3.3.

Masonry Prisms

Two types of masonry prisms were constructed and tested in this study. One type was three-course high with a height to thickness ratio of 3.3 as shown in Figure 3.20.

Figure 3.20 3-High Prisms testing arrangement

A total of 12 prisms of this type including 3 hollow, and 9 fully grouted were constructed. The prisms were tested for the compressive strength, the modulus of elasticity, and the stress-strain relationship of the masonry in accordance with ASTM C1314-07 Standard test methods for compressive strength of masonry prisms. The second type of masonry prisms, referred to as square prisms, was 4-course high, 2course wide with a height to thickness ratio of 4.4. A total of 27 prisms of this type including 9 hollow, 9 partially grouted, and 9 fully grouted were prepared. The partially grouted prisms were grouted on the two outer cells of the prisms. They were tested for compressive strength under three loading conditions. Vertical compression refers to a loading direction which was perpendicular to the bed joint; horizontal compression indicates that the loading was applied in parallel to the bed joint; and the diagonal compression was to load the specimen in diagonal direction. The diagonal, vertical and horizontal loading conditions are shown in Figure 3.21. These prisms were tested to have 41

a better understanding of the effect of loading direction on the compressive strength of masonry assemblage. All prisms were cured together with the walls and tested at approximately the same time as the walls. LVDTs were mounted at the front and the back of all the square prisms to obtain deformation readings. The gauge lengths of the LVDTs were kept at approximately 200 mm. Horizontal and vertical specimens had a similar testing procedure to the three-high prisms. For testing in the diagonal direction, two custom-made supports were used for the loaded corners where each support was a Vshaped joint inside a rectangular box designed to encase the corners and provide a straight surface for testing as shown in Figure 3.22.

Diagonal

Vertical

Horizontal

Figure 3.21 Loading Conditions of Compression Test for Square Prisms.

Figure 3.22 Diagonal prism test loading shoe. 42

4.2.2.2 Mortar Type S mortar was used in the construction of wall infills. Three batches of mortar were used in the building of specimens and mortar cubes were made from each batch. A total of twenty-six 50mm mortar cubes were tested for their 28-day strength according to CSA A179-04 (2004) Mortar and grout for unit masonry. For batch 1 mortar, nine cubes were tested for 7-day strength as well for quality control purposes. Figure 4.3 shows an example of the failure of mortar cubes under compressive testing where most of the mortar cubes showed a conical shear or pyramidal shape failure. The compressive strength for mortar cubes are summarized in Table 4.3 where the mean 28-day compressive strength of all the mortar cubes tested was 13.6MPa. The average 28-day compressive strengths were 15.1MPa from batch 1 (BM1) and 9.6MPa for Batch 2 (BM2) mortar cubes. Mortar cubes from batch 3 (BM3) attained compressive strength of 19.6MPa. The COVs of all 3 batches mortar strength were well within the specified limit of 15%. It should be pointed out that BM2 mortar strength was lower than the minimum 28-day strength (12.5MPa) specified in CSA A179 - 04 (2004) for type S mortar under laboratory conditions.

Figure 4.3 Failure of mortar cubes under compressive testing

48

Figure 4.4 Failure of grout cubes under compressive testing

25 20 Load (kN) 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3 Displacement (mm) 4 5

Figure 4.5 Load-displacement diagram of a grout cube in compressive

51

while the grouted column remained practically intact. These are common failure modes in prisms as reported by Drysdale and Hamid (2005).

Vertical crack (face-shell)

Vertical crack (web)

Face-shell spalling

Figure 4.6 Failure of 3-high prisms under compressive loading. Net areas were used for the calculation of compressive strength of prisms. The net area for the 3-high ungrouted prisms is the outside shell-area of the prism as shown in Figure 4.7. The net area of the 3-high fully grouted prisms was the gross area less the web area of the unit block as shown in Figure 4.8.

Figure 4.7 Net area for 3-high ungrouted prisms

Figure 4.8 Net area for 3-high grouted prisms The compressive stress of the BP1 ungrouted and grouted prisms were 12.7MPa and 8.0MPa, a difference of 37% with the difference in net areas of 49%. The higher 53

For the horizontally loaded prisms, net area was calculated to be the same as the vertically loaded prisms with respect to the different grouting situations. For diagonally loaded prisms, the net area used for the fully grouted diagonally loaded prisms was the rectangular area where the prisms were in contact with the loading shoes as shown in Figure 4.11. The net area of the hollow prisms was taken as the faceshell area contained within the loading shoe. For partially grouted diagonal loaded prisms, the average areas between the fully grouted and hollow diagonally loaded prisms were used to calculate the net areas. Net Area Loading Shoe

Figure 4.11 Diagonally loaded prisms net area To study the behavior of the prisms in different loading directions, a stress-strain curve of each prism specimen was obtained and the Modulus of Elasticity, Em, was also determined. It is a common practice to express Em in terms of compressive strength, f'm, obtained with loading applied perpendicular to the prism bed joint. In this study, this practice was followed and thus Em in the following tables is expressed in terms of f'mV, compressive strength of the vertically loaded prisms. Figure 4.12 shows the stress-strain curves of partially grouted prisms loaded in three directions. The full-set of stress-strain curves can be found in Appendix A. It can be seen that partially grouted prisms loaded in the horizontal direction displayed the lowest modulus of elasticity. However, diagonally loaded partially grouted prisms had the highest modulus of elasticity. As expected,

