International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 10, Issue 04, April 2019, pp. 1182–1191, Article ID: IJCIET_10_04_124
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=4
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
© IAEME Publication
Scopus Indexed
ANALYSIS OF THE CAUSES OF DAMAGE IN
THE BRICKWORK ELASTIC AND STRENGTH
CHARACTERISTICS OF MATERIALS OF
MASONRY GRIDS
Egorov Anton Vasilevich, Ivankova Anna Sergeevna, Zakharova Nina Vladimirovna,
Vlasov Vladislav Aleksandrovich, Petrova Katerina Valer'evna,
Tankaev Isa Maulievich, Malyy Artem Vadimovich, Khrustaleva Anastasia Dmitrievna,
Surzhikov Roman Ivanovich, Shadrina Kseniya Sergeevnа
Moscow State University of Civil Engineering (MGSU) National Research University, 26,
Yaroslavskoye Shosse, Moscow, Russia
ABSTRACT
Brick walls are considered to be among the strongest materials, however, they are
subject to destruction. The cause of damage in the brickwork can be both operational
and constructive. Even at the stage of construction of a building structure, it is worth
thinking about its strength and durability. Therefore, the reinforcement works allow
avoiding the destruction of the masonry of bricks, including the formation of cracks,
as well as to strengthen and extend the life of the masonry significantly.
The article discusses a method of increasing the strength of brickwork by
reinforcing it with nets of various materials, and an analysis of the effectiveness when
their application is carried out.
In the course of the work, tests of elements of steel, glass and basalt plastic nets
under tension were carried out, calculations were performed, elastic and strength
characteristics of the samples were obtained, and conclusions were drawn about the
effectiveness of the reinforcement of brick masonry with various materials. On the
basis of the obtained results, a comparative analysis was performed, and the
advantages and disadvantages of using composite or steel masonry grids were
identified from the point of view of efficiency and, at the same time, cost-effectiveness.
Key words: Inspection of buildings, calculation of structures, brickwork, elastic and strength
characteristics, masonry grids.
Cite this Article: Egorov Anton Vasilevich, Ivankova Anna Sergeevna, Zakharova Nina
Vladimirovna, Vlasov Vladislav Aleksandrovich, Petrova Katerina Valer'evna, Tankaev Isa
Maulievich, Malyy Artem Vadimovich, Khrustaleva Anastasia Dmitrievna, Surzhikov Roman
Ivanovich, Shadrina Kseniya Sergeevnа, Analysis of the Causes of Damage in the Brickwork.
Elastic and Strength Characteristics of Materials of Masonry Grids, International Journal of
Civil Engineering and Technology 10(4), 2019, pp. 1182–1191.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=4
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1182
editor@iaeme.com
Analysis of the Causes of Damage in the Brickwork. Elastic and Strength Characteristics of
Materials of Masonry Grids
1. INTRODUCTION
When examining historic buildings built before the beginning of the 20th century, special
attention should be paid to visual inspection. Most damage to the vaulted structures formed
from the time of construction can be identified at this stage of work.
The authors [1] in their study suggest that the damage always results from a change in the
balance of forces. Stable situation becomes unbalanced.
To stabilize its condition, the building must adjust itself, deforming. The deformations
exceeding admissible values can already be considered as damages. Analyzing the available
literature on this issue [2-10] it should be concluded that the characteristic damage to the
brickwork has certain and distinct signs. Among which it is possible to distinguish such as
precipitation of a building from the action of static or dynamic loads, structural overload,
obtained because of the reconstruction of historical buildings, as well as from the effects of
the environment.
2. CAUSES OF DAMAGES IN THE BUILDING
The influence of all the listed signs negatively affect the technical condition of building
structures. During the examination, it is necessary to understand that damage is usually the
result of the development of combinations of negative processes, developing individually or
jointly in building structures, and the approach to solving such complex tasks related to the
interpretation of visible damage should be complex.
Figure 1 Causes of damages in the building. From left to right: sediment, overload, environmental
exposure
During operation, the bearing elements of the building are influenced by a large number of
different load cases. During normal operation of structures in a situation of equilibrium, all
loads must be transferred through the elements onto a soil base. Each load will flow through
the carriers from the application point to the support point.
All structures located on the way must accept and transfer the load. Damage to structures
occurs when one of the elements is unable to perform its functions of transferring the load
and, depending on the rigidity and loading of the considered part, the overload process can
