Sei sulla pagina 1di 40

1.

0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.1.1
Brief history of masonry structure and reinforced
concrete- framed structure design
Masonry structure has been used as structure since man began
building buildings. It was traditionally very widely used in civil and
structural works including tunnels, bridges, retaining walls and
sewage system however, the introduction of steel and concrete
with their superior strength and cost characteristics led to a sharp
decline in the use of masonry for their application.
Over the past two decades or so, masonry has recaptured some
of the market lost to steel and concrete due largely to the
research and marketing work sponsored in particular by the brick
development association. For instance, everybody now knows
that brick is beautiful, less well appreciated. Perhaps, is the fact
that masonry as excellent structural, thermal and acoustic
properties. Furthermore, the permanence of masonry construction
is illustrated in the many structures remaining from the days of
the Greeks and romance, who were primarily masonry builders.
The famous Pout de Crard, an aqueduct built across the Gard
River near Nirues, France, and about 17miles from Avignon. It was
built about 15 B.C and was laid without mortal, that is very hard
and a fair condition well preserved cement concrete bridge along
the famous Amalfi Drive in Italy, near Naples, built in about the
6th century AD, well illustrates the durability of this type of
construction.
Even in prehistoric times, the prototypes of our masonry
structures were found in the crude dolmens and cromlechs of
barbarous man. These consisted of unshaped stones set as
column and partial walls and covered with a slab(s) of stones
without any attempt attaching one to the other. Mortar was, of
course, unknown, but piles of stone with huge natural slabs of
stones spinning the intervals are to be found in the ruins at
maidstone and stone henge, England, and at various other places
in Europe. Gradually, those simple elements of support and cover
were improved.

Perhaps, the most significant development in masonry


construction was the introduction of reinforced concrete, by which
masonry could be made to withstand tensile stress comparable
with its compressive strength. The first authentic record of the
use of reinforced concrete was at the worlds fair at Paris in 1855,
when a small rowboat built by M. Lambot of mortar reinforced
with wire netting was on exhibition, however, iron bars were used
at least a century earlier by Architects in Italy for reinforcing the
molded statuary in pertes and gardens (e.g. statuary groups in
ville d` Este at Tivoli). In 1865, Francois Coignet explained the
principles of reinforcing beams, slabs, arches, etc. and in 1869
took out patents on the process. In the same year, F. Joseph
Monier took out patents covering many of the details of this new
form of construction, and he has sometimes been called the
father of reinforced concrete.
1.1.2Typical masonry structure and reinforced concrete frame structure
model

Fig 1.0 Typical masonry structure of medium height under construction

Fig.1.1: Typical reinforced concrete framed structure of medium height


under construction
1.2 Justification and scope of the project
1.2.1This project primarily deals with comparison in design of masonry
structure and concrete-framed structure of residential building of
medium height. The British standard, BS 5628, part 1-3 gives the
design approach for structural use of unreinforced masonry, reinforced
and prestressed masonry, and materials and components, design and
workmanship of masonry structure. While the BS 8110, 1987, part 1-3
gives the design approach to structural design of reinforced concrete
i.e. concrete framed -structure. However, a structural model is selected
and designed to meet these codes of practice for masonry structure
and concrete- framed structure of residential building of medium
height. Separately and a comparison due to some certain conditions
will be justified.
3

In general, the choice of type of structure as well as the general


features of the design will be determined, provided the structure has
met the fundamental requirements of basis of design, by the following
considerations:
(i)
Adequacy
(ii)
Stability
(iii) Performance of function
(iv) Economy (a) initial cost (b) relative performance (c)
maintenance cost
(v) Aesthetics (a) harmony (b) proportion (c) ornamentation.
The scope of the project work will be on a five (5) storey building
structure design with masonry structure approach and concrete
frame structure, separately and compare in the course and is limited
to five storey building where lateral loads are relatively small and
must be designed accordingly. The structural model has regular
layout and are regular in shape, and is idealized in 2- dimensional
frames arranged in the orthogonal dimensions.
1.3
Objectives
The scopes of the project are to:
- Analyze the structural model of a five storey structure
- Design the structure as masonry structure and concreteframed structure
of a residential
building of medium height and ensure that requirements are
adequate and,
- Make a comparison of the design approaches and output.
The project objectives are completed by analyzing the structural model
by determining of forces and deformation of the structures due to
applied loads, designing the models which involves the arrangement
and proportioning of the structures and their components in such a
way that the assemble structure is capable of supporting the designed
loads within the allowable limit states and comparing the design output
to determine the main factor that influence the choice.
1.4

Contributions
4

The project summarizes design practices for masonry structure and


concrete framed structure of a medium height residential building.
The project gives a summary of masonry structure design and concrete
framed structure of medium height codes and literatures and also
provides a comparison between the different approaches requirements
of same structural model. Structural analysis solutions created as part
of the project simplifies the design and provides clear graphical output
to the design and the different in the design approaches is clarified.
1.5

Organization of project

The remaining portion of the project is separated into five chapters.


