RESTRICTED

TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONS

NEW DWI-130
8 APRIL 'f981.
,

m1

INSTRUCTION NO 1 OF 1982
C Q P ~ T R U C ~ I OIN N LOAD BEARING WALLS

Load bearing masonry walls/brick work is not new but suitably designed load bearing walls/br~ckworkis of comparatively recent origin. The first Indian Standard Code was issued in 196 1 and subseq uentl y revised in 1%9 and I 980, :IS 1905 of 1980 'Code of Pract ice for structural safety of buildings Masoniy walls'. In the past twenty years there has been emergence of modern structuraI masonry for mu1tistoreyed construction in many countries. The development has been based on application of structural engineerin principles to design of masonry structures, thus overcoming the limitations of ' ule of thum by procedures.
0.1

'K

Basic advantage of masonry construction lies in the fact that in load 0.2 bearing construction masonry performs a variety of functions viz; sup fling loads, sub-dividing space, providing thermal and accoudic insulation, i % and weather protection etc., which in framed buildings have to be provided for separately.
I n Western countries 12 to 20 storeyed well designed load bearing masonry buildin s have been constructed having only 20 to, 4Ucm thick walls. Pn India quality o bricks manufactured are comparatively poor and maximum crushing stren th generally is of order of 70 to 150 k cm*. In many Western countries bric s of even medium quality have crus ing strength 400 to 600 kg/cm4. A few mechaniseil brick plants have since been set up at few laces in our country and bricks af 150 to 250 kg/cmYstrength are bein manu actured. It should now be possible in some parts of India to go in or 5 to 6 storeyed load bearing structures at costs 15 to 20 % less than RCC framed construction.

0.3

I. Z The structural adequacy of masonry waIls depends upon a number of factors as under:(a) Strength of masonry unit bricks or bIocks

(b) Strength of mortar

(c) Workmanship and method of bonding

(d) Location of longitudinal and cross walls

(e) Position and size of openings in the walls

(0 Unsupported height and length of walls and slenderness ratio

(g) Eccentricity in the bading

(h) Combination of various loads to which walls are subjected.

.$;
-.

-,

8.1

These are generally of the following types:

-

(a) Cornman burni cloy brickSpecifications are laid down in IS 1077

of I976 'specifications for common burnt clay building bricks' (third re-

, 2,..

vision), Brk ks are classified as class 35,50,75,100,125,150,175,200,250, 3 O and 3 50 accordin to average compressive strength in kg f]cm9, These are further suklassi ed as of sub-class A or sub-class B. Brick of subclass A have srhooth rectangular faces with sharp edges and corners and uniformity of wlour. Bricks of sub-class B have slight distortion.

i!

masonry*.

(b) SIones (in reguIar sizes unifs)-- Detailed specifications' are given in IS 1 597 of 1967 Part I & I1 'Code of Practice for construction of stone

(c) Sand lime bricks-IS 4139 of 1976 'Specifications for sandlime brick' classified as class 75, 100, 150, and 200 according to their average compressive strength as for common burnt clay bricks.

d) Concrete Blocks- Minimum average compressive strength specik ed is kdcmf per I S 2 of 1967 'specifications fbr hollow wment concrete block'. The IS is however, under revision and the
50
as

185 Code

blocks are being proposed to be divided into various grades depending on their compresswe strength varying from 20 to 70 kg/cmSfor Hollow Concrete Blocks.

(e) Precast slone masonry Block-Spi fications are laid down in CB Rl Data Sheet No 8 of building kchnlque series Sep 1977 and CBRI information Note 1 of Sep 1978. Stone masonry blocks of 30x20x15cm nominal size using spalls of 12cm size and lean cement concrete ,mix of I :5 : 8 are made. The block should be compacted during casting by using piate vibrator. The nominal length and height of the block is kept 30cm and 15 cm respectively but the breadth may be 2 h , t5cm or I0 cm according to thickness of wall. The 28 days compressive strength of blocks with the above mix is 70 kg/cma. Theconcretemix proportion is to k suitably adjusted with available materials to meet the required strength. This lock constructionis abundance and at economical in areas where stones are economical cost. Method of production of blocks and spwial precautions to be taken and details of masonry construction are given in the aforesaid data sheet No 8 and information note Na 1 issued by Central Buildi
5.