lead either to individual cracks or to serious deformations (destruction).
Studying the literature that is devoted to this issue, one can form two types of damage
formation processes, namely, structural overload caused by a change in load on bearing
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1183
editor@iaeme.com
Egorov Anton Vasilevich, Ivankova Anna Sergeevna, Zakharova Nina Vladimirovna, Vlasov Vladislav
Aleksandrovich, Petrova Katerina Valer'evna, Tankaev Isa Maulievich, Malyy Artem Vadimovich,
Khrustaleva Anastasia Dmitrievna, Surzhikov Roman Ivanovich, Shadrina Kseniya Sergeevnа
elements and structural overload caused by a change in the path of load transfer within the
building.
Considering the issue of overloading structures caused by changes in the load on the
bearing elements, from the action of mechanical forces it is necessary to understand that there
are two types of forces in the building: mechanical forces and dynamic forces.
Mechanical forces are represented in the building by its own weight, useful and temporary
loads. Dynamic loads on a building are expressed by wind pressure on a building and human
activity (dynamic loads from transport, human activity in a building, etc.). But it is also worth
to say that each building has its own free oscillations and forced ones. Construction overload
from the action of mechanical forces occurs when the reconstruction increases the workload
on the structure.
It was possible only after a technical inspection of the structures was not carried out with
high quality and a false conclusion was given about the state of the structures. The question of
examining stone structures today is very sharp.
By the present moment, a lot of reference material on structural inspection has been
issued, but the exact answer of how to determine the mechanical properties of masonry has
not been done yet.
Members of the organization PNPIKU Venture in their work [11-13] have proved that the
use of any means of non-destructive testing for stone products is possible only in conjunction
with grading dependencies, for example, the use of devices at a brick factory. They also have
concluded that it is impossible to use ND methods for historical masonry, due to the lack of a
close connection between the measured parameters and strength in structures.
The priority method for determining the strength characteristics, according to the authors
[14-17], is the determination of dynamic parameters using the “Struna and Strela” complexes
and the definition of Young's modulus using the method of flat jacks. With the cumulative use
of these complexes, it is possible to determine the required parameters of masonry and make
the necessary calculations more accurately.
In addition to increasing the load, overload in stone structures can be formed, after
changing the path of transmission of acting forces through the elements. This mainly occurs
when interfering with the supporting structures. As a result, there is a redistribution of forces
in the elements.
Even a slight weakening of the bearing elements can affect the work of the whole
structure. An example of such actions can be an increase in doorways without design
solutions gain or increase the window opening, as well as other work carried out with the
supporting structures.
To confirm the above mentioned, we can give two examples in which damage was formed
after the reconstruction and because of the additional impact of dynamic loads on the
building.
In the first variant, the roof system of the structure was replaced during the reconstruction.
After the repair, a system of hanging rafters with a raised tightening was arranged. In the
course of the work, the main load-bearing elements of the building, which is the system of
lancet cylindrical arches with arches, were overloaded. The building itself had been built by
1841 and made in the neo-gothic style. Upon visual inspection it was recorded numerous
cracks in both arches, and the arches. Visible damage is shown in Picture 2.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1184
editor@iaeme.com
Analysis of the Causes of Damage in the Brickwork. Elastic and Strength Characteristics of
Materials of Masonry Grids
Figure 2 Crack in the arch of the archway
In the second case, damage is caused by the uneven precipitation of the building and,
additionally, by the constant impact of dynamic loads.
As a result, the base soil is constantly under the action of forces. Visible damage is shown
in the pictures below.
Figure 3. Crack in the inner wy the of the wall above the window
Figure 4. Crack in the exterior of the laying above the window
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1185
editor@iaeme.com
Egorov Anton Vasilevich, Ivankova Anna Sergeevna, Zakharova Nina Vladimirovna, Vlasov Vladislav
Aleksandrovich, Petrova Katerina Valer'evna, Tankaev Isa Maulievich, Malyy Artem Vadimovich,
Khrustaleva Anastasia Dmitrievna, Surzhikov Roman Ivanovich, Shadrina Kseniya Sergeevnа
3. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDIED SAMPLES