First a literature review (chapter 2) of masonry structure and concrete
framed structure of medium height residential building and design
codes, and structural models are presented. The variation found in
literature discussed.
A statement of the problem is presented in chapter 3. Flow charts and
the program to check the analysis for the flexural, shear and probably
personal analysis of concrete frame structure is presented here
(chapter 3) and validate comparison of the output to existing data is
given. Chapter 4 summarizes the theory conducted and analysis model
for the structure, load estimation and sizing of members, mix design
concrete mix/strength is discussed and modeling of the structure into
masonry and concrete framed structure.
Flow charts and the program to check the analysis for the flexural,
shear and probably personal analysis of concretes frame structure is
presented here (chapter 4) and validity comparison of the output to
existing manual calculation date is given.
The design of the structure i.e. masonry structure and the concrete
framed structure of residential medium height structure is discussed
and the structural detailing of the important section also shown. The
results and discussion of the design and the comparison of it are
discussed in chapter 5, also the suitability of each structure is also
presented.
5

The conclusion and recommendations are presented in chapter 6.


Appendices are also attached which explains some terms as well as the
analysis and design calculation sheet of relevant structures.

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW


2.1 Literature review on masonry structures design
Publication and papers related to the design of masonry structures
(reinforced masonry) severally fall into the following categories:
analysis techniques (typical chapter bending capacity) design of the
structure and general detailing of the masonry structure. Reinforced
masonry design as we know it today is rather recent. The principles of
reinforced masonry construction are said to have been discovered by
Marc Isambard Brunel, once a chief engineer for New York City, a great
innovator, and one of the greatest engineers of his time. In 1813, he
first proposed the use of reinforced masonry as a means of
strengthening a chimney, then under construction. However, his first
major application of reinforced masonry was in connection with the
building of the themes tunnels in 1825. As a part of this construction
project two bricks shafts were built, each 750mm thick, 15m diameter
and 21m deep. These shafts were reinforced vertically with 25mm
diameter. Wrought iron rods, built into the brickworks. Iron hoops,
225mm wide and 12mm thick were led in the brickwork as construction
progressed. However, the genesis of the provisions for the strength
design of reinforced masonry as specified in the MSJC code can be
traced technical report No 4115 titled strength design of one-to-four
storey concrete masonry building published by the ICBO in February
1984. This report had gone through several independent reviews
before and after publication. Following the reviews, the report was
received in February 1985, for two more years. Therefore, analysis and
6

design of reinforced masonry structure is improving with the review of


technical papers report on reinforced masonry structure from different
professionals in the field and standardization comes up thereafter.

2.1.1 LITERATURE REVIEW ON CONCRETE STRUCTURE


Francois Marte Le Brun built a concrete home in 1832 in Moissac in
which he used reinforced concrete arches of 5.4m span. He used
concrete to build a school in St. Aignan in 1834 and a church in
Conbariece in 1835. Joseph Louis Lambot exhibited a small rowboat
made of reinforced concrete at the Paris exposition in 1854. In the
same year, W.B Wkinson of England obtained a patent for a concrete
floor reinforced by twisted cables. The Frenchman Francois Cignet
obtained his first patent in 1855 for his system of iron bars, which
were embedded in concrete floors and extended to the supports. One
year later, he added nuts in the screw ends of the bars, and in 1869,
he published a book describing the applications of reinforced
concrete.
Joseph Monier, who obtained his patent in Paris on July 16, 1867, was
given credit for the invention of reinforced concrete. In 1873, he
registered a patent to use reinforced concrete in tanks and bridges,
and four year later, he registered another patent to use it in beams
and columns.In the United States, Thaddeus Hyatt conducted several
test on 50 beams that contained iron bars as tension reinforced and
published the result in 1877. He found out that both concrete and
steel can be assumed to behave in a homogeneous manner for all
practical purpose. This assumption was important for the design of
reinforced concrete members using elastic theory. He used
prefabricated slabs in his experiments and considered prefabricated
units to be best cost in T-section and placed side by side to form a
floor slab. Hyatt is generally credited with developing the principles
upon which the analysis and design of reinforced concrete are now
based.
A reinforced concrete house was built by W.E. Ward near Port Chester,
New York, in 1875. It used reinforced concrete for walls, beams, slabs
and staircase. P.B. Write wrote in the American Architect and building
7

news in 1877 designing the applications of reinforced concrete in


Wards house as a new method in building constructs.
E.L Ramsome, head of the Concrete Steel Company in San Francisco
used reinforced concrete in 1879 and deformed bars for the first time
in 1884. During 1889 to 1891, he built a reinforced concrete bridge in
San Francisco.
2.1.1 Field behavior of masonry structure and concrete frame
structure
Marc Isambard Brunel (1813), a chief engineer of New York City
studied the performance of masonry structure and is provided by
gravity, because masonry is weak in tension, no tension can be
allowed to develop at the back of the structure. This requires
unreinforced masonry structures to be sufficiently massive (meaning
large base width) that the resultant of all forced acting on the
structure does not fall outside the middle third of the base. This
requirement imposes an economic limit on the height of the masonry
structures that can be built. Furthermore, slender structure proved
incapable of withstanding lateral loads due to earthquakes as
demonstrated by damage during seismic events. In many countries
throughout the world, such as India, China, Iran, Mexico, the former
USSR, and Turkey to name a few extensive damage and collapse of
masonry structure during earthquakes continue to demonstrate the
web for a better experience construction. Reinforced masonry
provided the required answer, and thus began the present day
engineered-masonry construction, which uses methods completely
different from the empirical methods of the past was once evolved as
merely mason`s creations came to be designed and built as
engineered structures. While the concrete-framed structure of medium
height.
2.1.2 Material for masonry structure
Bricks, Blocks and Mortars for masonry structure
Brick is classified as a masonry unit with dimensions (mm) not
exceeding 337.5 x 225x112.5 (L.W.T). Any unit with a dimension that
exceeds any one of those specified above is termed a block. Blocks
8