Mortar

Requirements of good mortar for masonry are strength, workability, water retentivity and low drying shrinkage, Mortars wu1d Be broadly dassified as cement mortars, lime mortars and cement-Iime rqortars. Main characteristics are as under :
3.1
(a) Cement Mortars-These consist of cement and sand varying in proportionsfrom 1:6 to 1:3. Mortars leaner than 1:btendto become harsh and unworkableand are prone to seggregation. Rich mortars though having good strength have high shrinkage and thus liable to cracking.

Cb) Lime mortars-These consist of lime, sand and burnt clay/surkhi in the proportion 1 :2 :3. The main advantage of lime miortat lies in their good workability, low shrinkage and better resistance againstrain penetration. However strength is much less than that of cement mortar.
we11 as lime mortars i.e. good strength aIongwith

(c) Cement: Lime mortars-These have good qualities of both &ment as good workability,

.-

retentivity, freed~m from cracks and g o ~ d resistape agahst ram penetrqtion. Commonly adopted mixes are' 1 :1 : 6,1:2 : 9add 1 :3 : 12
Details of mortars for rnasonr are contained in IS 2250 of 1965 'Code I S 1625 of 1971 of Practice for preparation and use a masonry Mortars' and< 'Code of Practice for preparation and use of lime mortars'. Strength of various mortars are given .,.*T+ble 1 bclow :

ST . , ~ , ( D MASONRY $ MORTARS ~ a ~ i& co . ~~a~ss~ vR eE;N & Mix (Cement, , . . , :-, I Lime Sur
,
I

-I

it.I.'~ , -

2 ,-r

- .

4.g;' :i

2u ana above

3.3

Mortar strength shall i general be not &ter

.
,
I

-"'2.

0
i
1

3'nR
(.
4 .I, ,
a ' -

50 and above
a

than that of masonry and

f
,
I

. d ! f + !

workmanshi may seriously impair .the strength of brick work and ' i n t r o d w , weakness w ish rnw permi$ ,moisture pnetratjoa and other defects. The main defects in w6rkmanship which impair the gtrenah of mlyqng arc as under :' ,A?,- , /. , - t o i 4 - , . - . - h :$a1 ~';,.>,*iifd; . -. ' . (a) Use of dry b r i c u ~ o properly t s o w in w a t e JT~ . ..

of masonry units#d grade of mmar, strength of masonry depends on the uniformity of s i p .qnd shape of units. Units which are true in shape and size can be laid with 'ctsmparatively thinner joints, thereby resulting i n hi&r stren h. For this reason, use of 'A'grade.bricks givw masouy of higher stmn !?as compred to that with B grade,.bricks wen. though crushing strength of grade bricks may be same as those af A g~ade. For simjlar reasons. ashlar st oqe masonry which uses m u rately dressed and shaped stme blocks is much stpager (nearly double) 'th& coursed stone msnory. Znm-m in thickness of bed joints from 1Ornm to 16mm d masguy b s pr@xirnat$y 25%. For kick masomy ywrk provisions o IS 2212 of 1962 ' o e of Pxactlce for brick work' are to be folIowed. . Details of bond, bedding and jointing are laid down in thjs code. Poor
4.1
As a general rule, apart from strength

. ,

smnp
g

8f

-.

.,Q c , ~ .

(c) Failure.to

bed joints

(d) Deviation from verticaI Plane o r alignment i.2. out of plumb masonry.
(e) Unfavourable curing conditions.

Tolerances permissible in the masonry are given in table 2 below :

TABLE 2 MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE TOLERANCES IN MASONRY
SI No.
(1)

Item

Tolerance

Deviation from the position shown on plan of any brickwork more than one storey in height
Deviation from vertical within a storey
Deviarion from vertical i n the total height of building.

