J. Inst. Eng. India Ser.

A (September 2016) 97(3):199–204

DOI 10.1007/s40030-016-0178-7

ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION

An Experimental Investigation of Mechanical Properties in Clay

Brick Masonry by Partial Replacement of Fine Aggregate
with Clay Brick Waste
Hemraj Ramdas Kumavat1

Received: 28 March 2016 / Accepted: 30 August 2016 / Published online: 9 September 2016
 The Institution of Engineers (India) 2016

Abstract The compressive stress–strain behavior and mortar; it is not easily available because of limitation of
mechanical properties of clay brick masonry and its con- experimental tests and variation in properties and proportion
stituents clay bricks and mortar, have been studied by of material. In this experimental study, tests were performed
several laboratory tests. Using linear regression analysis, a on clay brick specimens manufactured at Kasat brick kiln
analytical model has been proposed for obtaining the plant Paldhi, group of each 27 mortar cube specimens for 3, 7
stress–strain curves for masonry that can be used in the and 28 days of 1:4 grade for replacement of sand with clay
analysis and design procedures. The model requires only brick waste (CB0, CB10, CB20, CB30, CB40) and group of
the compressive strengths of bricks and mortar as input each 27 masonry prisms combination of four bricks and three
data, which can be easily obtained experimentally. mortars joint (CBP0, CBP10, CBP20, CBP30, CBP40).
Development of analytical model from the obtained From the experimental data of compressive strengths, it
experimental results of Young’s modulus and compressive has been calculated modulus of elasticity of bricks, mortar,
strength. Simple relationships have been identified for and masonry prism. A simple analytical model has been
obtaining the modulus of elasticity of bricks, mortar, and proposed for obtaining the nonlinear stress–strain curves of
masonry from their corresponding compressive strengths. masonry, which is a function of only the compressive
It was observed that the proposed analytical model clearly strengths of bricks and mortar cubes.
demonstrates a reasonably good prediction of the stress–
strain curves when compared with the experimental curves.
Review Literture
Keywords Masonry prism  Stress–strain relation 
Young’s modulus Kaushik et al. [1] developed a simple analytical equation
by regression analysis of the experimental data to estimate
the modulus of elasticity and to plot the stress–strain curves
Introduction for masonry. A significant improvement in ductility of
masonry was observed because of the presence of lime in
Masonry walls are used due to low cost material, good sound the mortar without any considerable reduction in its com-
and heat insulation properties, easy availability and locally pressive strength. This showed that lime in the mortar
available material. Analytical modeling of masonry prism offered distinct structural advantages. The compressive
requires the properties and interrelationships of brick and strength of masonry was found to increase with the com-
pressive strength of bricks and mortar. The trend was more
prominent in case of masonry constructed with weaker
& Hemraj Ramdas Kumavat mortar.
kumavathr1981@gmail.com Based on an experimental study, it has been reported
1 that modulus of elasticity of soft bricks 500 MPa were
Building Science and Technology, North Maharashtra
University, R C Patel Institute of Technology, Shirpur, responsible for development of triaxial compression in
Maharashtra, India bricks and axial compression with lateral tension in mortar

123
200 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. A (September 2016) 97(3):199–204

Fig. 1 a Mortar cube, b clay

brick masonry prism,
c compressive strength of
mortar cube and d compressive
strength of prism under UTM