55

Preliminary System Identification

This chapter deals with the results of the component and system tests performed before the start of the actual shake-table experiments involving the application of earthquake records. The component tests include standard concrete compression tests and concrete split tension tests on concrete cylinders fabricated during the construction of the test structure. These component tests also include masonry compression, shear and bending tests performed on masonry prisms and masonry panels constructed at the same time as the URM infill wall in the test structure. The system tests are a series of pull-back (snap-back) tests on the test structure at different stages of completion of the test structure configuration, namely before and after building the URM infill wall and after the placement of additional mass on the test structure. The results of these preliminary tests are used to gather the required data for calibrating and validating analytical models of the test structure as discussed in Chapter 7 and to document the state of the test structure at the beginning of the shake-table experiments as a point of reference when discussing the results of these experiments in Chapter 6.

4.1

COMPONENT TESTS

4.1.1 Concrete Cylinder Compression Tests

A total of 30 test cylinders are prepared after each concrete placement for foundation, columns, and beams and slab in accordance with ASTM C 837-99. The cylinders are kept in the same environmental conditions as the test structure. Three uniaxial compression tests are performed for each patch of concrete at different times to monitor the strength gain with time, the last of which was performed on the day before the start of the shake-table experiments. Mean values and the coefficient of variation (COV) of each test group are reported in Tables 4.1 and 4.2, respectively. It can be observed that the compressive strength of the concrete on the day of the 41

test is on average 22% higher than its 28-day compressive strength. No clear conclusion can be made on the COV for the test results due to the small sample size, namely three for each reported value. However, based on the results in Table 4.2 and for the purpose of practical reliability analyses as in Chapter 8, one may consider a mean value of the COV of the concrete compressive strength of 4.5%. The test setup and the resulting relationship of the mean strengthgain with time for the used concrete are shown in Figure 4.1. The mean strength values obtained at the time of the shake-table test are used in the computational modeling of the test structure (Chapter 7) and for system identification purposes (Chapter 6).

Table 4.1 Mean uniaxial concrete compression test results. Third group (start of shake-table experiments) [ksi (MPa)] Foundation 3.27 (22.5)@11 day 4.15 (28.6)@28 day 4.98 (34.3)@567 day Columns 3.04 (20.9)@5 day 4.36 (30.1)@33 day 5.40 (37.2)@552 day Beams and slab 3.28 (22.6)@10 day 4.53 (31.2)@32 day 5.56 (38.3)@538 day Structural element First group [ksi (MPa)] Second group [ksi (MPa)] Table 4.2 COV of uniaxial concrete compression test results. Structural element
Foundation Columns Beams and slab

First group (%)

7.6@11 day 4.0@5 day 5.4@10 day
6

Second group (%)

5.6@28 day 4.6@33 day 1.6@32 day

Third group (start of shake-table experiments) (%) 1.1@567 day 9.1@552 day 1.4@538 day
40 30 20 Beams and slab 10 Coulmns Foundation 0 400 500 600

Concrete strength [ksi]

5 4 3 2 1 0 0 100 200 300

Time [days]

(a) Test setup

(b) Concrete compressive strength-gain with time

Fig. 4.1 Concrete compressive strength test.

42

[MPa]

4.1.2 Concrete Cylinder Split Tension Tests

Concrete cylinder split tension tests are performed on three concrete cylinders constructed using the columns concrete batch. The tests are carried out at the start of the shake-table experiments. The split tension tests conform to ASTM C496 and are used to identify the tensile strength of concrete cylinders as defined in Equation 4.1.
2P (4.1) ld where P is the maximum load at failure, l and d are the length and diameter of the cylindrical f ct = specimen, respectively. The failure is sudden, with a vertical splitting crack across the section of the specimen. The individual results as well as their mean value and COV are summarized in Table 4.3. The mean value of the tensile splitting strength of concrete (about 8% of the compressive strength) is used for the computational modeling of the test structure as described in Chapter 7.

Table 4.3 Concrete split tension tests. Specimen

1 2 3 Mean COV f ct Maximum load [kips (kN)] [psi (MPa)] 48.8 (217) 50.4 (224) 46.5 (207) 48.6 (216) 3.3% 431 (2.97) 446 (3.08) 411 (2.83) 429 (2.96)

Fig. 4.2 Concrete split tension test setup.

4.1.3 Masonry Compression Tests

Three masonry prisms are constructed at the time of the construction of the URM infill wall according to the requirements of the ASTM C 1314. The prisms are capped and secured to two steel plates on top and bottom using Hydrocal gypsum cement, and tested under uniaxial compression 28 days after the wall construction. Both the axial load and the axial displacement (measured between the two steel plates) of the masonry prisms are recorded during these axial compression tests. Figure 4.3 shows the configuration of the masonry prism tests as well as the typical failure mode consisting of vertical splitting and crushing. The stress-strain curves for the

43

three prisms are shown in Figure 4.4 with the individual results, as well as their mean values and COV, summarized in Table 4.4. In this table f mo , E m , mo , and mu indicate the compressive strength of the masonry, the modulus of elasticity measured as the secant modulus at 75% of the compressive strength, and strain corresponding to maximum compressive stress and ultimate strain of masonry corresponding to the residual stress value of f mu = 0.15 f mo , respectively, as shown in the insert of Table 4.4.