and bricks are made of fired clay, calcium silicate or concrete which
must conform to relevant national standards, for example BS3921
(clay units), BS187 (calcium silicate) and BS6073 part 1 (concrete
units). In these standards two classes of bricks are classified, namely
common and facing, BS3921 identifies a third category, engineering.
There are varieties of bricks i.e. bricks may be wire cut, with or
without perforations, or pressed with single or double frogs or cellular.
Perforated bricks contain holes; the cross sectional area of any one
hole; the cross sectional area of any one hole should not exceed 10%
and the volume of perforation 25% of the total volume of the bricks.
Cellular bricks will have cavities or frogs exceeding 20% of the gross
volume of the brick. In bricks having frogs the total volume of
depression should be less than or equal to 20%.
Bricks of shapes other than rectangular prisms are referred to as
Standard special and covered by BS 4729.
Concrete blocks may be solid, cellular or hollow from the structural
point of view, the compressive strength of the unit is the controlling
factor. For reinforced and prestressed brickwork, it is highly unlikely
that brick strength lower than 20N/mm will be used the design and
construction.
2.1.3 Material for concrete-framed structure
Concrete mixes for reinforced framed structure
Dilger, Ghali and Rao (1996), Dilger and Rao (1997), and Wang, Dilger,
and Kuebler (2001) determined that special mix designs were required
for masonry and concrete framed structure. It was found that normal
concrete mixes would have segregation problem due to the spinning
process and the dry or coarse mixes would not consolidate properly.
Drying shrinkage, freeze thaw, chloride penetration, mix proportions
and mixing time, spinning speeds and duration were all investigated.
The spinning process seemed to be the cause of differential shrinkage
due to the segregation of fines from the coarse aggregate. Differential
shrinkage between the inner and outer layers was linked to the
longitudinal cracking of concrete structure causing deterioration,
reduction in strength, and reduces life expectancy. Longitudinal
cracking was noted as a typical problem with concrete framed
structure in service. To eliminate segregation and therefore
9

significantly improve the strength and durability of concrete frame


structure, special mix design was suggested. A mix design suggested
for use in production by Wang, Dilger and Kuelber (2001) had the
following components : 1255kg/m coarse aggregate, 650kg/m sand,
341kg/m cement, 34kg/m silica fume, 9.5L of plasticizer, 1.5L of air
entraining agent (5.5%) and 115kg/m water.
2.1.4 Published guides and specification for masonry structure
and concrete framed structure design of medium height
2.1.4.1 Guide specification for masonry structure design
The guide for the design of masonry structure published by the
concrete centre provides the two most common forms of multi-storey
masonry construction as crosswall and cellular construction which can
show as much as 10% reduction in cost.
2.1.4.2 Guide specification for concrete framed structure of
medium height
The guide for concrete framed structure published by the concrete
centre adds additional information to the specification published by BS
8110. The guide gives useful enough to be referred to whenever new
design is being considered, and comprehensive enough to give
references to where more information could be found. The guide sits
alongside our Economic Concrete Frame Elements. The guide is
intended for use by structural designer.
No formulae or design recommendations are given for sustainability
but sustainability is becoming more and more of an issue in todays
world. The guide believes that concrete can help provide a sustainable
solution to the changing climate, through the use of its high thermal
mass.
3.0
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND MATERIALS
PROPERTIES
3.1 Statement of the problem
10

In order to provide excellent building structure at a minimal cost, good


thermal and acoustic insulation, fire and weather protection, durability
and wall finishes of every acceptable appearance.
However, this project work is directed to the comparison of the design
of masonry structure versus the design of concreteframed structure
for residential building of medium height; say five (5) storey building.
Ideally, the mission of the project work is to choose a structural model,
allocating one for the masonry structure and the other for concrete
framed structure, both having a fixed dimension of the total girth,
storey height and equal headroom in both structure and then analyze
the structure and carry out the design of the structural members on
selected approaches based on stated codes of practice i.e. BS 5628
part 1 & 3 and BS 8110 part 1-3 respectively.
The suitability of each design output is then compared based on those
options stated above. In spite of the type of the designed structure
that meets all the listed options, if we continue to do the design of the
structure the does not provide these required options, they will not
only be wasting of time and money, which jeopardizes their overall
efficiency.
3.2 Material properties
3.2.1 Concrete
Concrete is arguably the most important building material, playing a
part in all building structures. Concrete is a mixture of cement, water,
and aggregates. It may also contain one or more chemical admixtures.
Within hours of mixing and placing, concrete sets and begins to
develop strength and stiffness as a result of chemical reactions
between the cement and water. These reactions are known as
hydration .Calcium silicates in the cement react with water to produce
calcium silicate hydrate and calcium hydroxide. The resultant alkalinity
of the concrete helps to provide corrosion protection for the
reinforcement.
In order to alter and improve the properties of concretes, other
cementious materials may be used to replace part of the Portland
11

cement, e.g. fly ash, natural pozzolans, blast furnace slag, and
condensed silica fume. The ratio of water to cement by weight that is
required to hydrate the cement the cement completely is about 0.25,
although larger quantities of water are required in practices in order to
produce a workable mix. For the concrete typically used in structural
concrete structure, the water-to-cement ratio is about 0.4.It is
desirable to use as little water as possible, since water not used in the
hydration reaction causes voids in the cement paste that reduce the
strength and increase the permeability of the concrete. The use of
chemical admixture to improve one or more properties of concrete is
now in commonplace. In recent year, high strength concrete with low
water-cement ratios has been made more workable by the inclusion of
superplasticizer in the mix. These polymers greatly increase the flow of
the wet concrete and allow very high strength, low permeability
concrete to be used with conventional concrete construction
techniques.
3.2.2 Mortar
Masonry mortal is a versatile material capable of satisfying a variety of
diverse requirements. It is one of the main constituents of a
constructed masonry structure. Mortar is required to lay masonry units.
As such, it must facilitate the placement of units, contribute to the
serviceability of masonry structure, provide structural performance,
and exhibit the desired appearance.
Mortar consists of cementitious materials to which are added water
and approved additives so as to achieve workable plastic consistency.
The cementitious materials may be lime, masonry cement, mortar
cement, and Portland cement, and should not contain epoxy resins and
derivatives, phenols, asbestos; fiber or fireclays. The mortar should be
able to resist the water uptake by the absorbent bricks/blocks, e.g. by
incorporating a water-retaining admixture and/or use of a mortar type
that includes lime, otherwise hydration and hence full development of
the mortar strength may be prevented. The mortar must also be
durable. For example, if masonry remains wet for extended periods of
time the mortar may be susceptible to sulphate in clay masonry units,
12

the ground water or the soil. Masonry mortar is also susceptible to


freeze/thaw attack, particularly when newly laid, which can adversely
affect bond strength. It should be remembered too that the
appearance of mortar is also important and that it should be in
harmony with the masonry unit. In its most basic form, mortar simply
consists of a mixture of sand and ordinary Portland cement (OPC).
However, such a mix is generally unsuitable for use in masonry (other
than perhaps in foundations and below damp-proof courses) since it
will tend to be too strong in comparison with the strength of the
bricks/blocks. It is generally desirable to provide the lowest grade of
mortar possible, taking into account the strength and durability
requirements of the finished works.
3.2.3 Bricks and Blocks
Brick is defined as a masonry unit with dimensions (mm) not exceeding
337.5 x 225 x 112.5 mm (L x w x t). Any unit with a dimension that
exceeds any one of those specified above is termed a block. Bricks are
manufactured from a variety of materials such as clay, calcium silicate
(lime and sand/flint), concrete and natural stone. Of these, clay bricks
are by far the most commonly used in Nigeria.
Clay bricks are manufactured by shaping suitable clays to units of
standard size, normally taken to 215 x 102.5 x 65 mm. Sand facings
and face textures may then be applied to the green clay.
Alternatively, the clay units may be perforated or frogged in order to
reduce the self-weight of the unit. Thereafter, the clay units are fired in
kilns to a temperature in the range 900-1500 C in order to produce a
brick suitable for structural use. The firing process significantly
increases both the strength and durability of the units. In design it is
normally to refer to the coordinating size of brick. This is usually taken
to be 225 x 112.5 x 75 mm and is based on actual or work size of the
brick, i.e. 215 x 102.5 x 65mm, plus an allowance of 10mm for the
mortar joint. Clay bricks are also manufactured in metric modular
format having a coordinating size of 200 x 100 x 75mm. Other cuboids
and special shapes are also available (BS 4729).These must conform to
relevant national standards i.e. BS 3921 (clay units), BS 187 (calcium
13

silicate) and BS 6073: Part 1 (concrete units). In these standards two


classes of bricks are identified, namely common and facing; BS 3921
identifies the third category, engineering:
Common bricks are suitable for general building work.
Facing bricks are used for exterior and interior walls and available
in a variety of textures and colours.
Engineering bricks are dense and strong with defined limits of
absorption and compressive strength.
Blocks are walling units but, unlike bricks, are normally made from
concrete. They are available in two basic types: aircrete and aggregate
concrete. The aircrete blocks are made from a mixture of sand,
pulverized fuel ash, cement and aluminium powder. The latter is used
to generate hydrogen bubbles in the mix; none of the powder remains
after the reaction. The aggregate blocks have a composition similar to
that of normal concrete, consisting chiefly of sand, coarse and fine
aggregate and cement plus extenders. Aircrete blocks tend to have
lower densities (typically 400-900 kg/m) than aggregate blocks
(typically 1200-2400 kg/m) which accounts for the formers superior
thermal properties, lower unit weight and lower strengths.
Blocks are manufactured in three basic forms: solid, cellular and
hollow. Solid blocks have no formed holes or cavities other than those
inherent in the material. Cellular blocks have one or more formed voids
or cavities which do not pass through the block. Hollow blocks are
similar to cellular blocks except that the voids or cavities pass through
the block. The percentage of formed voids in blocks and formed voids
or frogs in bricks influences the characteristic compressive strength of
masonry.
For structural design, the two most important properties of blocks are
their size and compressive strength. The most commonly available
sizes and compressive strengths of concrete blocks in Nigeria is 450 X
230 mm, width 230mm and compressive strength 3.6N/mm and
7.3N/mm for aggregate concrete blocks as it can be used below
ground. Guidance on the selection and specification of concrete blocks
14

