks that incorporate crumb rubber and fibers and compared with clay brick walls. The effect of boundary conditions was studied with respect to the parallel and perpendicular to the bed joint of masonry walls in terms of force-time history, failure mechanism and energy absorption. The influence of aspect ratio on the response of masonry walls are also studied in detail.

Conclusion

It was concluded that the resistance offered by concrete brick walls was more as compared to the clay brick wall, however, the difference become insignifiacnt when aspect ratio is increased. The orientation of bed joint affects the energy absorption characteristics of walls as energy absorption was more when bed joint was in perpendicular to boundary conditions as compared to parallel orientation for both clay and concrete brick walls.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Venkatarama Reddy B, Jagadish K (2003) Embodied energy of common and alternative building materials and technologies. Energy Build. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(01)00141-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Thakur A, Senthil K, Singh AP (2022) Evaluation of concrete bricks with crumb rubber and polypropylene fibres under impact loading. Constr Build Mater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Thakur A, Senthil K, Singh AP (2022) Experimental investigation on crumb rubber based concrete bricks along with polypropylene and steel fibers. Asian J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-022-00428-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Iqbal MA, Kumar V, Mittal AK (2019) Experimental and numerical studies on the drop impact resistance of prestressed concrete plates. Int J Impact Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.09.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Thakur A, Kasilingam S, Singh AP (2023) Influence of constitutive models on the behaviour of clay brick masonry walls against multi hit impact loading. In: Dimitrovová Z, Biswas P, Gonçalves R, Silva T (eds) Recent trends in wave mechanics and vibrations. WMVC. Mechanisms and Machine Science, vol 125. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gilbert M, Hobbs B, Molyneaux TCK (2002) The performance of unreinforced masonry walls subjected to low-velocity impacts: experiments. Int J Impact Eng 27(3):231–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0734-743X(01)00049-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Saad AS, Ahmed TA, Yassin MH, Radwan AI, Ezzedine AI (2022) Out-of-plane structural performance of compressed earth block walls subject to quasistatic loading. Adv Civ Eng Mater 11(1):20210038. https://doi.org/10.1520/ACEM20210038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hobbs B, Gilbert M, Molyneaux T, Newton P, Beattie G, Burnett S (2009) Improving the impact resistance of masonry parapet walls. Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 162(1):57–67. https://doi.org/10.1680/stbu.2009.162.1.57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sparling A, Palermo D (2023) Response of full-scale slender masonry walls with conventional and NSM steel reinforcement subjected to axial and out-of-plane loads. J Struct Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSENDH.STENG-11364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wu G, Ji C, Wang X, Gao FY, Zhao C, Liu Y, Yang G (2022) Blast response of clay brick masonry unit walls unreinforced and reinforced with polyurea elastomer. Def Technol 18(4):643–662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2021.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lunn DS, Rizkalla SH (2014) Design of FRP-strengthened infill-masonry walls subjected to out-of-plane loading. J Compos Constr 18(3):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schmidt ME, Cheng L (2009) Impact response of externally strengthened unreinforced masonry walls using CFRP. J Compos Constr 13(4):252–261. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Anas S, Alam M, Umair M (2022) Strengthening of braced unreinforced brick masonry wall with (i) C-FRP wrapping, and (ii) steel angle-strip system under blast loading. Mater Today Proc 58:1181–1198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.01.335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Basili M, Vestroni F, Marcari G (2019) Brick masonry panels strengthened with textile reinforced mortar: experimentation and numerical analysis. Constr Build Mater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Basili M, Marcari G, Vestroni F (2016) Nonlinear analysis of masonry panels strengthened with textile reinforced mortar. Eng Struct 113:245–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.12.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Leblouba M, Altoubat S, Karzad AS, Maalej M, Barakat S (2022) Impact response and endurance of unreinforced masonry walls strengthened with cement-based composites. Structures. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.12.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Andreu A, Gil L, Roca P (2007) Computational analysis of masonry structures with a funicular model. J Eng Mech 133(4):473–480. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:4(473)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pelà L, Cervera M, Roca P (2013) An orthotropic damage model for the analysis of masonry structures. Constr Build Mater 41:957–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.07.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Milani G, Zuccarello FA, Olivito RS, Tralli A (2007) Heterogeneous upper-bound finite element limit analysis of masonry walls out-of-plane loaded. Comput Mech 40(6):911–931. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-006-0151-9

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Macorini L, Izzuddin BA (2011) A non-linear interface element for 3D mesoscale analysis of brick-masonry structures. Int J Numer Methods Eng 85(12):1584–1608. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.3046

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Chisari C, Macorini L, Amadio C, Izzuddin BA (2015) An inverse analysis procedure for material parameter identification of mortar joints in unreinforced masonry. Comput Struct 155(July):97–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2015.02.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. D’Altri AM et al (2020) Modeling strategies for the computational analysis of unreinforced masonry structures: review and classification. Arch Comput Methods Eng 27(4):1153–1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-019-09351-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gulen DB, Acikgoz S, Burd HJ (2022) A macro-element model for the assessment of tunnelling-induced damage to masonry buildings. Geotechnical engineering for the preservation of monuments and historic sites III, 1st edn. CRC Press, p 13