(2)

6mm per 3m height

(3)
(4)

.12.5mm
6mm

Relative di spIacement between load bearing walls in adjacent storeys intended to b e in vertical alignm,nt Deviation from line in Plan

(3

6mm
12.5.mm total

12.5 mm total

The deformations in the two cases we shown by dottd lines. The lateral loads acting on the fa~adeof a building are transmitted through floors (which act as horizontal beams) to cross walls, which act as shear walls. From cross walls, loads are transmitted to the foundation. This act ion is illustrated in Fig. 2 & 3.

fig. r, m a wdl A .has very good mistance a inst a lateral load, B , offem little resistance to Ioad acticg in the o~gitudinai direction

5.3 Asaresultof laterdload,therewill~anincreaseofcompressive stress on the leeward side, and decrease of compressive stress on the wind-ward side, The cross wall is designed f ~ zero r tension, and permissible compressive stress. It will be of interest to note that a wall which is carrying greater vertioal load, will be,in a better position to resist lateral load than one which is lightly loaded in the vertical direction. This feature should be kept in view while planning the structure so as to obtain an economical design.

5.4 A structure should have adequate stability along both the principal axes. The so called 'cross wall' construction would not have much lateral resistance in the longitudinal direction. In case of high-rise buildings, it is desirable to adopt 'cellular or 'box type' construction as illustrated in Fig. 4.,

Size,shapeand1~tionofopningsintheexternalwaIbhaveconsiderable influence on stability and magnitude of stresses dcz to lateral loads. This has been illustrated in Fig. 5.
6.1

6.2 If the opening in longitudinal walIs are so 1-ted and portionsof these walls act as flanges to cross walls, the strength of the cross walls get considerably increased and structure becomes much mare stable, as will be. seen from

F i g .6.

6.3 In a load bearing wall the length of openings should be minimum possible to aIIow more wall Iength to carry the loads. The more the openings, the less will be the effective wall area and the more will be the induced st-. As a general rule the length of openings in a Ioad bearing wall should not exceed 50 O/, of the t o t a l Iength of wall.

ratio for a wall shall be the effective hei t divided by the effective thickness or effective length divided by the e ective thickness, whichever is less.
(a) Walls--Slenderness

w"

(b) Column-Slenderness ratio for a column shall be the effective height divided by the corresponding laterd dimension (thickness or width), Forthepur seofdesign, higherofthe twovaluesis taken intoaccount since the w umn can buckle in any direction.

P"

(c) Maximum slenderness ratio-For

walls built in cement mortar & ame#41ime mortar, it shall not ,ad 27. When lime mQmr is used limits bf slenderness ratio shall be 13 and 2 0 for dewellings a c e d i n two storeys and not ex&h two storeys. respeetivdy* Fqr non-loa bearing walls like and wa Is, c b W d s and. p p e t walk, slenderness mtio shd not ex@ 30. Parapet nd shall howevbr be designed to be strong enough t a withstand' j a w 1 forces and other loads. For columns sIenderness ratio shall not exceed 12.

ICY \1;1L.

--- 1

>.-. . .,.!-- ,,,a .-. .. . . d ? ; ~).: _- i~ '.

.-

-'.'

L o -

--z

L- -

.-

".

- . ...
.
i
J

-.

b ,

'

.. -

', .

7
- , I , - .

--

- s

A%td:-@&&t#W-vekei#t&a watl ar cpoiumn &dl ba,thaschal height multi; pNed'byiddop rophate factop de ridiag n eud wndijtiom as given i n table 3 (Fig 7); S M d y eEeaEive I&OL s- w x h d l be aotullllength mdwd by appropiate factor as per fable 4. Bht&w W r @ 7 & 8.

. .

Table 3

EPF'ECTJiVE HElBWW
..
'

Fig 7
I

Condition of support .
I
I
-

.,.
I

"

, .

Wall effective height

0.75 H

1,

Adequate lateral support and partial rotaional mtraint at top and bottom-where the floor (or roof') has a direction of span at right angles to the wdJ, srr &at the reaction to the load of the floor or roof is rwih ded by the walls or whtre the concrete floors aye w

R bearing on walls, irrespective of the dimtion of s@n.

2.

other end. Fully braced construction which is itself adequately supported and incorporates (a) timber fioors immediately below or above a reinforced concrete floor, (b) roof trusses above @I reinforced concrete floor or the like.
3.
Ade uerta lateral support at top and bottom-where the oors (or roofs) have a direction of span parallel with the wall, topand bottom, and do not bear on it: or fully braced construction which is itself adequately

Adequate lateral support and partial rotational restraint at either top or bottom, and lateral restraint at

0.85
.