As a result, at a visual inspection of a building and structure, it is possible to identify most of
the accumulated damage during operation at the initial stage. It is also recommended to carry
out vibro-dynamic studies in order to determine its current dynamic characteristics (natural
frequencies and damping decrements) and perform numerical modeling in software systems,
such as Ansys or Abaqus, for more accurate determination of the technical condition.
Elastic and strength characteristics of both steel and composite grids are determined by the
characteristics of their grids elements. In this research, we study the individual elements of the
grids, i.e. the results of testing samples of metal, glass and basalt plastic nets are presented
and analyzed. Having determined the elastic-strength characteristics of the elements (rods) of
the grids, one can judge the strength of the grids consisted of them [21].
Characteristics of the studied samples are shown in table 1.
Table 1. Test samples
№
Type of grid
1
2
3
Steel
Fiberglass
Basalt-plastic
Material, type of
binding agent
Steel
Fiberglass, epoxy
Basalt fiber, epoxy
Number of samples
5
5
5
For all the samples studied, the main mechanical tensile characteristics were determined,
such as temporary resistance and the elastic modulus of the material from which the sample
was made. The tests were carried out on the Instron 5965, universal measuring complex. The
system is a block-modular design consisting of a base, on which a frame with movable and
fixed traverses, an electric motor drive, as well as an electronic control unit and a computer
are fixed.
Preparation of glass and basalt plastic grid samples for testing was carried out taking into
account the recommendations of GOST 6943.10-2015 “Glass textile materials. The method
for determining the breaking load and elongation at break ", and steel grid samples according to GOST 12004-81”Reinforcement steel. Extension test methods”.
Since fiberglass grid elements have irregularities and slip into the clamping block for
round specimens, each sample was fixed in steel anchors with an internal diameter of 6 mm
using epoxy-based glue. Before testing, the samples were kept for at least 12 hours to cure the
adhesive. For the preparation of steel mesh samples for testing, the grid elements were
separated from the mesh using a handsaw. The samples did not require additional preparation
of the clamping parts, due to reliable fixation in the clamping block for round samples of
wedge grippers of the Instron installation.
The prepared samples were mounted on an Instron 5965 test system and fixed with the
help of taper wedge clamps. The test length of all samples was 200 mm. The deformation rate
of composite elements was set to 50 mm / min, which is consistent with the recommendations
[11], and for steel rods it was 20 mm / min, equal to 10% of the working length of the sample,
in accordance with the recommendations [12].
Samples were tested in one direction, since the corresponding grids have the same
structure in the longitudinal and transverse directions [13]. Due to the limitation of the
maximum limit load of the Instron 5965 test system at 5 kN and to ensure the comparability
of the results, tests were performed on samples of composite grids of smaller diameter (2.5
mm) relative to steel samples (3.5 mm).
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1186
editor@iaeme.com
Analysis of the Causes of Damage in the Brickwork. Elastic and Strength Characteristics of
Materials of Masonry Grids
Tested samples are presented in Pictures 5-7.
Figure 5. Samples of steel mesh elements before and after testing
Figure 6. Sample of fiberglass mesh element before and after testing
Figure 7. A sample of the basalt plastic mesh element before and after testing
According to the results of tensile testing of the samples, their extension was determined,
as well as the maximum tensile forces applied to the composite rods. The breaking force
applied to the steel samples turned out to be more than 5 kN and could not be fixed to the
Instron 5965 testing system.
Similar rods in the amount of 3 copies were additionally tested on a tensile installation
with a maximum load of 50 kN to determine the breaking load.
The test results for steel, fiberglass and basalt-plastic tensile samples are presented in
Table 2. The measured diameter of the samples did not match the declared manufacturer; the
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1187
editor@iaeme.com
Egorov Anton Vasilevich, Ivankova Anna Sergeevna, Zakharova Nina Vladimirovna, Vlasov Vladislav
Aleksandrovich, Petrova Katerina Valer'evna, Tankaev Isa Maulievich, Malyy Artem Vadimovich,
Khrustaleva Anastasia Dmitrievna, Surzhikov Roman Ivanovich, Shadrina Kseniya Sergeevnа
strength parameters and the elastic modulus were calculated taking into account the actual
diameters.
4. TEST AND RESULTS
The table lists the average values of the characteristics of materials, calculated from the
results of testing five samples of each material.
Table 2. The results of the test elements of steel, fiberglass and basalt plastic grids