    Google Scholar 

  24. Asad M, Dhanasekar M, Zahra T, Thambiratnam D (2020) Failure analysis of masonry walls subjected to low velocity impacts. Eng Fail Anal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.104706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Burnett S, Gilbert M, Molyneaux T, Beattie G, Hobbs B (2007) The performance of unreinforced masonry walls subjected to low-velocity impacts: Finite element analysis. Int J Impact Eng 34(8):1433–1450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2006.08.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Piani TL et al (2020) Dynamic behaviour of adobe bricks in compression: the role of fibres and water content at various loading rates. Constr Build Mater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sauer C, Heine A, Riedel W (2019) Comprehensive study of projectile impact on lightweight adobe masonry. Int J Impact Eng 125:56–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.10.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wei X, Hao H (2009) Numerical derivation of homogenized dynamic masonry material properties with strain rate effects. Int J Impact Eng 36(3):522–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2008.02.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Daltri AM, de Miranda S, Castellazzi G, Sarhosis V (2018) A 3D detailed micro-model for the in-plane and out-of-plane numerical analysis of masonry panels. Comput Struct 206:18–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2018.06.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rafsanjani SH, Lourenço PB, Peixinho N (2015) Implementation and validation of a strain rate dependent anisotropic continuum model for masonry. Int J Mech Sci 104:24–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2015.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Senthil K, Thakur A, Singh AP, Iqbal MA, Gupta NK (2023) Transient dynamic response of brick masonry walls under low velocity repeated impact load. Int J Impact Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJIMPENG.2023.104521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lourenço PB (1996) Computational strategies for masonry structures, PhD Thesis

  33. Barattucci S, Sarhosis V, Bruno AW, D’Altri AM, de Miranda S, Castellazzi G (2020) An experimental and numerical study on masonry triplets subjected to monotonic and cyclic shear loadings. Constr Build Mater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Silva LC, Lourenço PB, Milani G (2017) Rigid block and spring homogenized model (HRBSM) for masonry subjected to impact and blast loading. Int J Impact Eng 109:14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.05.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Bui TT, Limam A, Sarhosis V, Hjiaj M (2017) Discrete element modelling of the in-plane and out-of-plane behaviour of dry-joint masonry wall constructions. Eng Struct 136:277–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.01.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Zakir SM, Tao S, Yulong L, Sohail A, Ahmed DU, Farrukh RM (2018) Numerical studies of penetration in light armor, concrete and brick-wall targets. Rev Mater. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-707620180003.0527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Thakur A, Senthil K, Singh AP, Iqbal MA (2020) Prediction of dynamic amplification factor on clay brick masonry assemblage. Structures 27(June):673–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.06.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Tiwari R, Chakraborty T, Matsagar V (2016) Dynamic analysis of a twin tunnel in soil subjected to internal blast loading. Indian Geotech J 46(4):369–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-016-0179-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Simulia (2014) “ABAQUS User Guide,”. https://abaqus-docs.mit.edu/2017/English/SIMACAEMATRefMap/simamat-c-druckerprager.htm#simamat-c-druckerprager-linear. Accessed 20 Sept 2022

  40. Mosalam K, Glascoe L, Bernier J (2009) Mechanical properties of unreinforced brick masonry, section1. Lawrence Livermore Natl Lab. https://doi.org/10.2172/966219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lubliner J, Oliver J, Oller S, Onate E (1989) amage model for concrete. Int J Solids Struct 25(3):299–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Dugdale DS (1960) Yielding of steel sheets containing slits. J Mech Phys Solids 8:100–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(60)90013-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Elices M, Guinea GV, Gómez J, Planas J (2001) The cohesive zone model: advantages, limitations and challenges. Eng Fract Mech 69(2):137–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7944(01)00083-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Gupta M, Prabhakaran RTD, Mahajan P (2020) Non-linear material characterization and numerical modeling of cross-ply basalt/epoxy laminate under low velocity impact. Polym Test. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Angelillo M, Lourenço PB, Milani G (2014) Masonry behaviour and modelling. CISM Int Cent Mech Sci Courses Lect 551:1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1774-3_1

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  46. Benzeggagh ML, Kenane M (1996) Measurement of mixed-mode delamination fracture toughness of unidirectional glass/epoxy composites with mixed-mode bending apparatus. Compos Sci Technol 56(4):439–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-3538(96)00005-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Li QM, Meng H (2003) About the dynamic strength enhancement of concrete-like materials in a split Hopkinson pressure bar test. Int J Solids Struct 40(2):343–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7683(02)00526-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dr. B R Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, Punjab, 144011, India

    Ankush Thakur & K. Senthil

Authors
  1. Ankush Thakur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Senthil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Senthil.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors(s) declared no potential conflict of interests with respect to any part of the manuscript publication, authorship, and research study of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thakur, A., Senthil, K. Effect of Aspect Ratio and Boundary Condition with Respect to the Bed Joint Orientation of Clay and Modified Concrete Brick Masonry Walls Against Impact Loading. J. Vib. Eng. Technol. 11, 2755–2777 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42417-023-01091-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42417-023-01091-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation