BOND STUDIES IN MASONRY

S.J. Lawrence l & A.W. Page2

1. ABSTRACT
The achievement of efIective bond between mortar and masonry unit is essential if a
masonry structure is to perform satisfactorily. Bond is influenced by many factors
including the suction of the masonry unit, the water retention of the mortar, the mortar
ingredients, the use of additives and the methods of laying.
AJthough many previous bond investigations have been performed, the fundamental
mechanism of bond creation is not understood . At the microscopic levei it is likely that
bond is achieved by chemical and mechanical means, predominantly by the crystallisation
of cementitious products in the pores of the masonry unit near the unit/mortar interface.
A major collaborative research project between the University of Newcastle and the
CSIRO Division of Building, Construction and Engineering is in progress in an aUempt
to establish this basic mechanism of bond at both the 'micro' and 'macro' leveis. At the
macro levei, work at both institutions has involved bond wrench testing of joints in
masonry prisms and of in-situ masonry joints to study the influence of various parameters
on joint bond strength. Factors such as sand type and grading, curing conditions, rate of
bond development and inherent variability have been studied. In conjunction with this
work a bond strength database of ali available bond strength results in Australia is being
prepared to allow a study of the significance of the various parameters. At the micro
levei it is intended to examine in detail the conditions at the unit/mortar interface using
electron microscopy and other techniques.
This paper reviews the factors which affect bond and gives an overview of the
collaborative research project. Some preliminary results of the macro study are
presented together with some background information on the micro study which is to
commence shortly.

Keywords: Masonry; Bond; Flexure; Tension; Mortars

I Project Manager - Masonry Structures, Division ofBuilding, Construction &

Engineering, CSIRO, PO Box 310, North Ryde, NSW 2113 , Australia.
2 CBPI Professor in Structural Clay Brickwork & Head ofDepartment, Department of
Civil Engineering & Surveying, The University ofNewcastle, NSW 2308, Australia.

909
2. INTRODUCTION
Masonry is a composite material consisting of masonry units ('bricks and blocks') and
mortar joints. This fact accounts for its inherent appeal but can also be its inherent
weakness. The achievement of an effective bond between mortar and unit is the most
important aspect of masonry construction. If adequate bond is not achieved, the mortar
joints will act as planes of weakness and cracking will occur due to wind, soil movement
or minor earthquake tremor. Long term degradation and unacceptable ingress of water
through the wall are also likely.
Cracking in masonry is a major problem both with regard to strength and serviceability
of the structure. Graphic evidence of the importance of masonry bond strength was
provided by the recent earthquake in Newcastle, Australia, where damage in excess of
$1 billion was caused to buildings. The bulk ofthis damage was to masonry in structures
and, in many cases, the damage was severe because of the low bond strength exhibited
by the masonry.
Tensile bond strength between masonry units and mortar is the criticai factor in
deterrnining resistance of non-Ioadbearing masonry walls to lateral wind and earthquake
forces. Bond is also a good indicator of overall quality or robustness of masonry and
strongly affects the resistance of a wall to water penetration. And yet prediction of the
levei of bond strength with any given materiais is not possible. Most codes in the world
perrnit certain basic leveis of bond strength to be assumed - for the Australian masonry
code AS 3700(1) the basic levei is 0.2 MPa (a 95% characteristic value). But the values
in different codes vary widely.
Despite many investigations over recent decades our understanding of the mechanism of
bonding and the factors determining bond strength in given circumstances are still
inadequate. The biggest problems are the large number of factors influencing bond, the
variation of material properties between countries and variations from one geographic
area to another within any country. The various factors interact with each other in the
way they influence bond and, because there has never been a comprehensive
investigation of ali factors in a controlled way and because the basic underlying
mechanism ofbond is not understood, the problem ofpredicting bond remains unsolved .
The CSIRO Division of Building, Construction & Engineering and the University of
Newcastle Department of Civil Engineering and Surveying are collaborating on research
aimed at solving these problems and resolving the difficulties in predicting bond for the
range of Australian masonry materiais.