I#

1.00

H
I

sup orted and which incorporates roof trusses and tim r upper storey floors.

&

4.

Adequate lateral support and partial rotational restrainl at bottom and no lateral sup r~ OP rotational
,

1.59 H

Fully bracedI .

restraintatthetopwherethewdl snolateralsup... ort at top construction not fully anchored or not

I

5.

Free standing non-load bearing members.

'

&

Table 4
EFFECTIVE LENGTH OF THE

~h
+

SL @.

CONDITIONS OF SUPPORT

I&&lpe

ks@h

.*,2S&rL

a butt6.n)

or crass wa

1i&

L= the :length

or buttress

s,swalls, . , piers .*
,
*+,'

d m ? ) ;

,.

,;.

Eccentric loading affects the ufifo %1. ihd'stress on'one' side becomes more than ricity ratio reaches I/6 (for a 1.ecmngular zero and on the otherside compressive stress becomes twice the average value i.e, the stress distribution block is a trlan@e. V ecantricity ratio exceeds 116, tension is .developed in one side. Since masonry is not expected !o take any tension a part ofthickness of masonry member becomes ineffective. For economical designs, therefore, eccentricity of loadi~g should he the least not completely avoided., - hL.
m n t r i c loads, .
'

m b &
(4

Allowable

.I

;.I compressive stress

in the masoary

(1 !

. ..
.

gets reduced with

D *

consideratiom
' 8:

9.1

'id-!

General-Load b r i n g walls are structurallymore efficient when the load is uniformly distributed and when the eccentricity of loading on the wall is as small as possible. For ensuring uniformity of loading, openin@ in walls should not b too large, bearings for lintels and bed b h k s under :5-beamsshould be liberal in size, heavy concentratim of loads should, be avoided. One of the commonly occuring causes of cracks i n masonry is wide variation in stress in masonry in adjoining vi ing 'fullEcccntribearing -city 'of loading on walls s of floors/rooton the wal&*&& ,<>-( :

~a*~
1

. , L A

d.'

proc.&m.

;r,

,..::
I

'

t.:

,I

f;2.,J

building as a whole shall be a n a l y d by accepted principles of mechanics. All component parts of the structure shall be capable of ~usbinhg the most adverse combination o f l o d s whbh - may be reasonably expected to be subjected to during or a ter erection. blrildiog 3wing constmotion the effects of wind, back fillins behind walls, or 4th~ erection conditions shdl be so controlled that no adverse or unconditions occur in the masonry.

#ii

ftbC

FI
I

9.3 h & m Y l l a l l .

I '
I

9.3.1

~'
I

The thickness of a load bearing d 1 shall be sufficient at all points to ensure that the stresses due ts worst conditions of loadin are within the limits prescribed for that rticular type of wali. e thicknks used for design calculations sha 1 be the actual thickness of the masonry, not the nominal thickness. See Fig. 9. In masonry with raked joints, the thickness shall be reduced by the depth of the raking out. See Fig 10.

P"

9J.2

However, if joints are raked to provide key for subsequent pla raking could be ignored. tf any face of a w d l is to be pointe desirable to do rnkin and pointing while the mortar is green to any loss of strength ue to raking. For solid walls adequately b into piers or buttresses at intervals, the effective thickness shall actual thickness of solid wall multiplied by the appropriate stiffenin coeffici~nt iven in table 5 given below. For cavity walls, the c!rectiv thickness s II be two-thirds of the sum of the actual thickness of th two leaves

'f

8,

E l 4

STWFENNG C O E F F I C m FOR WALLS ' B Y TMBSES/QR INTERSECTING WALLS

Ratio, sp

dBUTI

"

'

!,-.

WP

.
1 .O 1 .O 1 1.O

IFFENING CQEFFIGIENT 'p

1.4 1.3 1.2
1.1

' R

6 8

I0
15

.o

wmwm&rfs .-* 1.7

-*

c w

3 pr more

s.!