joints of masonry prism [2]. This behavior is contradictory analytical determination of compressive strengths of
to the generally accepted behavior of the masonry con- bricks, mortar, and masonry, which depend upon their
structed with stiff bricks and softer mortar [3]. compressive and tensile strengths [4].
Various researchers have suggested that masonry is very The researchers have suggested several analytical rela-
weak in tension because it is composed of two different tions for estimation of strength and deformation charac-
materials distributed at regular intervals and the bond teristics of masonry, which depend upon the compressive
between them is weak [4–6]. Therefore, masonry is nor- and tensile strengths of bricks and mortar along with sev-
mally provided and expected to resist only the compressive eral other factors [5, 7–9].
forces, during compression of masonry prisms constructed
with stronger and stiffer bricks, mortar of the bed joint has
a tendency to expand laterally more than the bricks because Experimental Program
of lesser stiffness. Shear stresses at the brick–mortar
interface result in an internal state of stress which consists Compressive strength and modulus of elasticity is main
of triaxial compression in mortar and bilateral tension parameters for determines the bearing capacity and defor-
coupled with axial compression in bricks. This state of mation of the mortar and masonry prism under loading.
stress initiates vertical splitting cracks in bricks that lead to Several tests were carried out in order to evaluate the
the failure of the prisms [4]. uniaxial compressive stress–strain curves of brick units,
Earlier, the investigators have conducted several uni- mortar cubes, and masonry prisms constructed with mortar
axial, biaxial, and triaxial tests on clay bricks, mortar, and grade 1:4. This work presents an investigation of various
masonry to validate an analytical model describing the blended mortars produced by 0, 10, 20, 30, and 40 %
failure criteria of masonry prisms, which considers the replacement of sand with a clay brick waste. The experi-
nonlinear behavior of confined mortar between bricks and mental result of replacement mortar compared with the
splitting strengths of bricks [4]. It was observed that the controlled mortar (0 % replacement). The compressive
failure of masonry prisms took place because of lateral strength of cement mortar cubes (size 7.07 cm 9
tensile splitting of bricks, which was induced in the bricks 7.07 cm 9 7.07 cm) of 1:4 proportions, as specified by IS:
by the mortar. Several relations were proposed for the 650 (1966) as shown in Fig. 1a.

123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. A (September 2016) 97(3):199–204 201

Clay Brick Prism (CBP) of size 210 9 95 9 340 mm a 700.00

were prepared using clay brick of size 210 9 95 9 60 mm
600.00
1:4 cement mortars with 0, 10, 20, 30, and 40 % replace-

Young,s modulus
ment of sand with a clay brick waste as shown in Fig. 1b. 500.00
Mortar joint thickness of 10 mm was used for all the prism 400.00
specimens. The Bureau of Indian Standards IS: 1905
(1987) suggest to use brick masonry prisms having the 300.00

dimensions of 40 cm height with aspect ratios (height/ 200.00

thickness) between 2 and 5 in order to determine the axial
100.00 E = 44.07fm
strength of the brick masonry [10]. In this experimental R² = 0.458
study axial compression test was conducted on the brick 0.00
0 5 10 15
masonry prisms with the ratio (h/t) of 3.58.
Compressive strength
After casting of mortar cube and prism they are cured in
water for 3, 7 and 28 days. Mortar and masonry prism b 900.00
specimen was placed on the computerized universal testing 800.00
machine and the axial compressive load was applied and 700.00
the deformation was recorded by a sensor available in the

Young,s Modulus
600.00
computer based data acquisition system. The specimens
were subjected to an axial load up to failure of the test 500.00

specimen as shown in Fig. 1c, d. 400.00

From obtained result a graph is plotted in between 300.00
Young’s modulus and compressive stress. Modulus of
elasticity is calculated from stress–strain curves by mea-
200.00 E = 40.87fm
suring the slope of a secant between ordinates corre- 100.00 R² = -0.86
sponding to 5 and 33 % of the ultimate strength of the 0.00
0 5 10 15 20
specimens [11].
Compressive Strength