3. FACTORS AFFECTING BOND

Recent reviews ofbond strength by Evans(2) and Groot(3) have highlighted the complexity
of the bond problem and discussed a large number of contributions in the literature. A
recent note on the history of bond by Fischer(4), refers to an investigation published in
1953 and reminds us that there is much information in the literature, even relatively old,
that should not be ignored.
The factors influencing bond include the following:
Unit properties such as material, surface texture, absorption and moisture content.
Mortar properties such as composition, additives, sand grading, air content and water
retentivity.

9 10
• Environrnental factors such as dust on the units, temperature, humidity, workmanship
and curing conditions.
While unit suction properties seem to be a vital factor in deterrnining bond there are
different views on the best way to assess these properties. In Australia the initial rate of
absorption (IRA) is considered to be a useful indicator of bonding potential whereas in
the United Kingdom the total water absorption is used.
A further factor affecting published results is the test method used and the treatment of
random variability. lt is clear that tensile bond strength is a highly variable property,
irrespective of the test procedure, and that reliable results cannot be obtained from small
numbers of replicates in an experiment. The test procedure can also introduce a further
levei of variability and it is unfortunate that no standard method of testing bond strength
has emerged from the many investigations carried out throughout the world.
Because there are so many interacting factors influencing bond its investigation requires
very careful experimental techniques and a broadly-based approach. The difficulty
experienced in the past stems from the fragmentary nature of the investigations and the
attempts by researchers to draw conclusions about various factors in isolation.
As a tool for weighing up these many factors and exarnining their interactions a database
ofbond results has been established. This database is discussed further in Section 6.

4. THE BRICK-MORTAR INTERFACE

A number ofworkers have identified the conditions at the brick-mortar interface as being
criticai in determining bond strength. Early work by Grandet(5) was followed with
investigations by Chase(6), Jung(7) and Lawrence and Cao(8) This work showed that the
bond is primarily mechanical and that brick surface characteristics are important. lt also
highlighted the importance of moisture content and water transfer from mortar to brick,
a point taken up by Groot(9). Lawrence & Cao also presented evidence for the beneficiai
effect of lime in promoting bond but pointed out that the lime increased the water
demand of the mortar.
These studies, while presenting interesting results, have only begun to look at the many
combinations of masonry unit and mortar materiais and to shed some light on the
mechanisms of bonding. Arising out of this work is a hypothesis of bond formation
between cement mortars and clay bricks as follows. Bond is formed by mechanical
interlocking of hydration products in the surface pores of the brick. The particular
hydration products which form are influenced by the chernistry of the mortar
composition and the presence of moisture throughout the period of cement hydration.
This period extends until the masonry dries out which, in Australian walling, is usually a
matter of a few days. While brick suction in the first few rninutes is important in
deterrnining the transfer of water from mortar to brick, the suction is also important
throughout the period until setting of the cement gel is complete. This suction is
probably not accurately reflected in either of the current measurements, IRA or total
water absorption.
Other observations by the present writers, where poor bond has been obtained with
sands containing a high proportion of fine silica particles, show that the presence of fine
inert particles (such as silica) in the mortar can 'elog' the surface pores of the brick and
prevent effective mechanical interlock from forming a strong bond.

911
Ali of these observations lead to the conclusion that much further work remains to be
done in the area of conditions at the interface and their influence on bond. This aspect
forms a large part ofthe investigation recently commenced in Australia (see Section 7).

5. RECENT AUSTRALIAN EXPERIMENTS

5.1 In-Situ Tests
To obtain data on bond strengths being achieved on site an investigation was carried out
by visiting 19 building sites where clay brickwork was under construction(lO) The bond
wrench was used to directly measure bond strength in the walls and materials were
sampled for further testing. Sand, bricks, dried mortar and wet mortar were sampled
irom each site and subjected to a range of tests in the laboratory. A total of 357 bond
wrench measurements were taken in 25 samples. The work was a collaboration between
the CSIRO Division of Building, Construction & Engineering, the University of
Melbourne and the Clay Brick and Paver Institute with co-operation from the
Bricklayers Division of the Victoria State Building Trade Union in arranging access to
the sites.
The results have caused a re-assessment of the rules in the Australian Masonry Code
AS 3700 for rejection of outliers and calculation of characteristic strength from test
results. They also provide confirmation that the current levei of strength that AS 3700
permits to be assumed in design is about right. The full benefit of the results will on1y be
realised when the data are considered along with the results of other investigations,
recently completed or planned.
5.2 Effect Of Mortar Ingredients
A common misconception is that increasing the cement content of a mortar will
necessarily lead to increased bond strength with any given masonry unit. Experimental
evidence does not bear this out and Figure 1 shows results for a series of bond tests with
a clay brick and four different mortar compositions. Whereas the mortar cube strength
increases with cement content, as expected, the bond strength does not follow a similar
trend. The mechanics of bond clearly involve more than just the cement content of the
mortar and other factors are important in achieving the full bonding potential.

