ABN 57 410 620 309

MINE SUBSIDENCE TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Reprint

from the

Proceedings of the
MSTS 4th triennial conference on
buildings and structures
subject to ground movement
Newcastle
th
Saturday 11 to Monday 13th July 1998

This document is available to members of the society at

www.mstsociety.org

Important disclaimers and copyright information

Responsibility for the content of these papers rests upon the authors and not Engineers
Australia or the Society. Data presented and conclusions developed by the authors are for
information only and are not intended for use without independent substantiating
investigation on the part of the potential user.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, no
part of these proceedings may be reproduced by any process without the written permission
of the Mine Subsidence Technological Society.

ISBN 0-9585779-0-0

A Society of the Institution of Engineers, Australia

PO Box 208, THE JUNCTION NSW 2291

Ph: 02 4926 4440 Fax: 02 4929 7121

www.mstsociety.org

The Serviceability Behaviour of Masonry Subjected to

Mine Subsidence or Shrink-Swell Effects
A R M MUNIRUZZAMAN, B.Sc, M.Sc, PhD
Research Associate
A W PAGE, ASTC, BE, PhD, FlEAust
CBPI Professor in Structural Clay Brickwork
Department of Civil, Surveying and Environmental Engineering
The University of Newcastle NSW 2308 Australia

SUMMARY Masonry structures are susceptible to damage when subjected to external effects
such as foundation movements due to mine subsidence, swelling and shrinkage of reactive soils,
differential settlement etc. Research on the serviceability behaviour of masonry has been in
progress for several years at the University of Newcastle. One of the major aims of this research
is to identify the critical factors that influence the behaviour of masonry structures subjected to
such external effects. The project includes modelling of external effects, full scale testing of
wall-footing systems, and the development of representative analytical models of masonry
behaviour to allow further study of the influence of various parameters. This paper presents an
overview of the testing program together with discussion and analysis of some of the test results.

1.

INTRODUCTION

Ground movement due to shrink-swell effects

of reactive soil or underground mining
induces serviceability failures in masonry
structures as well as in many other structures.
Subsidence damage alone has significant
financial and social implications as it affects
the mining industry, property owners,
insurance companies and various government
and local authorities. The problem is not only
confined to Australia; rather every mining
region experiences the effects of mine
subsidence. Structural damage can occur
from the collapse of abandoned mines as well
as from current mining activities, with the
nature and magnitude of the ground
movement depending on the mining method.
The effects of ground movement on a lowrise, light weight masonry structure due to
mine subsidence are quite similar in nature to

those that occur as a result of shrink-swell

behaviour of reactive foundation soil.
In the design of masonry, emphasis is placed
on its ultimate strength rather than its
serviceability performance, perhaps due to the
fact that up until the development of the limit
states code past research has focused only on
ultimate behaviour. Serviceability requirements
have usually been satisfied by enforcing
deemed-to-comply empirical rules which
place limiting values on external effects and
crack widths. No rational methods exist for
the systematic determination of the location
or size of control joints and 'other details.

In order to develop a more rational approach

to the serviceability behaviour of masonry,
comprehensive studies of the cause of
damage (external and internal effects),
together with the structural response of

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

masonry is necessary. With the exception of

some limited tests on hollow concrete
masonry by Symons et a1 [I], no previous
comprehensive studies on masonry response
have been performed. Some empirical
serviceability criteria for the masonry have
been suggested by numerous investigators,
many based on the work of Skempton and
MacDonald [2]. Deemed-to-comply detailing
rules for articulation of structures are also
available [3].
The main aim of the serviceability project is
to develop rational procedures for the
serviceability design of masonry subjected to
external effects. The investigation is confined
to one of the major areas of masonry use in
Australia - low-rise and light weight
structures of either cavity brick or brick
veneer. The study has three main strands:
1. Establishing the types and range of
external effects, and providing an
analytical model of this behaviour;
2. Testing of selected footing-masonry
assemblages to study their response to
these external effects, and to develop
representative analytical models of this
behaviour, and
3. The development of rational procedures
for establishing serviceability criteria for
cracking in masonry allowing for
variability in both external effects and
structural response.

response of representative wall-footing

systems to simulated foundation movement.
The main objectives of the experimental
program were to identify the critical factors
influencing the serviceability behaviour, and
to validate the developed analytical models of
the wall-footing system.

2.1
Phase-1: Two Dimensional Tests
During the 2D tests only the in-plane
behaviour of the wall-footing assembly was
investigated. A general arrangement of the
testing rig used in the two dimensional study
is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Rear Elevation of the 2D Testing

Rig [71.

The work in Strand 1 and 2 is in a concluding

stage, with considerable progress being made
[4-71. Following significant progress in the
first two stages, the principal focus is now on
Strand 3. This paper presents an overview of
the experimental study together with
discussion and analysis of the tests performed
on a poor quality, low bond strength masonry
wall. Tests on a good quality masonry wall
have been reported elsewhere [8].

The rig was capable of accommodating a 6m

long x 2.5m high single leaf load bearing or
veneer wall on a reinforced concrete footing
thus simulating a straight length of wall
between control joints. Vertical curvature, in
the form of prescribed displacements at three
central locations, was applied by means of
manually controlled loading jacks. Provision
was made to pre-load the wall through a
simulated roof system. To simulate ground
movement the foundation beam was given
both upward and downward curvature. In this
preliminary phase of testing a total of 18 tests
were performed on these wall-footing systems.

2.

2.2

FULL-SCALE TESTING OF THE

WALL-FOOTING SYSTEMS
A comprehensive experimental program was
conducted in two phases, and studied the

Phase-2: Three Dimensional Tests

The investigation in Phase-1 was limited to

in-plane effects only and therefore the results

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

were only relevant to lengths of wall located

between vertical control joints. The presence
of corners and returns in any structure
requires a three dimensional study, as
articulation joints are not necessarily located
immediately adjacent to a corner or return.
Thus when a corner of a dwelling is subjected
to ground movement, out-of-plane as well as
in-plane effects will be produced in the walls,
and additional stresses due to torsion and
flexure will alter the structural response of
the masonry. To study the complex 3D
behaviour of the wall-footing system a more
comprehensive testing arrangement was
constructed to allow the equivalent of the
corner of a house to be tested.
Loadioe- Throueb
- a Timber Top Plale via a Losdine T r a

footing beam at five locations (J1 through Js)

by means of hydraulic jacks. The beam was
free to rotate in all directions at these five
locations because of specifically fabricated
spherical seats placed between the beam and
the jacks. Commercial load cells were
mounted on top of the jacks to measure the
loads due to the applied displacements, which
in turn were measured by LVDT's.
Potentiometers were used to record the
separation along the dpc, separation along the
interface between the wall and the footing
beam, and were mounted over long gauge
lengths to identify cracking at selected
locations in the masonry. Provisions were
also made to apply vertical pre-load via a
simulated roof system consisting of timber
joists resting on a timber top plate located
along the top of the wall. The wall could thus
represent either a non-load bearing veneer in
a veneer construction, or the inner load
bearing skin of a cavity construction. The
influence of wall ties between the skins was
neglected, as they have very low shear
stiffness and will not produce composite wall
behaviour. A complete description of the
testing program can be found elsewhere [6].

R = Reactions

Figure 2 General Arrangement of the 3D

Testing Rig.
A schematic arrangement of the testing rig is
shown in Figure 2. The rig was designed to
support a 6.3m long x 2.4m high single leaf
masonry wall with a 3.2m long x 2.4m high
90'-return on a reinforced concrete footing.
This is representative of the full scale corner
of domestic masonry construction, whch was
then tested under imposed displacement
conditions. The entire wall-footing system
was supported at nine locations throughout its
length. Each of the beam-ends was held down
by two reaction points (R1 through Rq in
Figure 2), l m apart. These "fixed" support
conditions were therefore representative of
the continuity in a longer footing.
Vertical displacements in the upward and
downward directions were applied to the

Ground curvatures were applied to the

footing beam by lowering the jacks either
individually or in a group. The deflection at
the corner was chosen as the principal
reference point for applying upward and
downward displacements. The following
categories of displacement cycles were used
to simulate the typical external effects
imposed on the footing system (refer to
Figure 2 for location of the jacks with respect
to the wall-footing system).

I:
The corner jack J4 was gradually
unloaded until the load approached zero. This
represented the effects of soil shrinkage
around the corner of a building for a diameter
of around 1 m under the footing due to causes
such as the drying out of foundation soil from
the water demand of a nearby tree root.
Separation at the soil-structure interface over
an area of l m radius would result in the
corner cantilevering beyond jacks J3 and Js.

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

This particular displacement cycle was

discontinued after a few preliminary tests
since the footing beam was too stiff to allow
any significant corner displacement.
11:
The corner was pushed upward by
the corner jack J4 to a prescribed
displacement from its approximate original
undeflected position. This caused jacks 52, J3
and J5 to unload. The long beam spanned
from J1 to J4 and the short beam from R3 to
J4. On some occasions the long beam spanned
from R2 instead of J1 because of the higher
magnitude of the corner displacement. During
the first two series of tests the amount of
applied upward displacement was restricted
to 4 mrn. This differential displacement cycle
was comparable to a situation where local
swelling of foundation soil at the corner of a
dwelling had taken place (eg. due to the
removal of a nearby large tree). The upward
jack movement was terminated at a point
when any significant change in the response
of the wall ceased to appear. Any further
upward displacement would have only caused
more cracking of the foundation beam.
111: Three corner jacks J3, J4 and J5 were
unloaded simultaneously in the same manner
as Category-I until the load in each of them
approached zero. The corner beam then
cantilevered from Jack J2 and reaction R3 in
the long and short directions respectively.
Thls represented a more extensive soil
shrinkage effect than in Category-I.
IV:
The corner jacks J3, J4 and Js were
loaded simultaneously with equal pressure
and the corner raised to a prescribed
displacement as in Category-I1 to represent a
more extensive zone of soil swelling.
V:
To simulate a foundation on variable
ground, the three central jacks J1, J2 and J3
were unloaded simultaneously, leaving the
long beam supported by the corner jack J4
and the end supports R1 and R3. The Jacks J4
and J5 were locked in position by closing the
individual needle valves.
VI:
This displacement cycle was
opposite to the cycle applied in Category-V.
The two central jacks J1 and J2 were loaded
simultaneously simulating a swelling of the
foundation soil midway along the long wall.

The central region of the long beam assumed

a doming curvature.
VII: A severe soil shrinkage was created
by unloading the jacks J2 through J5
simultaneously. This situation was similar to
that of a dwelling constructed during a wet
season with the soil around the perimeter of
the structure then drying out. The long beam
cantilevered from J1 and the short beam from
R3. On a few occasions the complete
unloading of the jacks was not carried out
once the trend of the test had been
established.

In each category of displacement cycles, the

foundation beam was given a predetermined
displacement at the appropriate jacking
locations and then gradually returned to its
approximate original position to examine the
response of the structural elements during the
loading and unloading cycle. Each cycle was
executed under three levels of vertical preload: zero joist load, representing a non-load
bearing masonry veneer (Load level I); 7 kN /
joist on the long wall and 1 kN /joist on the
short wall, representing a roof load only
(Load level 11); and 12 kNl joist on the long
wall and 5 kN / joist on the short wall,
representing roof load and load of an
additional storey of brick masonry (Load
level III). Repetitive application of the
displacement cycles was also performed to
study the effects of seasonal changes in soil
moisture content.
Although time dependent effects may have
some influence on masonry cracking, it was
not feasible for this project to include the
influence of long term effects on the
serviceability behaviour. However, limited
short term effects were studied on critical
tests by holding the wall-footing system at its
peak deflection for a period of 18 to 24 hours.

3.
TEST RESULTS
A total of 124 tests in six series were
performed on two types of masonry walls; a
good quality, high bond strength masonry
(referred as Wall-1) and a poor quality, low
bond strength masonry (referred as Wall-2).

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

The experimental program also considered

other variables such as the type of masonry
construction (masonry veneer or full masonry
of cavity construction), wall openings,
articulation joints etc. All these variables
were studied whilst subjecting the walls to a
wide range of footing curvatures.
A total of 33 tests were performed on the
poor quality, low bond strength (28-day
characteristic bond strength of 0.19 MPa)
masonry (Wall-2) in two series, Series E and
Series F. A discussion on the results of these
tests is presented in the following sections.

3.1

Results of Series E Tests

Table 1 Summary of Series E Tests.

Test

Displ

1 Load 1

VII
VII
VII

I
11
111

5
6

6y

1 -5.23
1

Structural

--

I1
I1

13
14

I1
I1
VII
VII
VII
VII
VII
VII
VII
VII

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

1
I

1
I
1
I

1
1

1
I

I
I

-7.13 SpC, SpSE, SpLE

-5.51 p p s ~SpLE
,

1
I

k,
1

I Notation I

Table 2 Notation
Description

I Test repeated

I
I

- .

6.79 Partial Data Loss

7.34 R, SpML, SpMS

I11
7.43 Partial Data LOSS111
7.42 R, SpML, SpMS
I11 -2.58 Ppc
II I11 1I -7.53 I USE
'
I I11 I -8.01 b P s ~
I 111 1 -9.55 ~ V S E
I I11 1I - k'artial
Data Loss
I
I
I I11 1 -14.05 b p ~ ~
I I 1 -10.74 k,SDC,.SDSE
.
I
-10.58
SpC, SpSE
* use Table 2 for Notation

During the first three tests the footing was

subjected to foundation doming as the three
corner jacks (J3, J4 and Js) were gradually
unloaded to zero load. As in Wall-1
separation occurred along the dpc at the
corner and wall ends, with the resulting
unsupported corner acting as a two way
cantilever creating horizontal tensile and
compressive stresses at the top and bottom of
the masonry wall. The potentiometer readings
suggest that the region of maximum tensile
stress was at the wall top, between 1600 mm
and 2800 mm from the corner. It is inferred
that for all load levels the magnitude of the
developed tensile stresses were small as
Wall-2 did not show any sign of significant
distress. Wall-2 was able to withstand the
effects foundation doming despite its low
bond strength and poor quality.

--

SpC, SpSE, SpLE

10
11

corner. The shaded rows in Table 1 represent

the onset of cracking.

A total of 22 tests were performed on the

solid wall in this series. Table 1 shows the
summary of these tests along with the
structural response in terms of separation at
the dpc interface. 6y in Table 1 represents the
maximum displacement applied at the footing

SpSE
SpML
SpMS

end.
Separation at dpc level at the Short wall
end
Separation at dpc level mid-way in the
Long wall.
Separation at dpc level mid-way in the
Short wall.

Following the displacement cycle CategoryIII, the wall was subjected to more extended
simulated ground shrinkage at the corner by
unloading all the jacks except J1. All the jacks
were simultaneously unloaded until the load
in each approaches zero. The behaviour of the
wall subjected to displacement cycle
Category-VII can be best explained with the
help of the schematic sketch shown in Figure
3. As corner displacement was applied the
wall rotated with the footing corner resulting
little or no separation at the dpc interface near
the corner. On the other hand vertical

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

separation occurred at the dpc interface of the

wall ends due to rigid body rotation of the
solid wall. The magnitudes of vertical
separations were significantly higher
compared to those of displacement cycle
category-III.
I

Applied Through the

$ $End
&n aC

wall (Ls). The 'end cantilever' as shown in

Figure 3 as a result of vertical separation at
the wall ends was expected to develop
horizontal tensile stresses. The intensity of
these tensile stresses would be expected to be
higher in the long wall due to the higher
length of separation and higher level of load
to be carried by the cantilever during Load
level-I1 and III. Nevertheless, the level of
developed tensile stresses due to end
cantilevering under Load level-I and II, were
not sufficient to produce any cracking in the
masonry.
L

lo Sirnulalc Scvcrc Ground

Shrinkage a1 [he Corncr

-Test - 4
.............

J1

LL: Length olSeparation a l the Long Wall End

LS= Lenglh of Separation a t the Short Wall End

Figure 3 Effects of Severe Ground Shrinkage.

The plot of vertical separation of the long
wall end at the dpc interface versus the
downward displacement of the footing corner
under Load level-I and II is shown in Figure
4. The sudden change in slope of these plots
corresponds to vertical separation at the dpc
interface at the end of the long wall. In the
case of masonry veneer, vertical separation at
the long wall end occurred at a corner
displacement of -0.8 mm, whereas separation
commenced at about -3.0 mm under Load
level-II. Once commenced the magnitude of
vertical separation increased linearly with
downward displacement in both the load
levels. This suggested that once vertical
separation occurred its magnitude was
controlled by rigid body rotation independent
of the level of applied superimposed load.
Despite the difference in magnitude of
vertical separation at the respective wall ends
for Load level-I and II, the differences in the
corresponding length of separation were
small. However, for both the load levels the
length of separation at the long wall end (LL)
was approximately twice that of the short

Downward Comer Displacement ( rnm )

Figure 4 Vertical Separation at the dpc

Interface at the End of the Long Wall.

Initiation of the Primary Crack

The first cracking of Wall-2 occurred under
displacement cycle Category-VII, whle
carrying the hghest level of superimposed
load. The cracks initiated in two consecutive
perpend joints at the top of the wall,
approximately 2100 mm away from the end
of the long wall. The two cracks travelled
vertically through the mortar joints and brick
units following a zigzag path for six courses
before joining together and forming a single
crack. The crack then propagated downward
through the mortar joints and occasionally
through brick units and stopped at the lgth
course of brickwork from the top as the test
was halted.
The cracking started at the perpend joints as a
result of the horizontal tensile stresses
developed due to the cantilever action of the
long wall end. The critical level of flexural

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

tension was mainly due to the higher level of

superimposed load applied to the long wall,
which imposed greater restrictions on wall
rotation. The primary cracking initiated from
the expected zone of high tensile stresses and
travelled through the planes of weakness
(mortar joints) and through local weak spots
in the wall created by poorly connected
perpends, pre-cracked brick units etc. These
weak spots therefore play a role in
determining the path of crack propagation.
The rigid body movement of the short wall
maintained uniform gradients throughout the
displacement cycle suggesting that no
cracking occurred in the short wall.

Development of the Second Crack

Following the initiation of the primary crack
Wall-2 was subjected to foundation dishing
by loading the three corner jacks. The
behaviour of the wall resembled that of Wall1 under similar circumstances, with
separation occurring at the dpc interface
midway along the long and the short wall. A
zone of high tensile stresses was expected to
develop close to the dpc interface, midway
along the long wall. The stresses developed in
the wall were controlled by the length of the
separation (wall span), the weight of the
structure (including the vertical pre-load) and
the frictional resistance developed along the
dpc.
In case of Load level-I the developed tensile
stresses were not high enough to initiate
cracking. A hairline crack developed in the
next dishing cycle under Load level-2 at a
perpend joint in the first course above the dpc
approximately 2800 mm from the end of the
long wall. It is important to mention that the
location of the crack was in the vicinity of the
location of maximum vertical separation.
This emphasises the fact that although Wall-2
was of poor quality, with weak spots located
all over the wall, cracking still initiated at the
expected location.
The cracked wall was then subjected to a
number of dishing cycles, under different
load levels. The wall behaviour under these

cycles was similar to that described above,

except for the fact that both the vertical and
horizontal separation at the dpc of the long
and short wall increased progressively. The
applied displacement cycles also opened up
the crack further. Figure 5 illustrates the
effect of cyclic displacement on crack
propagation. At the end of Test 14, the
second crack had propagated vertically
through the mortar joints and stopped 4
courses above the dpc level. At this stage the
maximum width of the second crack at the
level of the dpc was 1.28 mm.

Upward Comer Displacement ( mm )

Figure 5 Effect of Cyclic Displacement on

Crack Propagation.
To study the propagation of the primary
crack, Wall-2 was subjected to 8 more
doming cycles. The displacement cycle of
Test 18 caused the primary crack to propagate
all the way to the tip of the second crack and
thereby reaching the dpc interface. This
effectively divided the wall into two rigid
bodies. At the peak corner displacement of 9.55 mrn the width of the crack at the wall
top was 3.95 mm. For Test 20 the crack width
at the top measured a maximum of 6.59 mm
during the peak displacement. At the
completion of this test series, the residual
width at the top of the primary crack was 1.43
mm.

3.2 Results of Series F Tests

Following the completion of the Series-E
tests, the cracked wall was repaired using
epoxy injection. A window opening similar to
that of Wall-1 was then sawn at 355 mm from

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

the corner into the long wall. Table 3

summarises the tests performed in Series-F,
the discussions of which are presented here.
Table 3 Summary of Series F Tests.

* use Table 2 for Notation.

Initiation ofthe First Crack of Series F
The first cracking occurred during the 2ndtest
of this series when foundation dishing was
applied to the masonry veneer by pushing the
corner upward with jack J4 alone. Although
the corner was given almost the same level of
upward displacement during Test 23 and 24,
the magnitude of the maximum vertical
separation at the dpc interface in these tests
was different. The magnitude of maximum
vertical separation was 1.99 mm and 1.75
mm in Test 23 and Test 24 respectively.
However a significant difference was
observed in the magnitude of the lengths of
separation (wall spans) during these tests. The
wall spanned over a longer length of
approximately 5500 mm during Test 24
compared to the span of 4800 mm during
Test 23. Due to the longer length of
separation of the long wall during Test 24,
higher tensile stresses developed at the
bottom of the window thereby initiating a
hairline crack. This suggests that the
magnitude of vertical separation has no
influence on crack initiation, rather the length
of separation along the dpc interface controls
the initiation of cracking. The vertical
separation increased proportionally with the
applied corner displacement following crack

initiation indicating that the crack would have

propagated further if upward displacement of
the footing corner were continued. This
suggests that the magnitude of vertical
separation influences crack propagation.

Formation of the 2nd Crack of Series F

The second crack of this series occurred
during Test 25 as a result of foundation
doming under Load level-I. As a result of the
separation at the dpc interface, the wall
corner acted as a two way cantilever. The
cantilever action of the wall corner produced
tensile stresses at the inner window corner
thereby initiating cracking. The crack started
at the 2ndperpend joint of the window sill and
travelled through the mortar joints following
a stepped path and stopped apparently three
courses above the dpc interface. The
mechanism of crack formation in this case
was similar to that of Wall-1. The only
significant difference was that for Wall-1 the
high level of superimposed load (Load levelIll) produced cracking at the inner corner of
the window. For Wall-2 the tensile stresses
developed due to the weight of the suspended
corner alone were sufficient to produce
cracking at the same region (see Figure 6 for
the location of the crack).
-

Figure 6 Schematic Layout of Cracks which

Occurred during Series F Tests.

Other Cracks of Series F

The third crack of Series-F tests occurred
during Test 26 as Wall-2 was subjected to a
dishing cycle. The mechanism involved in the
development of this crack was again similar

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

to the one responsible in initiating a similar

crack in Wall- 1. When the corner was pushed
upward with the corner jacks, the top corner
of the wall tended to tilt inward. However,
friction at the wall top-plate interface
prevented the corner from tilting inward, thus
creating tensile stress at the other corner of
the window sill and thereby cracking the
nearest perpend joint. Figure 6 shows the
location of the third crack.
At the same time the applied displacement
cycle increased the width of the first crack
thereby forcing this crack to propagate
further. The first crack propagated from the
dpc level, following a stepped path through
the bed and perpends joints before joining the
second crack, apparently at three courses
above the dpc interface. As a result the first
and the second crack produced a perfect
stepped crack thereby splitting Wall-2 into
two rigid bodies.
During the next four tests (Test 27 to 30) the
stepped crack at the inner window corner and
the third crack opened up further. At Test 30
the stepped crack opened up by 1.44 rnrn at
the dpc level and the third crack opened by
0.37 mm near the sill. A few more cracks also
appeared as a result of the displacement
cycles applied during Tests 32 and 33.
Among these newly developed cracks, the
major one started from the same cracked
perpend of the inner corner of the window
and followed a stepped path towards the wall
corner until it reached the dpc interface.
Although several cracks appeared during this
series of tests, their width remained relatively
small perhaps due to the small number of
displacement cycles compared to Wall- 1. At
the end Test 33 the stepped crack had a width
of approximately 2 rnrn. However, it is
important to mention that the crack opened
up significantly at peak corner displacement
of the footing, with the width reaching a
maximum of 5.2 mm during Test 33.