1.4

1.2

20 or more

1 .O

1.O

1.O

Where

sp
tp
tw

= e u a l thickness of wall oper; and wp = wldth of the pier in the i~ction of the wall or tk'e actuaI thickness of the intersectrng wall. ,

- centre to centre spacing of the pier or intersecting wall the thickness of pier

Note:--' Linear interpolation between the values given In M a tabk is permissible but nat extrapolation outside rhe limit givec.

In case o f veneered walls, veneer shall not be ms;dered to be part of

the wall when computing the strength or required thickness of the

wall.

10.f

r b i

<C

The gemiis~ible ing factors:

sive sir'&%% masonry depends upon the foHaw-

(a) Strength of masonry units

, ~ B ~ E . = @ F ~ ,I::!;..i:
:I

c.,

'-

&&icmb';atia \ . ~masonry k &meat

.
,
, ' - 7

,,(

<-:
.!
,

-'

.,

,l
,,

/;

' 1 1

.'I . .. , Cross-section aria bf masonry

I ,
' ' '

$&ntrhity of loading ! . .. . .. ..., . .

' , , '

.;
- 1

, I .

Shape and size of the masonry unit

Eflect of these factors is explained in su b-pqrqs, lm03 and JQ.4 .blow. -

: :

,:,

r m .

.'I
(

.,,

.*

"

; .

W. 2
:
I
.

Permigsibla s t *
Page 15

ess.shaI1 be rehtpd.to bask stress. as.$:vyq B b!q 6 a dqmdi~ 'upon the, myskiogstnasfhof m ~ r y u n an ~ t nix of m0~ttL.rUse . . ,, .

1 0 . 3
. ,

For slenderness rati0.a rqductiq? af factor given in table 7 b l o w is to be applid. W l q I y , for $afls or c ~ l u ~ whjktkd n td &ehtkic loads ar v d r t i d lciads plus lateral 108ds; a ieductioii f a c t b f is to tre applied ~; n tloads i ~ pleas r@r fig 12 . . given in the Table 7 below. Fot e c ,
a
,

!0.4

'fie addh@d.sge$@&& @ . e ~ n ~ ~ ~ c i t y , ~hp~d ~lq~~pnd e max~muh ,gesultant stres$ may e x w d the allowatjb kfr& prci$s, Such ~ m s i s &o)etg-d . ..' ~lp e -nL by n ~ b@r4if f haq 35 %,.vpro~jw that . tricity of*loading ! 1 ' .
Wbp~
, a

a]

q J

, , I

C a s e I - Axial load only

I

PermjssibIe stress
(PxWfl
"
,

, apptoprigte basiq gtress from table 4 mtdtipued by appropri& stredd factor:h s 1 ~ h d e r n ~ w& s'~~ zierd mfitricitv from table 7.
i

!
t

7ase 11' - Eccentric load

'

Permissible compressive stress (Axial and bending compression)

appropriate b sic stress multiplied by stress factor r slenderness rato and eccentricity multiplied by 1.25.

r%

Note;- In ilo case shall the stress due to axial toad alone exceed the values aiven

REE3UCTICTN FACTORS FOR S L E N D E R N ~ RATIO A N D ECCENTBa;CPI"Y OF LOADING

Sif;&m~ Ratio
-

(1)

REDUCTION FACTOR Equivalent eccentricity of loading dividd by the thickness of the member 0 0.04 0.1 0.2 0,33 0.55 : (2) (3) (41 (8
,

Note-1

wnear interpolation betwcen values f g the stress factors i pormissibb. .' ', .s: -11 d**il:p,\ai<."; . !Ithi; N o t c 2 For unreinfod masonry, the valuw ,in wl8 are for,pur;pm of , .. , , ,..,*;I:!Im, ' , ,., interpdation on1y .
J

~;-LI:

J:S

I . ! >

. -.
,, ': :,

,:,

,.. I , -'

Gate&: &w:; r , p ~ i li ; j 4 v B . 'dewfhds ~~$qs.#'t$$~~rhiah .i&~?,&,ib'15WQc~;'kere'pthg8i . .

,,

,. '$64 1 -1 q &"&s:

'it

,;

*Ff&.

"

.:_ .

I ,

..

' . I

kc1 !(o Code.