(a) Test setup

(b) Typical failure mode

Fig. 4.3 Masonry prism tests.

3 Specimen 3 2.5 2 Stress [ksi] 1.5 1
5 20

Specimen 2

15

Specimen 1

10

0.5 0 0 0.005 0.01 0.015

0

Strain

Fig. 4.4 28-day compression stress-strain curves for masonry prisms.

44

[MPa]

Table 4.4 28-day uniaxial compression test results for masonry prisms. Specimen
1 2 3 Mean COV f mo Em [ksi (MPa)] [ksi (GPa)] 2.31 (16.0) 948 (6.54) 2.31 (16.0) 812 (5.60) 2.76 (19.0) 935 (6.45) 2.46 (17.0) 898 (6.19) 10% 8.3% mo 0.0038 0.0035 0.0040 0.0038 6.1% mu 0.0120 0.0086 0.0120 0.0109 18%

f mo 0.75 fmo f mu Tension Compression

Em

mo

mu

4.1.4 Masonry Diagonal Tension (Shear) Tests

In order to determine the shear strength of masonry, diagonal tension (shear) tests in accordance with ASTM E519 are performed on three specimens. The used specimens are 2-5"2-5" (75 cm75 cm) instead of the usual 44 (122 cm122 cm) as specified in ASTM E519 in order to facilitate the construction and handling of the specimens. This reduction in size is suggested and allowed by ASTM E519. The specimens are loaded in compression along the diagonal, and the applied load and its corresponding vertical and horizontal deformations (along the diagonals) are recorded. The loading causes almost diagonal cracking (vertical splitting in the testing position) along an axis parallel to the direction of loading corresponding to a rapid drop in the loadcarrying capacity of the specimen. The force-deformation plots corresponding to the vertical and horizontal diagonal deformations of the three tested specimens are shown in Figures 4.5 (a) and (b), respectively. From these plots, note that the horizontal deformation (corresponding to the crack opening of the vertical splitting cracks) is one order of magnitude higher than the vertical deformation.

45

[mm]
0 45 40 0.5 1 1.5 Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 200

[mm]
0 45 40 5 10 15 Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 200

Vertical force [kips]

Vertical force [kips]

35 30

150

35 30

150

[kN]

20 15 10 5 0 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06

100

20 15 10 5

100

50

50

Vertical deformation [in]

0 0.07

0 0

0.1

Horizontal deformation [in]

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0 0.7

(a) Deformation along vertical diagonal axis of specimen

(b) Deformation along horizontal diagonal axis of specimen

Fig. 4.5 Diagonal force-deformation plots for masonry shear tests.

The shear strength of the masonry f v is obtained using Equation 4.2.
fv = P Aeff

where P is the applied peak compressive diagonal force on the specimen and Aeff is the gross sectional area of the specimen along its diagonal direction calculated as

2 h t where h and t

are the side length and thickness of the square specimen, respectively. The applied peak compressive force and its corresponding shear strength for the three specimens as well as the mean value (about 11% of the masonry compressive strength) and COV are presented in Table 4.5. The test setup and a typical failure mode are shown in Figure 4.6.
Table 4.5 Masonry shear test results. Specimen Peak compressive Shear strength load [kips (kN)] [psi (MPa)] 44.2 (197) 283 (1.95) 41.1 (183) 263 (1.81) 38.0 (169) 243 (1.68) 41.1 (183) 263 (1.81) 7.6%

1 2 3 Mean COV

46

[kN]

25

25

(4.2)

(a) Test setup

(b) Typical failure mode

Fig. 4.6 Masonry diagonal tension (shear) test. 4.1.5 Masonry Bending Test

To determine the tensile strength of the masonry assembly, a bending test on 2-5"2-5" (75 cm75 cm) specimen is performed. The test setup is such that the middle third of the span of the specimen is subjected to pure bending moment (i.e., no shear) as shown in Figure 4.7(a). Assuming an elastic-brittle behavior for masonry in tension, the tensile strength of the masonry assembly can be calculated from Equation 4.3: M P L/6 = (4.3) S b t2 /6 where M is the applied bending moment, S is the section modulus, P is the total applied peak ft = vertical load, L is the span, and b and t are the width and thickness of the specimen, respectively. The total applied peak vertical load recorded during the test is P = 978 lbs (4.35 kN) which corresponds to f t = 69.5 psi (479 kPa) representing only 3% of the masonry compressive strength and 26% of its shear strength. This relatively low value, compared to those in more homogeneous materials, such as concrete, is attributed to the mode of failure of the masonry composite (two-phase) material (Loureno 1996), in Figure 4.7(b), which is dominated by a single vertical crack along the weak plane of the mortar-brick interface.