4.
CONCLUSIONS
The full-scale testing provided valuable
information on the serviceability behaviour of

masonry, particularly the important role of

the damp proof course, the top plate, window
openings etc. These tests therefore provided
valuable background for the development of a
representative analytical model of masonry
walls subjected to external effects.
Bond strength is one of the most important
factors in the serviceability behaviour of
masonry. The tests confirmed that masonry
with low bond strength (0.2 MPa or less)
behaved poorly when subjected to external
effects, with significant cracking occurring.
Damage is also cumulative, with repeated
cycles of external effects inducing further
secondary cracking. The good quality
masonry with high bond strength (0.75 MPa
or more), on the other hand, performed very
well under a significantly larger number of
displacement cycles.
The membrane type damp proof course plays
a critical role in influencing the serviceability
behaviour of masonry as it acts as a
horizontal control joint, with separation and
sometimes sliding occurring at this interface.
It provides a regular single plane facilitating
controlled rigid body movement, and
therefore is a desirable feature with regard to
serviceability performance. Tests showed that
the magnitude of vertical separation at the
dpc interface has little influence on crack
formation, and in uncracked masonry it will
be proportional to footing curvature. In
contrast, once a crack is formed, the extent of
propagation is related to the vertical
separation at the dpc interface and therefore,
directly related to footing stiffness. The
length of separation is one of the main factors
in crack formation as it influences the extent
of unsupported regions of the masonry and
hence the development of masonry stresses.
For a load bearing wall the top plate played a
critical role in the serviceability behaviour of
masonry due to the frictional resistance acting
at the wall-top plate interface. The presence
of openings influenced the internal stress
distribution, and the cyclic application had a
definite effect on crack propagation.

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998

5.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work has been funded by a grant from
the Australian Research Council. The
assistance of the Clay Brick and Paver
Institute and its member companies in the
supply
of
materials
is
gratefully
acknowledged, as is the support of the
laboratory staff of the Department of Civil
Engineering and Surveying. A major
contribution to the serviceability project has
also been made by Mr. Peter Kleeman whose
assistance is gratefully acknowledged.
6.
REFERENCES
1. Symons, M. G., Arney, D. J. and Johnston,
R., "In-Plane Bending of Single-Leaf
Block
Walls",
Pacific
Concrete
Conference, New Zealand, November,
1988, pp. 791-799.
2. Skempton, A. W. and MacDonald, D. H.,
"Allowable Settlement of Buildings",
Proceedings,
Institution
of
Civil
Engineers, Part IU,Vol. 5, 1956, pp. 727768.
3. Cement and Concrete Association of
Australia, "Articulated Walling" Concrete
Information, Technical Note No. 6 1, 1991.

4. Totoev, Y. Z. and Kleeman, P. W., "A

Simple Soil Surface Boundary Condition
For Richard's Equation", Proceedings,
Water Down Under 94, The Institution of
Engineers Australia and Association of
Hydrogeologists, Adelaide, 94 pp 749-753.
5. Page, A. W., Kleeman, P. W. and Bryant,
I., "The Effects of Foundation Hogging
and Sagging of Masonry Walls",
Proceedings Third National Structural
Engineering Conference, The Institution of
Engineers Australia, September, 1994, pp.
665-67 1.
6. Muniruzzaman, A. R. M, "A Study of the
Serviceability Behaviour of Masonry",
PhD Thesis, The University of Newcastle,
NSW, December, 1997.
7. Bryant, I., "Serviceability of Masonry
Walls
Subjected
to
Foundation
Movements", ME Thesis, The University
of Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
8. Muniruzzaman A R M, Page A W and
Kleeman P W., Serviceability Behaviour
of Masonry Walls - A Three Dimensional
Study, Proceedings 6th North American
Masonry Conference, Philadelphia, June,
1996, pp348-359.

Copyright MSTS www.mstsociety.org

Conference on buildings and structures subject to ground movement Newcastle 11-13 July 1998