in masonry construction can be found in BS EN 5628; part 3 and BS EN


771-3 respectively.
3.2.4

Reinforcement and Ties

Reinforcing bar are produced in two grades: hot rolled mild steel bars
have a yield strength fy of 250 N/mm: hot rolled or cold worked high
yield steel bars have a yield strength f y of 460 N/mm. Steel fabric is
made from cold drawn steel wires welded to form a mesh: it has a yield
strength fy of 460N/mm.
The hot rolled bars have a definite yield point. A defined proof stress is
recorded for the cold worked bars. The value of Youngs modulus E is
200KN/mm.The behavior in tension and compression is taken to be
the same. Mild steel are produced to be smooth round bars. High yield
bars are produced as deformed bars in two types defined in the code
to increase bond stress.
Wall ties External cavity walls are used for environmental reasons.
The two skins of the wall are tied together to provide some degree of
interaction. Wall ties for cavity walls are always galvanized mild steel
or stainless steel and must comply to BS 1243.Three types of ties are
used for cavity walls:
Vertical twist type made from 20mm wide, 3.2 to 4.83mm thick
metal strip
Butterfly- made from 4.5mm wire
Double-triangle type-made from 4.5mm wire.
For load bearing masonry vertical twist type ties should be used for
maximum co-action. For a low rise building or a situation where
large differential movements is expected or for reason of sound
insulation, more flexible ties should be selected. In certain cases
where large differential movements have to be accommodated,
special ties or fixings have to be used. In especially unfavorable
situations non-ferous or stainless-steel ties may be required.BS 5628
(table 6) gives guidance for the selection and use of ties for normal
situations.
15

Fig 3.1: A typical cavity wall: outer, insulation board and inner leaf with
metal ties in position
4.0 Theory
4.1 Analytical models of the structure
4.1.1 General Masonry Structure Design
The design of bending and shear stress in masonry walls is based on
the standard masonry wall approach used for all masonry members.
The design for bending stress in masonry structure involves the bricks
and blocks geometry.
The design of the behavior of the composite unit-mortar material under
various stress conditions requires a clear understanding. Masonry walls
are vertical load bearing elements in which resistance to compressive
stress is the predominating factor in design. However, walls are
frequently required to resist horizontal shear forces or lateral pressure
from wind and therefore the strength of masonry in shear and in
tension will be considered.
16

The current values for the design strength of masonry have been
derived on an empirical basis from tests on piers, walls and small
specimens. Whilst this has resulted in safe designs, it gives very little
insight into the behavior of the material under stress so that more
detailed discussion on masonry strength is required. The final strength
of the structural elements formed is dependent on:
The strength of the brick required (obtained from the calculation
output), and
The strength of the mortar required (dependent on mortar
constituents and proportions)
4.1.2 General Concrete-framed Structure Design
The design of concrete-framed structure is based on approximate
method approach used for concrete-framed structural members. All
members of the frame are considered continuous in the two directions
frame system, and the columns participate with the flat slab in
resisting external loads. The effects of lateral load i.e. wind load, is also
spread over the whole frame, increasing its safety. In this method, the
analysis of the floor under consideration is made assuming that the far
ends of the columns above and below the slab level are fixed using the
moment distribution method. The thickness of the flat slab and drop
panel is estimated first, and their relative stiffness based on the gross
concrete sections is used. The moment and shear force are calculated
and the values used to calculate for the tension, compression and
shear reinforcement.
To aid in the analysis of the concrete flat slab, a computer software
programme (SAFE) was also used to calculate the displacement and
stress values of the slab. See the attached displacement and resultant
maps.
4.1.3 Sizing of Members and Load Estimation
4.1.3.1 Masonry structure
For the masonry structure, the masonry unit of standard brick format
215mm long x 102.5mm wide x 65mm high will be used based for
17

facing and interior wall based on manufacturers satisfied tested


average strength of 20-50N/mm, texture, colour and size to meet the
design requirements while the Inner leaf B and cellular wall brick of
minimum average strength of 21-50N/mm that satisfied the quality
control requirements.

Table 1: Estimation of Gravity loads on


Wall A
Loading on wall A per meter run

Load/m run (KN/m)


Dead load
at floor

Calculation for floor level


considered
4th floor
roof dead weight , 3.5 x 3 x
1.2
Weight of wall, 2.6 x 3.3
Imposed load , 1.5 x 3 x 1.2
3rd floor
Floor dead weight, 4.8 x 3 x

12.6
8.58
21.18 KN/m
5.4 KN/m

21.18

Cumulative
dead
load to
floor, Gk

Cumulative
live
load to
floor, Qk

21.8

5.4

17.28
18

1.2
Wall
90% of Imposed load,
(5.4 + (5 x 3
x1.2))x 0.9
2nd floor
Floor dead weight, 4.8 x 3 x
1.2
Wall
80% of 3 floors imposed load,
(18+21.06) x
0.8
1st floor
Floor dead weight, 4.8 x 3 x
1.2
Wall
70% of 4 floors imposed load,
(18+31.25) x
0.7
Ground floor
Floor dead weight, 4.8 x 3 x
1.2
Wall
60% of 4 floors imposed load,
(18+34.48) x
0.6