47

(a) Test setup

(b) Typical failure mode

Fig. 4.7 Masonry bending test. 4.2 SNAP-BACK TESTS

Pull-back (snap-back) tests are performed on the test structure before and after the URM infill wall construction to determine the stiffness, natural frequency, and damping ratio of the structural system before starting the shake-table experiments. These tests are separately conducted for both the longitudinal (north-south) and transverse (east-west) directions of the test structure. It is to be noted that the torsional response of this symmetric test structure is not of interest; therefore, asymmetric snap-back tests of the longitudinal and transverse directions are not considered in this study. For each test, the structure is pulled in one direction by applying 3 8 kips (1336 kN) lateral force, depending on the stiffness of the test structure, using lever hoist (come-along), and then released suddenly to allow free vibration. The floor acceleration and displacements are measured during both the loading (pulling) phase and the free vibration phase of the test. The force-displacement results of the pull test are used to obtain an estimate of the stiffness of the test structure. The floor acceleration responses during the free vibration after releasing the pulling force, both in the time and frequency domains, are analyzed and used to estimate the natural period of vibration of the test structure and the corresponding damping ratio. A typical configuration and sample test results of the snap-back test is shown in Figure 4.8. The results in this figure refer to the second snap-back test in the north-south and east-west directions after building the URM infill wall, post-tensioning of the columns, and installation of additional mass on the RC slab. The complete results of the snap-back tests are presented in Appendix B.

48

70

4. Experimental tests on FRP strengthened masonry wall panels

also includes a comparison of the reinforcement schemes, and comparisons of the results with other tests from the literature.

4.2 Experimental program

The Diagonal Tension/Shear Test involves subjecting a square section of masonry, with height and length both equal to 1.2 m, to a compressive load applied along the diagonal. A schematic of the test is shown in Figure 4.1a. A photograph of the test is shown in Figure 4.1b.

(a) Test schematic

(b) Setup URM-1

Figure 4.1: The Diagonal Tension/Shear Test The panels were constructed from solid clay masonry units with nominal dimensions 230 mm long, 110 mm wide and 76 mm high. Five batches of mortar were used in the construction of the panels, all having a mix ratio of 1:1:6 (cement:lime:sand by volume). The mortar joints were 10 mm thick. These are the same material specications as used for the pull tests presented in Chapter 3. The mortar batches used to construct each panel are presented in Table 4.1. The exural tensile bond strength of each mortar batch was determined using the bond wrench test, AS3700-2001, Standards Australia (2001c). The bond wrench test is described in further detail in Section 5.3.1. The average exural tensile bond strength (coefcient of variation in brackets) of each mortar batch is also presen-

122

5. Finite element modelling Table 5.1: Summary of all bond wrench results

Test Compression test (Section 5.3.2) Torsion test (Section 5.3.3) Pull tests (Section 3.2.1) Wall Panel tests (Section 4.2)

Mortar batch 1:1:6 mortar Han (2008) specimens (1:1:6 + air entrainer) Series 1 (1:1:6 + air entrainer) Series 2 (1:1:6) 1 2 3 1 1+W 2 2+W 3 3+W 4 5 5+W

Bond Strength (MPa) 1.22 0.176 0.14 1.74 1.84 1.73 1.22 1.25 0.65 0.49 0.29 0.47 0.31 0.57 1.26 0.41

COV (%) 31 26 11 23 22 31 51 34 37 46 47 57 48 32 59

5.3.2 Compression tests on masonry prisms

Compression tests on 7-brick high masonry prisms were used to determine the elastic properties of the brick unit and mortar joint, as well as the compressive strength of the masonry. Five prisms were constructed using the same clay brick and mortar specication used to construct the pull test specimens and the wall panels tested in diagonal tension/shear. The exural bond strength of these specimens was 1.22 MPa (COV 31%), determined using AS 3700 bond wrench test (Standards Australia, 2001c). This value was approximately equal to the bond strengths of the strongest panels tested (URM-1, URM-2 and H4A - see Table 4.1 in Chapter 4). The compression specimens were constructed and tested in accordance with AS3700 Appendix C (Standards Australia, 2001b). Specimens were constructed 7 bricks high to achieve a height-to-thickness ratio greater than 5 to minimise the inuence of platen restraint. A photograph of the test is shown in Fig. 5.7. Potentiometers were placed on both sides of the specimen to measure the displacement across a mortar joint and across 3 bricks to calculate the strain in the mortar joint and masonry respectively (as recommended by Drysdale et al. (1994)). Potentiometers were not used to measure the displacement within a single brick unit because they were not sensitive enough to measure the small brick displacement. Potentiometers were mounted onto brackets that were screwed onto the specimen at ne target points to allow the gauge lengths for displacement measurement to be determined accurately. To improve the determination of the elastic modulus from the compression test each specimen was loaded and then unloaded three times before being loa-

