Response of reinforced mortar-less interlocking brick wall under seismic loading

Abstract

Mortar-less construction with interlocking bricks has many advantages, such as improved construction efficiency and relatively low requirements on labour skills. Nevertheless, the seismic performance of interlocking brick structures is not well understood yet. In this paper, laboratory tests and numerical modelling are carried out to investigate the seismic behaviour of interlocking brick walls. Laboratory shaking table tests are performed on a scaled reinforced mortar-less interlocking brick wall. The response and damage modes under in-plane seismic loading are investigated. A detailed numerical model is then generated and validated with the laboratory testing data. Unlike the conventional masonry wall that diagonal shear damage governs the failure, the interlocking brick wall exhibits rocking responses, whose damage is mainly at the two bottom corners of the wall. Full-scale interlocking brick walls are then modelled and compared with conventional concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls bonded by mortar. Comparisons are made between the seismic resistances and damage modes of the two walls. The influences of ground motion intensities, vertical components of seismic excitations and different seismic time histories on the seismic behaviour of the interlocking brick wall are examined. It is found that the interlocking brick wall has a higher seismic resistance capacity than the conventional CMU wall. Inter-brick friction is the main energy dissipation mechanism in the interlocking brick wall. Because of the rocking response, vertical component of the ground motion significantly influences the damage of interlocking brick wall. The interlocking brick wall is insensitive to velocity pulses of ground motions due to its relatively high natural frequency.

Environmentally Friendly Smart Construction—Review of Recent Developments and Opportunities

“…Under dynamic loadings, the posttensioning provides higher bending stiffness, but the damping is higher for the externally prestressed structures [197]. The ability of the blocks to detach provides an additional mechanism for dissipation of vibration energy [189,190,198,199].…”

“…Stone flats assembled of blocks with isosceles trapezium cross sections in both directions [235,236] Planar interfaces Non-planar assemblies of truncated tetrahedra [182] Non-planar interfaces Osteomorphic blocks [180,181,201] Non-planar interfaces Tetraloc concrete and rammed earth blocks [180,199,202,203,237,238] Stone flats assembled of blocks with isosceles trapezium cross sections in both directions [235,236] Planar interfaces locking of dodecahedra in the plane nor-mal to 5th order symmetry axes, (f) assembly of interlocked icosahedra [180,224,225,229,230,232,233] Planar interfaces Design patterns for TI floors [234] Planar interfaces…”

“…Stone flats assembled of blocks with isosceles trapezium cross sections in both directions [235,236] Planar interfaces Non-planar assemblies of truncated tetrahedra [182] Non-planar interfaces Osteomorphic blocks [180,181,201] Non-planar interfaces Tetraloc concrete and rammed earth blocks [180,199,202,203,237,238] Tetraloc concrete and rammed earth blocks [180,199,202,203,237,238] Non-planar interfaces Appl. Sci.…”

Review on the Developments of Structure, Construction Automation, and Monitoring of Intelligent Construction

“…Compared to traditional construction methods, prefabrication and modular constructions have a number of advantages, which include higher construction efficiency, a safer building environment, a shorter project duration, better building quality, less labor intensity, and less material waste, etc. [47][48][49][50][51][52][53].…”