c 3000.00
Results and Discussion
2500.00
Young,s modulus

Stress–strain characteristics of brick masonry prism were 2000.00

examined through prism test as per IS 1905 (1987) [10].
From the stress strain behavior of prism, the compressive 1500.00
strength of clay brick masonry prism in 1:4 cement mortars
1000.00
with 20 % replacement of fine aggregate with clay brick
waste exhibited higher compressive strength due to the 500.00 E = 71.12fm
effect of clay brick waste on brick masonry attributed its R² = 0.4
pozzolanic activity, by which the pozzolans chemically 0.00
convert the weak CH crystals to strong CSH fibrous gel. 24 25 26 27 28 29
Compressive strength
The pozzolanic activity depends mainly on the chemical
composition, fineness and percentage of the pozzolans. The Fig. 2 Compressive stress against Young’s modulus of mortar for
pozzolanic reaction of clay brick waste was reported to curing periods a 3 days, b 7 days and c 28 days
have a significant effect on long-term strength develop-
ment. The clay brick masonry prisms were damaged with
visible vertical cracks along the entire surface as shown in increased. From the above results, it was found that the
Fig. 2. construction cost is reduced, because of clay brick waste is
Some investigators have reported that the mortar joints naturally and easily available at construction sites and brick
can develop lateral compression while brick develops lat- manufacturing plants and its crushing cost is very less than
eral tension in brick masonry [12]. The compressive naturally available standard sand in nearby rivers. The
strength of clay brick prism varies in the range of stress, strain and young’s modulus of mortar and clay brick
4.6–5.53 MPa for 28 days, with partial replacement of fine masonry prism are given in Tables 1 and 2.
aggregate in the mortar with the clay brick waste, the In this experimental study, the compressive strength of
compressive strength (load carrying capacity) was the clay brick masonry prism was predicted from the

123
202 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. A (September 2016) 97(3):199–204

Table 1 Stress strain behavior of mortar cubes

Age 3 days 7 days 28 days
Sample Stress Strain E Stress Strain E Stress Strain E

BW-0 9.8 0.028 350.0 15.2 0.028 542.9 25.1 0.015 1673.3
BW-5 9.76 0.028 348.6 15 0.029 517.2 24.98 0.016 1561.3
BW-10 9.98 0.024 415.8 16.66 0.031 537.4 25.55 0.016 1596.9
BW-15 11 0.021 523.8 17.52 0.028 625.7 27.3 0.015 1820.0
BW-20 11.87 0.018 659.4 17.52 0.026 673.8 28.67 0.011 2606.4
BW-25 10.67 0.019 561.6 15.45 0.024 643.8 27.12 0.012 2260.0
BW-30 10 0.021 476.2 14.22 0.022 646.4 26.38 0.014 1884.3
BW-30 9.78 0.026 376.2 13.89 0.019 731.1 25.46 0.015 1697.3
BW-40 9.63 0.03 321.0 13.55 0.016 846.9 25.12 0.016 1570.0

Table 2 Stress strain behavior of clay brick masonry prism

Age 3 days 7 days 28 days
Sample Stress Strain E Stress Strain E Stress Strain E

BW-0 2.3 0.008 287.50 3.688 0.012 307.33 4.608 0.015 307.20
BW-5 1.725 0.006 287.50 4.704 0.014 336.00 4.624 0.015 308.27
BW-10 4.577 0.012 381.42 5.72 0.017 336.47 4.64 0.015 309.33
BW-15 5.566 0.014 397.57 5.558 0.016 347.38 5.088 0.015 339.20
BW-20 6.072 0.015 404.80 5.396 0.015 359.73 5.536 0.015 369.07
BW-25 5.014 0.011 455.82 4.838 0.015 322.53 5.328 0.016 333.00
BW-30 3.979 0.011 361.73 4.28 0.013 329.23 5.12 0.015 341.33
BW-30 3.772 0.009 419.11 3.996 0.013 307.38 4.976 0.015 331.73
BW-40 3.565 0.009 396.11 3.712 0.011 337.45 4.832 0.015 322.13

Table 3 Comparison of past experimental results on masonry prisms with analytical predictions
Experimental results Predicated results [fm0 ]
Research fb Fm fm0 Present study Dayaratanm Hemant et al.