5.3 Compression tests on masonry prisms

123

Figure 5.7: Compression test setup

ded to failure. Specimens were loaded to approximately 40 % of their predicted peak load, before unloading, to capture the elastic loading range and minimise non-recoverable damage. Specimen 1 was loaded to 200 kN before unloading (based on an estimate of P c = 500 kN); specimens 2-4 were loaded to 260 kN before unloading (40% of P c specimen 1); and specimen 5 was loaded to 300 kN before unloading (approximately 40% of average of P c for rst four specimens). The displacements recorded from the second, third and nal load cycles were averaged and used in the calculations to determine the elastic modulus values of the masonry and the mortar (displacements recorded from the rst load cycle were ignored). All of the compression tests were stopped once the ultimate load was reached to avoid damaging the potentiometers. All of the specimens failed by crushing in the mortar joint and vertical cracking through the front and back faces of the brick units. The ultimate load (P c ) and corresponding maximum compressive stress ( f c ), masonry strain at f c , and the elastic modulus of the mortar (E mor ) and masonry (E mas ) are shown in Table 5.2. The elastic modulii of the mortar (E mor ) and masonry (E mas ) were determined as the gradients of the compressive stress-strain curves (for mortar and masonry respectively) between 5 and 33% of the maximum compressive strength (Drysdale et al., 1994). The average elastic modulus of a single brick unit E uni t was determined indirectly using the average values of E mor and E mas and by considering compatibility

124

5. Finite element modelling

of displacements between masonry, brick unit and mortar joint. This calculation was required because brick unit displacement (used to calculate strain) was not recorded. The total masonry displacement is equal to the sum of the displacement of the units and mortar. The masonry displacement across 3 bricks and 3 mortar joint is equal to: mas = 3uni t + 3mor The displacements are calculated using: mas = uni t = mas = P L mas E mas A P L uni t E uni t A P L mor E mor A (5.7) (5.8) (5.9) (5.6)

Where P =compression load, A =bedded area of prism, L mas =258 mm, L uni t =76 mm, L mor =10 mm. By substituting Equations 5.7, 5.8, and 5.9 into Equation 5.6, E uni t was determined as 27592 MPa. Table 5.2: Compression test results (bond strength = 1.22 MPa)
Specimen 1 2 3 4 5 Average P c (kN) 664.88 651.73 970.51 894.86 873.10 811.12 f c (MPa) 26.28 25.76 38.36 35.37 34.51 32.06 Masonry strain at f c 0.0013 0.0030 0.0027 0.0025 0.0023 0.0025 E mor (MPa) 4801 8047 5067 2650 4854 5084 E mas (MPa) 17698 18895 17909 18157 18415 18215

The average shear modulus values of the brick unit (G uni t ) and mortar (G mor ) were calculated as 11497 MPa and 2118 MPa respectively, using Equation 5.10 and Equation 5.11. A Poissons ratio () equal to 0.2 was adopted for both the brick unit and the mortar (Loureno, 1996a). G uni t = G mor = E uni t 2(1 + ) E mor 2(1 + ) (5.10) (5.11)

The experimentally determined elastic properties of the brick unit and mortar joint were valid for the actual dimensions of the unit and the joint. As expanded units and zero-thickness mortar joints were used in the FE model, adjustments to the elastic properties were required to achieve an equivalent overall elastic response. A method that alters the elastic properties of the interface elements and

5.3 Compression tests on masonry prisms

125

leaves the enlarged unit properties untouched is described in Rots (1997) and Loureno (1996a). The normal elastic stiffness (k n ) and the shear elastic stiffness (k s ) of the mortar joint interface element were altered using Equation 5.12 and Equation 5.13, respectively, where h mor = thickness of mortar joint = 10 mm. The normal elastic stiffness (k n ) was calculated as 623 N/mm3 and the shear elastic stiffness (k s ) was calculated as 260 N/mm3 . kn = E uni t E mor h mor (E uni t E mor ) G uni t G mor h mor (G uni t G mor ) (5.12)

ks =

(5.13)

In addition to the maximum compressive stress ( f c ), the equivalent plastic relative displacement (p ) and the compressive fracture energy (G c ) were also required to model compression failure. The equivalent plastic relative displacement (p ) was calculated using Equation 5.14 as 0.024 mm in order to obtain a total masonry strain of 0.25% at f c (Table 5.2) (Loureno, 1996a). In Equation 5.14 h uni t is the height of the brick unit = 76 mm. p = 0.0025 f c 1 E uni t + 1 k n (h uni t + h mor ) fc (5.14)

As each compression test was stopped just after the ultimate load was reached the compressive fracture energy was not recorded. The compressive fracture energy was estimated as 25 N/mm using Equation 5.15 (Loureno, 1996a). G c = 15 + 0.43 f c 0.0036 f c2 (5.15)

To estimate the elastic and compression properties for masonry panels with a weaker bond strength (the average bond strength for some of the panels tested was as low as 0.29 MPa) the results of Han (2008) were used. Han tested ve masonry prisms constructed using a similar clay brick (as the current investigation), but a weaker mortar was used. This mortar consisted of cement:lime:sand in proportions of 1:1:6 by volume with eight times the recommended dose of air entraining agent added to deliberately create low bond strength. The bond strength of these specimens was 0.176 MPa. The average values of the ultimate load (P c ), maximum compressive stress ( f c ), and the elastic modulus of the mortar (E mor ), masonry (E mas ) and brick unit(E uni t ) are shown in Table 5.3. The masonry strain at f c was not reported. Table 5.3: Compression test average results from Han (2008) (bond strength = 0.176 MPa) P c (kN) 516 f c (MPa) 20.0 E mor (MPa) 2772 E mas (MPa) 18135 E uni t (MPa) 35360