8.58
25.86 KN/m

25.86

47.66

21.06

25.86

73.52

31.25

25.86

99.38

34.48

25.86

125.24

31.49

21.06 KN/m

17.28
8.58
25.86 KN/m

31.25 KN/m

17.28
8.58
25.86 KN/m

34.48 KN/m

17.28
8.58
25.86 KN/m

31.49

Table 2: Estimation of Gravity load on Wall B: Inner leaf


Loading on wall B per meter run;
Inner leaf
Load/m run (KN/m)
Dead load at
floor

Cumulative
dead
load to floor,
Gk

Cumulative
live
load to floor,
Qk

Calculation for floor level


considered
19

4th floor
roof dead weight , 3.5 x
3 x 0.45
Wall ( roof to 4th floor),
2.42 x 3.3

Imposed load , 2.025


3rd floor
Floor dead weight, 4.8 x
3 x 0.45
Wall

4.725
7.99

12.715

12.715

2.025

15.06

27.775

3.645

15.06

42.835

4.86

15.06

57.895

5.67

15.06

72.955

6.075

KN/
12.715 m
KN/
2.025 m

6.48
8.58
KN/
15.06 m

90% of Imposed load,


2x
2.025
x 0.9
2nd floor
Floor dead weight, 4.8 x
3 x 0.45
Wall

KN/
3.645 m

6.48
8.58
KN/
15.06 m

80% of 3 floors imposed


load,
3x
2.025
x 0.8
1st floor
Floor dead weight, 4.8 x
3 x 0.45
Wall

KN/
4.86 m

6.48
8.58
KN/
15.06 m

70% of 4 floors imposed


load,
4x
2.025
x 0.7
Ground floor
Floor dead weight, 4.8 x
3 x 0.45
Wall

5.67

6.48
8.58
KN/
15.06 m

60% of 4 floors imposed


load,
5x

6.075 KN/
20

2.025
x 0.6

4.1.3.2 Concrete-framed structure


The section dimension of members is based on the experience and
most especially already established empirical formulae. The thickness
of the flat slab, drop panel dimension and thickness and column
dimension are all generated on this. And these dimensions are also
used in calculating the dead load values for each element. See the
calculation sheets for the breakdown estimations.
4.2 Modelling of the Structure into Masonry and Reinforced
Concrete-framed Structure
4.2.1 Masonry Structure Model

21

Fig 4.1

22

Fig 4.2

23

Fig 4.3

4.2.2 Concrete-framed Structure Model

Fig 4.4
24

Fig 4.5

25

Fig 4.6

26

4.3 Analysis, Design and Detailing of the Structure


4.3.1 Analysis, Design and Detailing of Masonry Structure
Result (from appendix A)
Table 3: Design load and Characteristic brickwork strenght required for
wall type "A"
Floor

Design
load/m

Design characteristic strenght fk


(N/mm)

fk from the table 2 and


clause 23.1.2 (N/mm)

design load x Ym
t
4th

38.29

2.51

3rd

100.42

6.59

2nd

152.93

10.04

194.298

12.76

225.8

14.83

1st
Ground
floor

20N/mm brick in 1:1:6


mortar fk =1.15 x 5.8=
6.67N/mm
20N/mm brick in 1:1:6
mortar fk =1.15 x 5.8=
6.67N/mm
35N/mm brick in 1::3
mortar fk =1.15 x 11.4=
13.11N/mm
35N/mm brick in 1::3
mortar fk =1.15 x 11.4=
13.11N/mm
50N/mm brick in 1::3
mortar fk =1.15 x 15=
17.25N/mm

Table 4: Design load and Characteristic brickwork strenght required for


wall type "B"
Floor

Design
load/m

Design characteristic strenght fk


(N/mm)

fk from the table 2 and


clause 23.1.2 (N/mm)

design load x Ym
t
4th

21.04

1.38

3rd

43.15

2.83

2nd

68.16

4.48

1st

95.43

6.27

125.05

8.21

Ground
floor

20N/mm brick in 1:1:6


mortar fk =1.15 x 5.8=
6.67N/mm
20N/mm brick in 1:1:6
mortar fk =1.15 x 5.8=
6.67N/mm
20N/mm brick in 1:1:6
mortar fk =1.15 x 5.8=
6.67N/mm
20N/mm brick in 1:1:6
mortar fk =1.15 x 5.58=
6.67N/mm
20N/mm brick in 1::3
mortar fk =1.15 x 7=
8.51N/mm

27

4.3.2 Analysis, Design and Detailing of Concrete-framed


Structure (from appendix B)

28

5.0 Results and Discussion


5.1 Comparison of the design of masonry structure and
concrete-framed structure output and economic analysis of
each structure
The aim of this comparison study was to provide further insight into
the design outputs of masonry structure and concrete-framed sections
respectively, having the same live load and structure useful purpose
i.e. residential building of medium height. Based on the design outputs,
these were used to calculate the quantities of each structure type and
there cost using an already prepared price list of one of the foremost
construction companies in Nigeria, so as to checkmate the cost
applicable to each. Comparison was also made on the time of delivery
of the project using the two structures construction techniques.
An approximate economic analysis was also performed to determine
the cost reduction associated with using of the masonry structure
versus concrete-framed structure. Using an assumed labour cost per
minute and measured labour times incurred into the cost, approximate
savings can be determined (Table 6 and Figure 10). The material
savings comes from the fact that very less formwork and iron
quantities when masonry structure was used. The structure quantities
and cost was prepared to show more details. Hence, too often, costs
reflect the current state of the building and not the long-term of the
building over its life. Economy initial cost, relative performance and
maintenance cost favours masonry structure over concrete-framed
structure due to fact that masonry structure shows to be flexible to the
builder.