Present study 3.96 25.1 4.608 4.868 2.742 3.468

3.96 25.55 4.64 4.898 2.766 3.488
3.96 28.67 5.536 5.100 2.930 3.619
3.96 26.38 5.12 4.954 2.811 3.524
3.96 25.12 4.832 4.869 2.743 3.469
Hemant et al. 20.8 3.1 4.1 6.334 2.208 4.003
20.8 15.2 6.6 11.049 4.890 6.659
20.8 20.6 7.5 12.290 5.692 7.339
Sarangpani 10.7 4.1 2.9 4.688 1.821 3.161
10.7 10.6 3.2 6.536 2.929 4.284

obtained results of brick and mortar compressive strength. Masonry strength; fm0 ¼ 0:63 fb0:49 fm0:32 ð1Þ
Earlier, some of the investigators have given a relationship
between the strength of the brick masonry with the strength Based on regression analysis of data obtained in an
of the brick and the mortar as [1], experimental study, Dayaratnam [13] proposed different

123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. A (September 2016) 97(3):199–204 203

Table 4 Relation between Young’s modulus and compressive a 600.00

strength for controlled and replaced mortar
500.00

Youngs modulus
Sample Curing period, ‘‘E’’ for standard ‘‘E’’ for replaced
days mortar mortar 400.00

Mortar 3 E = 35.71 fm E = 44.07 fm 300.00

cube 7 E = 35.71 fm E = 40.87 fm 200.00
28 E = 66.66 fm E = 71.12 fm E = 86.62fm
Masonry 3 E = 125 fm E = 86.62 fm 100.00 R² = -1.54
prism 7 E = 83.33 fm E = 69.83 fm 0.00
28 E = 66.66 fm E = 66.13 fm 0 2 4 6 8
Compressive Strength

values of the constants K, a, and b as per the following b 450

equation [13] 400

Masonry strength; fm0 ¼ 0:275fb0:5 fj0:5 ð2Þ

Youngs Modulus
350

300
The equation proposed by Dayaratnam gives almost
250
equal weight age to the compressive strength of the brick
200
and the mortar. It has been reported earlier that, in such
cases, the errors in the estimation of masonry compressive 150

strength may be higher [1]. 100 E = 69.83fm

The generalized equation is proposed for estimating the 50 R² = -5.94
axial strength of the brick masonry as K, a and b are 0
constants. Based on present experimental results, by trial 0 2 4 6 8
and error method the value of, K = 0.7, a = 0.57 and Compressive Strength
b = 0.35
c 400.00
Therefore, the relation between compressive stresses of
brick, mortar and brick masonry prism. 350.00
Youngs Modulus

300.00
Masonry strength; fm0 ¼ 0:69fb0:6 fm:35 ð3Þ
250.00
It indicates that if the compressive stress of any brick
200.00
and mortar of 1:4 proportions is known then the
compressive stress of brick masonry can be found out by 150.00
0
using above relation. fm is the intrinsic property of masonry 100.00
E = 66.13fm
which can be used in the design of a variety of masonry 50.00 R² = 0.866
0
elements, particularly the walls. fm is also used to estimate
0.00
Em and for plotting the masonry stress strain curves. The 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
relation between Young’s modulus and compressive Compressive Strength
strength of standard mortar and replaced mortar present
Fig. 3 Compressive stress against Young’s modulus of clay brick
in Table 3.
masonry prism for curing periods a 3 days, b 7 days and c 28 days
In general, the brick strength is usually greater than the
mortar strength, hence ‘a’ must be greater than ‘b’ as
reported by the previous researchers [1]. However, the
axial strength of brick masonry is calculated based on the (2) experimental curves obtained in research study [2] of
0
experimental results of the present study, the value of ‘k’ is analytical relations for estimating fm have been proposed
obtained by least square methods of regression analysis. by the researchers [1]. Therefore for better comparison
among the three analytical models, stress–strain curves are
0
generated using: analytical fm and experimentally obtained
0
Fitness of Proposed Analytical Model fm. A comparison of past experimental results on masonry
prisms with analytical predictions is shown in Table 3,
The proposed analytical model for compressive stress– which show a very close match between the analytical and
strain curves is examined for its fitness by comparing it experimental curves. The proposed analytical model
with: (1) experimental curves obtained in the present study, clearly demonstrates a reasonably good prediction of the