126

5. Finite element modelling

From these tests the values of f c = 20 MPa and E mor = 2772 MPa were adopted to represent masonry with a bond strength of 0.176 MPa. For consistency, the elastic modulus of the brick unit (E uni t ) from the previously described test series (equal to 27592 MPa) was kept. The input properties required for the mortar joint interface elements were calculated the same way as described previously, and are shown in Table 5.4. For the calculation of p , the masonry strain at f c was assumed as 0.2% (Loureno, 1996a). The input properties required for the mortar joint interface elements determined for masonry with a bond strength of 1.22 MPa, are also shown in Table 5.4. Table 5.4: FE model input properties determined from compression tests Property k n (N/mm3 ) k s (N/mm3 ) f c (MPa) G c (N/mm) p (mm) Bond strength = 0.176 MPa 308 128 20 22 0.010 Bond strength = 1.22 MPa 623 260 32 25 0.024

5.3.3 Torsion test

To characterise the shear behaviour of the mortar joint the torsion test (shown in Figure 5.8), developed by Masia et al. (2006, 2007), was used. In this test an annular masonry specimen, which contains a single bed joint (Figure 5.8a), is subjected to combined compressive stress (normal to the bed joint) and torsion. The torsion test produces close to uniform distributions of normal and shear stress, thus allowing the shear behaviour at a point to be characterised. As part of the current investigation a set of torsion tests were performed on specimens constructed using the same brick and mortar as the wall panel tests. The specimens were prepared by coring a complete annular specimen through the height of a pre-cast masonry couplet. These specimens were prepared differently from previous torsion tests, reported in Masia et al. (2007). In Masia et al.s tests the specimens were prepared by coring annular sections from two separate solid units rst, and then bonding them together with mortar. After testing, and then analysing the results of the current investigation (joints cast before coring) it was found that the joint shear strengths were lower than expected when compared to joints that were cast after coring (as in Masia et al. (2007)). The reduced joint strength was thought to be caused by damage to the joint during the coring procedure. The results from the current investigation were unreliable and therefore were not used for the characterisation of the shear behaviour. The results of tests conducted by Masia et al. (2007) were used instead. Torsion tests by Masia et al. (2007) This section outlines the specimens tested by Masia et al., the testing procedure they used, and their results. Torsion tests were performed on specimens

Figure 3.4 Triplet Test setup

Figure 3.5 Shear stress vs. Lateral compressive stress graph (Average shear stresses)

37

CHAPTER 6
PANEL TESTS

6.1

GENERAL

Before the frame tests, two series of panel tests were conducted to obtain information about the behavior of the strengthened masonry walls. The information gathered in panel tests were used to model the frame tests in analytical evaluation. In these tests, square masonry walls having dimensions of 700 700 mm and width of 69 mm were loaded in diagonal direction.

Test set-up was prepared between two heavy concrete support blocks. Test specimen was placed on thin metal plates parallel to floor. Steel plate was oiled and sat on ball roller supports to ensure friction free movement of panel specimens. Steel heads were placed to corners of the wall specimen in the diagonal direction and were attached with gypsum. Dial gages were placed in six directions to measure displacements on the wall. Test set-up is illustrated in Figures 6.1 and 6.2.

Figure 6.1 Test Set-up of Panel Tests

159

Figure 6.2 General View of Panel Tests

6.2
6.2.1

PANEL TESTS
First Series Panel Tests

In the scope of the first series, 12 tests were conducted. First, 6 reference wall specimens, composed of 3 non-plastered and 3 plastered, were tested. Then, 6 plastered wall specimens strengthened in different ways were tested. Plastered wall specimens were produced of 10 mm plaster thickness on both sides. 10 mm thickness of mortar with 2% volumetric ratio of steel fibers was applied on one side of 3 specimens. To the remaining 3 specimens, 20 mm thickness of mortar with 2% volumetric ratio of steel fibers was applied again on one side. Specimen properties are given in Table 6.1.

Mix proportions of the mortar used for the first series brick laying are presented in Table 6.2 and mix proportions of the mortar used for plastering are given in Table 6.3. Mix proportions for 1 m3 of the mortar with steel fibers applied on the plaster of the first series panel specimens are shown in Table 6.4.

160

Figure 6.31 Views of SF2P-1

Figure 6.32 Views of SF2P-2

Figure 6.33 Views of SF2P-3

Figure 6.34 View of 2SNPP-1

Figure 6.35 View of 2SNPP-2

176

Figure 6.44 View of 2SSF1P-3

Figure 6.45 View of 2SSF2P-1

Figure 6.46 Views of 2SSF2P-2

Figure 6.47 View of 2SSF1PD-1

Figure 6.48 View of 2SSF1PD-2

Figure 6.49 View of 2SSF1PD-3

Figure 6.50 View of 2SSF2PD-1

178

 Figure5:Bondwrenchtestapparatusandjointfailure 2.5. Masonrytensilebondstrength(Splittingtest)

Becausethefailureofthewallettesalsoinvolvedsomeverticalsplitting,forlatermodellingpurposes, it was also useful to determine the transverse strength of the masonry composite. This was achieved using the splitting test reported by Ali (7), see Figure6, performed on specimens which were built accordingtoreference(7)andwerecuredinairinthelaboratory.Usingthisprocedure,thetransverse strengthisgivenby:

T
where D

CF Dt

hl

/4

andhandlarethespecimenheightandwidth,respectively.Inaddition,tdenotes

the specimen thickness; F is the applied load and C a constant of 0.648. This constant depends on brick/joint stiffness and the chosen value was based on moduli of elasticity ratio of brick and mortar, Eb/Em,ofapproximately2,seealso(7). Using this approach, the mean transverse tensile strength of the five specimens was found to be 0.62MPawithacoefficientofvariationof22.4%.DetailedresultsaregiveninTableA4.