29

Table 5: Comparison between the various costs of the two structures


elements
Concrete-framed
structure
Masonry structure
Cost (#
Cost (#
Quantit
Naira)
Naira)
y
Quantity
Concrete
volume (m)
68,950/m
Columns
74
5102300
Slab (roof & floor
slab)
340.8
23498160
323.34
22,294,293.00
Shear wall
35.51
2448414.5
Edge beams
14.66
1010807
32,059,681.50
Formwork (m)
Columns
Slab (roof & floor
slab)
Shear walls
Edge beams

Reinforcement
(tonnes)
Columns
Slab (roof & floor
slab)
Shear wall
Edge beams
Wall ties

592
1334.7
318.6
47.43

8.02626
37.90503
4.26631
0.77853

13036/ m
7717312
17399149.2
4153269.6
618297.48
29,888,028.28

379928/tonne
3049400.909
14401182.24
1620890.626
295785.3458

1084

7000/250 pcs

13.90252

5,281,956.62

4837 pcs

135,436.00
5,417,392.62

19,367,259.12
Wall (m)
Cavity wall: (utility brick 102.5mm thick facing
wall)

14,131,024.00

1239.5

6944000
30

Inner leaf
Cellular wall type
C
Load bearing wall
type A
Non load bearing
block

Total project cost

2482

1147.65

6428800

785

2,355,000.00

993.7

5560800

4,964,000.00

21288600

86,278,968.9
0

68,413,266.2
4

It can be approximated that Seventeen million eight hundred and sixtyfive thousand seven hundred and two Naira (# 17,865,702.66) can be
saved per structure using masonry structure for the same purpose.
Using a similar method, approximately twenty-one percent (21%) will
be saved. The savings will be more significant when it is compared to
the beam-slab concrete-framed structure as flat slab concrete-frame
structure is more economical over other type. When many medium
height building are produced, savings may be more substantial

31

Comparison of cost of design output


35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
Cost ( million of Naira)
10.00
5.00
0.00

Fig. 5.1: comparison bar chart of cost of design output


5.2 Advantages, Suitability and applications
structure over concrete-framed structure

of

masonry

Both masonry and concrete-framed structures have their advantages,


suitability and application and the advantages of masonry structure
over concrete-framed structure is stated below based on the criteria
listed in chapter 1 i.e. cost, speed of erection, aesthetic, durability,
sound insulation, thermal insulation, fire resistance and accidental
damage.
(i)

Speed of erection
The erection of masonry structure can quickly follow on thus
achieving a faster overall construction time for the whole
32

building. A masonry wall can easily be built in two days, and


support a floor load soon after. Compare this with an in-situ
reinforced concrete-framed structure column where the time
taken to fix reinforcement , erect shuttering, cast concrete,
cure, prop, and then strike the shutter is often more a week. In
conclusion, it is worth pointing out that the speed of masonry
construction is achieved without the same planning constraints
that limit the application of system building.
(ii) Aesthetics harmony, proportion and ornamentation
Masonry structures provide appeal of a building, it provides the
human scale, is available in a vast range of colours and
textures, and, due to the small module size of bricks and
blocks, is extremely flexible in application in that it can be used
to form a great variety of shapes and sizes of walls. it also
tends to wear well and mellow with time.
(iii) Sound Insulation
The majority of noise introduction is by airborne sound, and the
best defense against this traditionally is mass- the heavier the
partition, the less the noise transmitted through it. It is added
bonus if the mass structure is not too rigid. Brick work and
blockwork provides the mass without too much rigidity.
However there are many light weight wall systems also
available, which perform better than the same thickness of
masonry.
(iv) Thermal Insulation
The good thermal properties of cavity walls have long been
recognized and, more recently, have become critical in the
attempts to conserve energy. Cavity walls and diaphragm walls
can easily be insulated within the void to provide further
improved thermal values. Care is also required for the choice of
external leaf which must resist rain penetration, insulation
materials and the details employed.

33

(v)

Fire Resistance and Accidental Damage


Masonry structure always suffers less damage than concreteframed buildings- which fact provides evidence of not only the
high fire resistance of masonry structures, but also their
inherent capacity to resist accidental damage.

