Prototype and model masonry behaviour under different loading conditions

Mohammed, A.; Hughes, T. G.

doi:10.1617/s11527-010-9608-6

Cited by 25 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most recent detailed experimental study on scaling of solid clay brick masonry is presented by Mohammed (2006) and Mohammed and Hughes (2011) which comprises different standardised material tests at different scales (1/6-, 1/4-, 1/2-and full-scale). When comparing the results of compression tests, similar failure patterns were observed for the specimens at all scales.…”

Section: Compressive Strength Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The increase in strength was attributed to the following two phenomena: (1) the burning of a reduced-scale brick can lead to an increased brick strength (Egermann et al 1991) and (2) the scaling of the mortar joint affects the percentage of water sucked from the mortar by the brick during the curing of the mortar and thus the strength of the mortar joint (Drysdale and Hamid 2008;Mohammed and Hughes 2011). Mohammed (2006) reported that the brick unit at 1/6-and 1/4-scale was indeed slightly stronger in compression than the prototype brick.…”

Section: Compressive Strength Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the additional masses required by the Artificial Mass Simulation scaling law are typically only installed after the construction of the entire structure has been completed, the compressive stresses acting on the bed joints during curing of the mortar of the small-scale masonry are only half of those of the full-scale masonry. To avoid the difference in overburden stresses, Mohammed and Hughes (2011) built their specimens horizontally and obtained from compression tests similar stiffnesses in the elastic range for the small-and full-scale masonry. While such a construction practice is feasible when conducting material tests on small specimens, it is not possible to construct entire shake table test units in a horizontal position nor does this construction practice reflect the stiffness of real masonry structures.…”

Section: Axial Stiffness Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Exceptions are (i) the study by Benjamin and Williams (1958) who investigated the scale effect on the shear strength of infill masonry walls with concrete frames; (ii) the study by Sinha and Hendry (1969) and Hendry and Sinha (1971) who compared the shear behaviour of masonry panels at full-and reduced-scale, (iii) the study by Abrams (1996) who compared the behaviour of a 2-storey URM building at full-and reduced-scale when subjected to lateral loading; and (iv) the study by Mohammed and Hughes (2011) who studied the influence of the scaling on the masonry shear strength through triplet tests and diagonal compression tests.…”

Section: Shear Behaviour Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the last study (Mohammed and Hughes 2011), the model bricks were cut after the burning from prototype bricks leading to a smaller surface roughness when compared to the prototype brick that were wire-cut before the burning. As a result, Mohammed and Hughes (2011) observed for the shear triplet tests on full-size masonry a significant higher cohesion and friction than for the model masonry.…”

Section: Shear Behaviour Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Scaling unreinforced masonry for reduced-scale seismic testing

Petry

Beyer

2014

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When testing multi-storey structures, most testing facilities require the testing of a reduced-scale model. A literature review on tests of scaled masonry structural components revealed that scaling of masonry was rather challenging and often significant differences in stiffness, strength and failure mechanisms between the different sized masonry were reported. This paper addresses the scaling of hollow clay brick masonry with fully mortared head and bed joints. We investigate different choices of scaling brick units and mortar joints. Based on the results of an extensive test programme including standard material tests and quasi-static cyclic tests on masonry walls subjected to horizontal and axial loads, we formulate recommendations for the production of a half-scale model of unreinforced masonry structures. The experimental results show a good match between full-scale and half-scale masonry. We discuss the differences in material properties that remained and compare the force-displacement hystereses obtained for the wall tests.

show abstract

Section: Compressive Strength Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Compressive Strength Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Axial Stiffness Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Shear Behaviour Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Shear Behaviour Of Masonrymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Scaling unreinforced masonry for reduced-scale seismic testing

Petry

Beyer

2014

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Out‐of‐plane shaking table tests of full‐scale historic adobe corner walls retrofitted with timber elements

Reyes

Galvis

Liu

et al. 2019

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Historic adobe structures pose a high seismic risk mainly because of the poor out‐of‐plane bending response of their walls that may produce fatalities and significant economic, cultural, and heritage losses. In this paper, we propose a retrofitting technique that increases the wall strength for both in‐plane and out‐of‐plane directions. This technique consists of vertical and horizontal timber elements symmetrically installed on each face of the wall to form a confining wood frame, supplemented with vertical tensors that pre‐compress the wall. This study evaluates the performance of this retrofitting technique with a two‐set experimental program on full‐scale historic adobe walls. On the first set, four specimens were subjected to a static overturning test with boundary conditions representing the confinement effect at both ends by orthogonal walls. On the second set, three full‐scale specimens, one unretrofitted and two retrofitted, were subjected to four ground motion records on a shaking table to assess the out‐of‐plane dynamic behavior of typical corner walls. The unretrofitted specimen collapsed during the second motion (peak ground acceleration [PGA] = 0.39 g), while both retrofitted walls survived all four motions (maximum PGA of 0.75 g) proving the high effectiveness of the proposed retrofitting. The addition of base anchors as a variation of the retrofitting technique significantly reduced the rocking effects and the residual drifts of the system, thus improving its overall seismic performance. Further research is needed to develop guidelines for seismic retrofit of heritage buildings including multistory full‐scale tests of specimens with various types of openings and retrofitting strategies that minimize their architectural impact.

show abstract