Figure6:Tensilebondtestapparatusandsplittingfailure

TableA7 in AppendixA shows the specimen dimensions, failure loads as well as the compressive strengthandmodulusofelasticity(asasecantmodulusattheloadof30%oftheultimate)forallfour specimens. The mean value for the modulus of elasticity Em obtained from tests on specimens1and4 was6.81GPa.Themeanvalueforthemasonrycompressivestrengthobtainedfromthetestswasonly a half of that obtained from the prism tests in accordance with the Australian code (see TableA6). Apart from any size effects, it isalso possible that the specimensmay have been damagedduring the cuttingout process. The failure modes of these specimens (Figure9) also differed from that of the masonrytripletsindicatingthatthetypeofspecimenmayhavealsoplayedarole.

Figure9:Compressiontestoncutoutspecimenanditsfailure

The objectives of these small-scale tests were (1) to understand the impact of a thin layer of ECC on unreinforced masonry, (2) to examine the performance of different ECC retrofit schemes, and (3) to help develop a retrofit scheme for unreinforced masonry infills in non-ductile reinforced concrete frames. The small-scale tests were compression tests, flexural tests and triplet (shear) tests (Figure 3.2). Compression tests of masonry prisms were conducted representing the compression strut of a masonry infill under in-plane lateral loading. Flexural tests of brick beams using a quarter point bending configuration with the constant moment region intended to approximately represent direct tension (in particular in the ECC), were performed to investigate the approximate response of tension struts in the masonry infill. Triplet specimens with ECC in the joints between the bricks were tested in shear to evaluate the ECC-brick bond in shear. With the small-scale tests different reinforcement ratios, as well as ECC-masonry bonding techniques were examined.

(a)

(b) test, and (c) triplet test.

(c)

Figure 3.2. Schematic of the small-scale test set-ups (a) compression test, (b) flexural

3.2. Compression Experiments Masonry prisms with and without retrofit were fabricated and tested in compression. The procedure followed for the fabrication of the specimens, the design of the different
______________________________________________________________________________________ Chapter 3 Small-Scale Tests

40

research had triple-wythe masonry infills and the intention was to use a 39 mm (1.5 in.) ECC layer for its retrofit. A thickness of 39 mm (1.5 in.) is the maximum thickness that the sprayable ECC was reported to reach when sprayed on a vertical surface (Kim et al., 2003) at the time these experiments were designed.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

Figure 3.3. Schematic of the different variables tested, a) Tall plain specimen, b) Short plain specimen, c) ECC retrofit, d) ECC retrofit with stitch dowels, e) lightly reinforced ECC, f) lightly reinforced ECC with stitch dowels, and g) heavily reinforced ECC with stitch dowels. All dimensions are in mm.

3.2.2. Fabrication of Masonry Prisms All specimens tested in compression had four mortar joints no thicker than 13 mm (0.5 in.) each. As indicated in Figure 3.3, the specimens of group (a) were taller than those of groups (b) through (g). The tall plain prisms had a height of approximately 343 mm (13.5 in.). The specimens of groups (b) through (g) had a height of approximately 267 mm (10.5 in.) with the top and bottom bricks being cut down to 20 mm (0.8 in.) in thickness. The height of the short specimens was controlled by the maximum specimen height that the Forney compression tester at Stanford could accommodate when modified to give the full compressive stress-strain response of the specimen. However, due to limitations in the free rotation of the loading plates of the compression tester when modified, all specimens were tested in the Powell laboratory, at The University of California, San
______________________________________________________________________________________ Chapter 3 Small-Scale Tests

42

Diego. A professional mason from a local masonry company (Walton & Sons Masonry Inc.), was hired to build the brick specimens in order to ensure real practice conditions (Figure 3.4). All fabrication was performed in one day in the laboratory of the John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center at Stanford University.