Technological characteristics
Specified diameter, mm
Actual diameter, mm
Cross-sectional area of the sample,
specified, mm2
Clamping length of the sample, mm
Sample length after rupture
Extension of the sample, %
Maximum test load, N
Timed tensile strength
Elastic modulus (original)/ elastic modulus of
steel sample (E/Esteel)
Steel
3.5
3.45
9.35
Material
Fiberglass
2.5
2.18
3.73
Basalt-plastic
2.5
2.27
4.05
200
204.6
2.3
6848
732.4
1
200
207.8
3.9
4264
1143.1
0.27
200
206.9
3.45
3882
958.5
0.23
Figure 8. The load-extension diagram of the tested samples
Fiberglass and basalt plastic samples have shown similar results in testing, but fiberglass
surpassed basalt plastic, both in terms of the temporal resistance and modulus of elasticity. As
a result, only 2 materials are compared further: these are steel and fiberglass. The
irregularities of the tension diagrams (Picture 4) of composite rods at the initial stage are
associated with the straightening of images. As a result of the study of the behavior of the
samples under extension and analysis of the values of the forces and deformations on the
straight sections of the graphs obtained, the values of the elastic modulus were calculated.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1188
editor@iaeme.com
Analysis of the Causes of Damage in the Brickwork. Elastic and Strength Characteristics of
Materials of Masonry Grids
Figure 9. Diagrams of the relationship of the modulus of elasticity to the modulus of elasticity (initial)
of the steel sample from the deformation of the samples under study
It can be noted that the temporary resistance of samples of fiberglass more than 55%
higher than the temporary resistance of steel samples. The modulus of elasticity of a
composite is 70% less than steel, but this is only in the initial part of the diagram. As steel
rods load, their elastic modulus decreases, Hooke’s law of proportionality of the applied load
to deformation is not fulfilled even at the initial stage (Picture 8), and the derivative of the
curve for the steel mesh in the diagram of the dependence of the elastic modulus on
deformation is negative, the graph is directed down (Picture 9). For composite rods, in turn,
the elastic modulus index is constant throughout the entire loading process.
In favor of steel rods, it can be noted that the diagram for their extension has no obvious
yield areas, and this indicates that when the structure is unloaded, the residual deformations of
the steel reinforcing mesh will be minimal, however, the residual deformations of the
composite meshes will significantly exceed.
Thus, the properties of fiberglass rods are significantly different from steel and at the same
time they are competitive with steel in the criteria for physical and mechanical characteristics.
Fiberglass has a lower modulus of elasticity than steel, but higher strength with less weight, as
A.N. Polilov and N.A. Tatus and other authors noted in their articles [14-17].
Reinforcement of brick masonry with composite materials is an effective alternative to the
classic reinforcement with steel meshes [18].
According to the results of extension tests of steel, glass and basalt-plastic specimens, as
well as by determining the maximum extension forces arising in the samples, the elasticstrength characteristics of composite and steel masonry grids were calculated, which clearly
demonstrated the advantages and disadvantages of composite materials compared to classic
steel mesh.
With similar diameters of rods, fiberglass meshes would be one and a half times stronger
than steel ones, which was important when calculating structures according to the I limit state,
and when using meshes with equal strength steel, their cost would be 80-85% of the steel
mesh cost, which would have a positive effect on the overall brick masonry cost.
An important parameter in the design was the calculation of the II group of limit states (by
deformation). In the mode of operation of structures, when the stresses in them did not exceed
30% of the temporary resistance of the reinforcing material, preference should be given to
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1189
editor@iaeme.com
Egorov Anton Vasilevich, Ivankova Anna Sergeevna, Zakharova Nina Vladimirovna, Vlasov Vladislav
Aleksandrovich, Petrova Katerina Valer'evna, Tankaev Isa Maulievich, Malyy Artem Vadimovich,
Khrustaleva Anastasia Dmitrievna, Surzhikov Roman Ivanovich, Shadrina Kseniya Sergeevnа
steel grids, so when they were used, the masonry deformations would be 3 or more times less
than similar walls and reinforced with GRP grids.
However, when the structure operates in the range of stresses approaching the value of the
temporary resistance of the reinforcing material, it is more rational to use composite mesh, the
residual strain of which will be minimal after the structure is unloaded.
The modulus of elasticity of steel in this extension range was close to the values of
fiberglass and did not exceed it more than one and a half times.
Thus, the general advantages of composite reinforcement to steel can be formulated as
follows:

- Strength: composite reinforcement is stronger than metal in 1.5-2 times;

- Profitability: benefit is from 10% with equal durability of metal reinforcement to composite
reinforcement;

- Durability (due to the corrosion and chemical resistance of the material);

- Low weight: fiberglass mesh has a density of 3-5 times lower than the metal; the use of
fiberglass as a reinforcing material reduces the cost of transport and handling, as well as
facilitates the work on the object;

- Low thermal conductivity: which is 80-100 times lower than that of steel, which
significantly reduces heat loss;

- Dielectric (it does not conduct electrical current, electrical safety);

- Radio transparency: it does not create any radio interference, in contrast to metal contours
created by steel reinforcement.
The advantages of steel reinforcement:

- Modulus of elasticity of the material is high at low loads, if they do not exceedi 30% of its
temporary resistance;

- Plasticity and rigidity to lateral loads, while for a fiberglass mesh, changing the shape of the
rod is impossible without heating, which creates difficulties in the manufacture of mounting
loops and fixings;

- Thermal stability, good fire resistance;

- Availability of a wide regulatory framework, documents and standards regulating the use of
steel reinforcement, as opposed to composite;

- Availability and prevalence of material (it can be purchased in any city in the country).
5. CONCLUSIONS
The article discusses a method of increasing the strength of brickwork by reinforcing it with
nets of various materials, and an analysis of the effectiveness when their application is carried
out.
In the course of the work, tests of elements of steel, glass and basalt plastic nets under
tension were carried out, calculations were performed, elastic and strength characteristics of
the samples were obtained, and conclusions were drawn about the effectiveness of the
reinforcement of brick masonry with various materials. On the basis of the obtained results, a
comparative analysis was performed, and the advantages and disadvantages of using
composite or steel masonry grids were identified from the point of view of efficiency and, at
the same time, cost-effectiveness
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1190
editor@iaeme.com
Analysis of the Causes of Damage in the Brickwork. Elastic and Strength Characteristics of
Materials of Masonry Grids
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
Amato P., Bakhmisov V.A., Kuklin V.A., Andreev V.G. Bakhmisov I.A. Method of static
strengthening of cladding elements with composite systems consisting of a grid of highstrength fiber and adhesive on the basis of a mineral binder // Works of ChGU named after
I.N. Ulyanov. New in architecture, building design and reconstruction. Cheboksary:
Publishing House of ChGU named after I.N. Ulyanov, 2016. p. 226-239.
Belov V.V., Derkach V.N. Examination and technology of strengthening of stone
structures // Engineering and Construction Journal. 2016. No. 7. P. 14-20.
GOST 6943.10-2015 Glass textile materials. Method for determining the breaking load
and elongation at break.
GOST 12004-81 Reinforcement steel. Tensile test methods
Granovsky AV, Galishnikova VV, Berestenko E.I. Prospects for the use of reinforcing
mesh based on basalt fiber in construction // Industrial and civil construction. 2015. № 3.
P. 59-63
Dzhigrin A.V., Makhrakov I.V. Investigation of the structure of a composite with spirally
reinforced filler for anchor lining // News of higher educational institutions. Mountain
Journal. 2016. No. 2. P. 38-43.
Orlovich RB, Zimin S.S., Nachkina PA, Trusova A.A.Repair of brick facing layer in
modern frame-monolithic houses // Construction of unique buildings and structures. 2014.
№ 8 (23). Pp. 136-153.
Orlovich, R. B., Rubtsov, N.M., Zimin, S.S. On the work of anchors in multilayer
enclosing structures with an outer brick layer // Engineering and Construction Journal.
2018. No. 1. P. 3-11.
Serikhaliev, S. B., Zimin, S. S., Orlovich, R. B. Defects of protective and decorative brick
lining of the facades of frame buildings // Construction of unique buildings and facilities.
2014. № 5 (20). Pp. 28-38.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1191
editor@iaeme.com