123
204 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. A (September 2016) 97(3):199–204

stress–strain curves when compared with the experimental close match between the analytical and experimental
curves. The proposed model successfully predicts prism curves. The proposed analytical model clearly demon-
strengths and corresponding peak strain values fairly strates a reasonably good prediction of the stress–strain
accurately. In most of the cases, failure strains predicted by curves when compared with the experimental curves.
the proposed model are significantly greater than the cor- • The elastic modulus of the brick masonry (Epm) was
responding experimental values. The researchers have used determined with the prism strength (fpm). The equiv-
very soft and weak bricks in their experimental study, alent homogenized elastic property of the masonry was
therefore prism strength reported in their study is also derived with the elastic properties of brick and mortar.
much les [2].
Based on experimental result, graph is plotted in
between Young’s modulus and compressive stress. An
angle bisector is drawn in between two extreme lines which References
show maximum and minimum value with origin and its
equation is found. The equation of that angle bisector gives 1. H.B. Kaushik, D.C. Rai, S.K. Jain, Stress–strain characteristics of
the average relation between young’s modulus and com- clay brick masonry under uniaxial compression. J. Mater. Civ.
pressive stress of masonry mortar. Finally found the exact Eng. (ASCE) 19(9), 728–739 (2007)
2. G. Sarangpani, B.V.V. Reddy, K.S. Jagadish, Structural charac-
relationship in between the equation of replacement mortar teristics of bricks, mortar and masonry. J. Struct. Eng. 29(2),
and controlled mortar (Table 4). The relation between 101–107 (2002)
young’s modulus and compressive strength of controlled 3. G. Sarangpani, B.V.V. Reddy, K.S. Jagadish, Brick mortar bond
and replaced mortar as shown in Fig. 2 and clay brick and masonry compressive strength. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 17(2),
229–237 (2005)
masonry Prism as shown in Fig. 3. 4. M.C. Nary, D.P. Abrams, Mechanics of masonry in compression.
J. Struct. Eng. 111(4), 857–870 (1985)
5. M.J. Priestley, D.M. Elder, Stress–strain curves for unconfined
Conclusion and confined concrete masonry. Am. Concr. Inst. J. 80(3),
192–201 (1983)
6. R.G. Drysdale, A.A. Hamid, L.R. Baker, Masonry structures:
• The mortar with the ratio of 1:4 cement mortars with behavior and design (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1994)
20 % replacement of fine aggregate with clay brick 7. C.T. Grimm, Strength and related properties of brick masonry.
waste exhibited a higher compressive strength than the J. Struct. Div. 101(1), 217–232 (1975)
8. Indian Standards, Indian standard methods of test of burn clay
controlled mortar after 28 days of curing. Based on building bricks—part 1: determination of compressive strength,
experimental results, compressive strength is more than IS 3495, 3rd Rev., Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India
controlled mortar for replacement ratio of sand with (1992a)
clay brick waste up to around 35 % for a curing period 9. L. Binda, A. Fontana, G. Frigerio, Mechanical behavior of brick
masonries derived from unit and mortar characteristics, in Pro-
of 3 and 28 days and 25 % for curing period of 7 days. ceedings, 8th International Brick and Block Masonry Conference,
For higher replacement ratio, parameters decreased. vol. 1, Dublin, Ireland, (1988), pp. 205–216
This was the combination of some degree of pozzolanic 10. Indian Standards Indian standard code of practice for structural
effect of these brick waste with filler effect. use of unreinforced masonry, IS1905, 3rd Rev., Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi, India (1987)
• In prism test, it is seen that compressive strength of 11. Masonry Standards Joint Committee (MSJC), Building code
replaced brick waste masonry prism is more than the requirements for masonry structures, ACI 530-02/ASCE 5-02/
compressive strength of standard brick masonry prism. TMS 402-02, American Concrete Institute, Structural Engineer-
The value of constant factor ‘C’ is more in replaced ing Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers, The
Masonry Society, Detroit (2002)
mortar than standard mortar for each and every curing 12. D. Lenczer, Elements of load bearing brickwork (Pergamon
period. It indicates that the sand replacement with brick Press, Oxford, 1972)
waste gives better strength than standard mortar 13. P. Dayaratnam, Brick and reinforced brick structures (Oxford
without brick waste. and IBH, New Delhi, 1987)
• A comparison of past experimental results on masonry
prisms with analytical predictions, which show a very

123