200 mm

Figure 3.4. Fabrication of masonry specimens for compression tests. The materials used were: Yellow clay bricks 94 mm x 58 mm x 196 mm (3.7 in. x 2.3 in. x 7.7 in.), grade MW, type FBS, and manufactured to meet ASTM C216-10. Mortar consisting of 1 part cement (Type I/II), 1 part lime (Type S) and 5 parts sand (Oly 1) by volume. The above types of cement, lime and sand were recommended by the masonry company. This type of mortar is similar to Type N which uses a 1:1:6 mix and results in a mortar with low compressive strength (ASTM C270-10). The type of bricks and mortar used were recommended by the Professional Advisory Panel (PAP) of the project to represent the mechanical properties of the materials used for the construction of masonry infills of a building that served as the project's prototype
______________________________________________________________________________________ Chapter 3 Small-Scale Tests

43

Table 3.13. ECC-brick interface shear strength of TEB specimens. Joints are named based on Figure 3.79.
TEB specimen 1 2 3 4 5 Joint 1 1 1' Joint 2 2 2' f's ECC-brick MPa (psi) 2.08 (302) 2.38 (346) 1.72 (250) 2.00 (289) 2.08 (302) 2.05 (298) 0.21 (31)

R R* S S* R R* S S* S* S R* R R R* S S* R R* S S* Average f's ECC-brick = S.D. f's ECC-brick =

* toweled surface

58 mm

94 mm
Figure 3.80. TE triplet specimen: Brick-ECC interface failure

58 mm

94 mm
3.81. TEB triplet specimen: Brick shear failure

______________________________________________________________________________________ Chapter 3 Small-Scale Tests

128

42

Figure 2.32: equipment set up for vertical compression tests: the steel profiles fitted onto the Metrocom 3000 kN press (left), a wall ready to be crashed inside the press (right)

Figure 2.33: diagonal compression tests set up, steel supports for diagonal compression tests (left), wall ready to be crashed inside the press (right)

Figure 2.34: suspension system of the upper steel profile

47

Figure 2.45: equipment for compression test parallel to holes on hollow brick walls (front and back view of the panel)

Figure 2.46: equipment for compression test orthogonal to holes on hollow brick walls (front and back view of the panel)

Figure 2.47: equipment for diagonal on hollow brick walls (front and back view of the panel)

48

Figure 2.48: equipment for compression test parallel to holes on half-full brick walls (front and back view of the panel)

Figure 2.49: equipment for compression test orthogonal to holes on halffull brick walls (front and back view of the panel)

Figure 2.50: equipment for diagonal compression test half-full brick walls (front and back view of the panel)

Plugging this raw data into the formula, along with the measurements and parameters as defined by the equation, the tensile strengths are found, shown in Table 2. Table 2: Bond Wrench Flexural Strength Results Gross Area flexural Tensile Strength (psi) 6(H + H ) I $ 142.4 109.2 72.2 162.6 93.06 113.5 ( + ) I 7.2 5.8 4.1 8.1 5.1 6.0 average

PRISM 1 12 15 17 26 28

Tensile Strength psi 135.2 psi 103.4 psi 84.8 psi 154.5 psi 88.0 psi 107.5 psi 112.2

Taking the average of these values, neglecting the values of Prisms 8 and 15, yield an average of 112.2 psi for the tensile strength of the mortar joints. However, there is a wide range of values, anywhere from 84 psi to 154 psi, which indicates that the accuracy of these values is not certain. 3. SHEAR TEST a. Methods The second major material testing conducted is the shear test in which a triplet of bricks are made with the center brick protruding on the top, as shown in Fig. 5. Prior to being tested, the triplets are capped using hydrostone and following ASTM 1552-07 standards (Standard Practice for Capping Concrete Masonry Units). This is done so that the two bottom prisms are flat against the floor and the top of the prism is perfectly flat. To ensure the top is flat, a level is used in all directions to find the best possible fit of the capping with the triplets. However, it was found that the friction forces between the hydrostone capping and the bottom plate impacted the results of the testing. As a result, a steel plate was Figure 5: Shear Test Setup placed under the hydrostone, along with a small roller. The roller was used to eliminate the friction forces at the bottom of the triplets, and the steel plate, which is hot glued directly onto the hydrostone, prevented the roller from digging in and crushing the hydrostone capping. This set up is shown in a close up view on Fig. 7.

The triplets are then tested in the MTS 500k machine where the central brick is subjected to a downward force while the entire prism has a horizontal load at various stresses. An in-house design for the test arrangement was used, as there are no ASTM Standards regarding this shear test. Following some tweaking to the apparatus and the construction, the shear test as used in the experimented is shown in Fig. 6. Stresses exerted on the mortar joints are 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, and 200 psi. Using the formula: = (2)
Figure 6: Shear Testing

the forces to be exerted in compression on the prisms are determined as shown in Table 3. This axial compressive stress is generated by tightening screws on plates surrounding the triplets, using an external load cell (shown in blue in Fig. 6) to measure the amount of force placed axially. Levels are used to ensure that the plates and the prisms are both as close to perpendicular with the base plate as possible. Wooden blocks, shown in Fig. 6, are placed on the sides as safety precautions, preventing the metal plates or the prisms from hitting the MTS machine upon the sudden failure of the mortar joint. In almost all the triplet tests, only one side of the mortar joint failed while the other remained intact. Table 3: Shear Test Axial Forces Stress (psi) Force (kips) 50 1.172 100 2.344 150 3.416 200 4.688

Figure 7: Shear Test, a close up view of the plates and the rollers

The results from this test are recorded through a data acquisition system which records both axial and shear forces. The shear displacements are recorded using a pair of pots located on the center brick, as shown in Fig. 7 in addition to the recording of the distance being pushed downward onto the prism. This is then post-processed and plotted to form coherent and readable graphs.

b. Results The results of the shear data is in forces and displacements; this is then converted to shear vs. displacement, as shown in Fig. 8.