10,'6.1 , . E ~ r n i i s d n ~ u a i w o f ~ ~ ~strCq b h i nh4*btlrV'tj 53k'cm3iid W ~ a. H .ratio .M hei Itb thip, ' n * as .laid) O.#but not " * ' " ~ & f e r i b ~ h 3 , ~ t b & b i c s t t s s s ~ modlA#dr I, , I yi~e'~&~of+pccified as under in table 8.
8 .

'

i '

4.!&
,?il,-,
,,,!,
, J

. ..-:
-

Table 8
.
.lidfi+:

.
,
L;

i
r

.;

. ..., &;miE :wTvNfiY um,

- I -

~ .'. .. - !;: .: 1.6 . .. : .., . ,-...-; 2.0, FWrtt; . - . . .. ... . ' .; .'L2 ..
1-

Ratio o f ht to thickness of brick or block

i ~ , ' ~
!
. C

Q.75
'
.'I

1.0

.-9

'
-

:ti.3. ;:-'
.
,,,t,.
8

. ,. -., ,.>. ,..

!;:

2 . 0 to 3 . ~ I
, I . ,
,

8 . .

b + , , .

'

,9

, r

I .

,.;.

"

. ' . i'il;.i~l'!

it

!,'::',:

>

. --

I
I

n~ $ c q, d u@ ~o , t ..i , y2' --- .,'.

tk.
;,

, the pmjssible tensile stress irt

I

ortar not weaker than?1 :l :6 wmcnt: lime: sand

bending shouid
! '' I

. .

.-

rr'kil.,:t

. 4L.6,3m tl; )

.. .. ..

12.

Pqm&dliiIt+&~'
.
i

' r

"

-<,,,t:

,;,:

!;

:,:;

, ,

,:*.a

(i)
?

.,

Walls

.( I ) ~ oadbearin walls ~ w i i nw*.walls at intewais, Traditional type of.

'

'

'

'JO ibtcllra~i ~
1

one-brick thick o r more

. i
,.

@) - . ~ d s o f - k - - t ~

?"v
\

. .

'..I .
A ,

: . . . ; ? ; : ;

: , Y " . ,

. , :.

:-Expa~slwjoigt~iin,waIls it . : t ~ n ~ w i . t h o u t c r ~ ~ s l w a,I rsl ,)#:r ~ *.: ~ ~. ~ . m ~ b u m , ~ i n ~(If als. '. ,. * .+ . , i . . .. . . *fbe,lwdls~aIS~m*I wlls between columq%:~at not more , y~ b P y I' than 9m centres no joints are . , Q g , I h r d.ipints w r ., , , j ' , ,,..:.--. . , ,,*. ~y.sypml?~ . . . , . 5 . !.:>:+ . :.-,: . -. , ~ * . : Q J ?~piQFI-;may

:I.,.!<

i! , '

'

'

A .

P"

,mas-

,*

, b

=+'

> .

- *

.,?::!'

. ;

t,

..I..

,.

Note92 Pot uunaidod mawpry, the .lafl in lPd are -foynipyses of , ....,. i*i:rn 2 $ ~ , i!!rlr; X L : . . interpolation ody.
"
,:'I i:bt*

10.7.1 Addition s t r e w 8 d a p d y local naturc as at gi~W&h~11;.wiurnnt bases9 lint& or other c m n t r p d loads shalt be cal.cuhtd a d the maximum ~ & m s w l t i n g f i d $ 7 m m b i n g h of stms&s w'th @her s shsll no# cad t b pmissiMe s -re than
i it I, I $ r i a w ! r t . m d b .

bf &sp&n d &e lading s s ~ l bt takes uair*rsb the d i r d m of raeh lopding. I 4 f h b ', , , !

a

qdv,a %
W 4 3 !R:
..*

3Uk3.a In
1.1

P~ gibe d Gtile, s t r e w of bricg sectiw in knslons will bp t+hr.tl a s $ to b&mctiwf@ them~ain&-will w,oompressive strev .)8&+ I oa41cla b SW@ typto6.Wl Mwib stmep i s & ~ d b gmay be takgp
:j'-'qv

1 . ~ ~ . f li ~ k ' l I

rdQiJ.(j

ih'j}, 1

;;i

:-.(j wo

f M & a t i m , 1 :T h ~ g m &the.