5.3 Suitability of each structure


Masonry structure of a multi-storey building on which the wind is
directly applied are usually the outer cladding walls, which have
their weakest axis at right angles to the wind direction. Walls best
able to resist these forces are the internal cross walls and the
vertical shafts forming the stair or lift. Masonry structure is more
suitable when T and L and other plan configurations are used to
enhance masonrys lateral load resistance. When the structure has
repetitive floor plan, masonry structure has an advantage to provide
repetitive load bearing wall layout. The masonry structure can still
prove competitive for more flexible layout.
However, architectural and planning layout design that mostly
shows repetitive floors is for structures like hostel, hotel, flat and
other residential buildings. So, adopting masonry structure of
medium height for this type of structures will be more economical.
Concrete-framed structure
The frame is the key structural element of any concrete-framed
structure.Frame choice can have a surprisingly influential role in the
performance of the final structure, and importlantly, also influence
people using the building.However, cost alone dictates frame choice,
although the most suitable choice has been selected (flat slab)
which has the advantage over other concrete-framed structure
types, but this cannot still be economical based on this research
work. Cladding can represent up to 25% of the total construction
cost if non-loadbearing was not used, which would have added more
advantage of masonry structure over frame structure.

34

However, the suitability of concrete-framed structure can be highly


favoured due to its high resistance vibration.For some uses, such as
laboratories or hospitals, additional measures may be needed, but
these are significantly less than for other materials. In recent
independent study (by the Concrete Centre, 2004) into the vibration
performance of hospital floors, concrete emerge the solution least in
need of significant modification to meet the stringent criteria.
However, concrete-framed structure of medium height will be
suitable for structures susceptible to vibration. i.e. hospital, thearter,
etc.

35

Chapter 6: Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Work


An investigation into the design of masonry structure and concreteframed structure of residential building of medium height was
completed. The objectives of the investigation were to analyze, design
and compare the outputs of design calculations of both structures.
Adequacy, stability and performance of function were assumed to have
been met and satisfied in the design calculations. The mode of actions
(dead live and wind loads) were also presented and analyzed. The
investigation yielded the conclusion and results.
Total cost reduction of an approximate value of 21% could be
achieved using masonry structure instead of concrete-framed
structure meant for the same function.
In concrete frame structures, masonry or other materials are used
to form partitions and corridor walls, etc. In so many instances, if
these partition and other walls are designed in load bearing
masonry they can be made to carry the loads and dispense with
the need for columns and beams, while ensuring that the most
economic scheme has been chosen for each material.
That masonry building tends to be faster to erect, resulting in
lower site overhead costs and without very large expenditure on
the part of the builder.
That the maintenance costs of masonry are minimal compared to
concrete-framed structure since the facing wall bears a good
finishing that can withstand the weather harshness and does not
perennial painting.
Masonry structure brick wall 102.5mm thick plastered both sides
with a minimum of 12.5mm thick of plaster has an approximate
sound reduction index of 46 Db which makes it more suitable in
an area where noise pollution always occur.
36

Quality control and assurance of the concrete, bricks, mortar and


other materials are more important factors for masonry structure
construction. Segregation caused by poor concrete, low mortal
and brick strengths and wrong arrangement of wall ties could
cause out-of-plane, which reduce the stability of the building.
Since the load bearing construction is most appropriately used for
building in which the floor area is subdivided into a relatively large
number of medium size and in which the floor plan is repeated on each
storey throughout the height of the building. These considerations give
ample opportunity for disposing load bearing walls, which are
continuous from foundation to roof level and, because of the moderate
floor spans, are not called upon to carry unduly heavy concentrations
of vertical load. Therefore, once the chosen model complies with all
these conditions and the type of buildings which are compatible with
these requirements include flats, hostels, hotels and other residential
buildings. A masonry structure of medium height is recommended to
be more appropriate for these types of structure (flats, hostels, hotels
and other residential building of medium height) and other quality of
masonry will be utilized fully while adopting it.
It is recommended that an extensive comparison be undertaken to
conclusively determine if design of reinforced/ prestressed masonry
structure versus concrete-framed structure of residential/commercial
building of medium height will be more economical because of some
advantages of reinforced masonry over unreinforced masonry
structures. If more investigations are performed on masonry structure,
a method to entirely eliminate the concrete-framed structure than the
use of masonry structure for residential building of medium height
would be beneficial.

37

References:
BS 5628:
Code of practice for use of masonry; part 1: structural use
of unreinforced
masonry; Part 3: Materials and components, design and
workmanship.
BS 6399:
Design loading for buildings; Part 1: Code of practice for
dead and imposed
loads, 1996; Part 2: Code of practice for wind loads, 1997;
Part 3: Code of
practice for imposed roof load.
BS 8110:
Structural use of concrete; Part 1: Code of practice for
design and
construction, 1997; Part 2: Code of practice for special
circumstances, 1985;
Part 3: Design charts for singly reinforced beams, doubly
reinforced beams
and rectangular columns, 1985.

38

CP3:
Code of basic design data for the design of buildings;
Chapter V: Part 2:
Wind loads.
Curtin, W.G.,Shaw, G.,Beck, J.G and Bray, W.A. (1995) Structural
Masonry Designers Manual, Blackwell, Oxford.
DD 140-2 Recommendation for design of wall ties
Institution of Structural Engineers and The Concrete Society, Standard
method of detailing structural concrete- a manual for best practice,
London,2006.
Sinha, B.P, Henry, A.W and Davies, S.R (2004) Design of Masonry
Structure,3rd Edition E&FN SPON, U.K

APPENDICE A

39

APPENDICE B

40