20 0.8
li Cube Strength
• Bond Strength
m
Cl.
15 0.6 ;f
~ ~
.r:. .r:.
Õl Õl
~ 10 0.4 ~
U5 U5
Q) 'O
.D c:
:::l
() 5 0.2S

o o
1 :%:3 1:Y:.:4 Y:. 1 :2:5 1: 1:6
Mortar Composition

Figure 1. Bond Strength Versus Mortar Composition

912
A recent investigation ofthe effect ofmortar ingredients on bond strength(II), reported at
tlús conference, examines the influence of sand grading and the use of air entrainer in
mortar. The six sands in most common use in the Sydney region were identified and
tested for the bonding potential of five different mortar mixes with three bricks. The
mortar mixes include one with a common air entrainer used according to the
manufacturer's recommendations and one with the air entrainer overdosed by a factor of
ten . The report concludes that the common sands are closely grouped with respect to
the properties measured and yet there were significant differences in bond strength due
to the sand. It therefore appears that a sand property wlúch was not measured, such as
particle shape, is affecting bond strength with some mortar mixes and brick types.
The investigation also shows that the use of air entrainer can reduce bond strength wlúle
overdosing produces a marked reduction in strength.
Similar studies at the University of Newcastle immediately after the Newcastle
earthquake in December 1989 revealed significant reductions in bond strength both from
overdosing with air entraining additives and excessive use of fireclay as a plasticizdl2)
Some typical results of bond wrench tests on clay brickwork prisms built with a
conventional 1: 1:6 (cement:lime:sand) mortar using typical Newcastle sands with various
dosage leveIs of additives are shown in Figure 2. The dramatic reductions in bond
strength are apparent.

'"
~ 1.2
1.4 r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
..
a.
60.8
~1 .<:

.,c Õl
c
~ 0.6
c?5 08
., Cf)

2
~ 0.6
c .~ 0 .4
~ ~
~ 0.4
~
::J
~ 0.2
iL:
.
~
iL:
0.2

o No air entrainer 1:40 solution o

No Fireclay 10% Fireclay
Recommended dose 5% Fireclay 15% Fireclay

Figure 2. Influence OfPlasticizing Agents On Bond Strength

5.3 Effect OfUnit Suction

In the investigation referred to in the previous section(l l) the results show that the current
Australian recommendation for an optimum range ofIRA of05 to 1.5 Kg/m2 min. could
be extended to an upper limit of at least 3 Kg/m2 min.
An earlier study by Morgan(13) suggested that the effect of brick suction on bonding
might extend beyond the first minute absorption (as measured by IRA). An investigation
is currently under way at the eSIRO to provi de data on the rate of absorption at various
moisture contents, in recognition of the fact that it is the rate of absbrption at the time of
laying wlúch affects bond, not the rate of absorption in the oven dry condition. The
work is also examining the effects of various moisture profiles in bricks such as might be
aclúeved by drying a saturated brick or wetting a dry brick. Tlús will provide data on the
effects of 'docking' bricks to reduce their initial suction. An investigation of absorption
rates at later times (measured from initial contact between mortar and masonry unit) is

913
also planned, for comparison with the work of Groot(3) on water transfer across the
interface.
Some recent prelinúnary work in this area has also been carried out at the University of
Newcastle, with a study of absorption rates with time for typical solid concrete and
calcium silicate units and solid and extruded day units. In each case batches of 10 units
were oven dried and then a bed face immersed to a depth of 3 mrn in a constant depth of
water for time periods ranging trom 1 núnute to 24 hours. The results are shown in
Figure 3 and, although not comprehensive, do confirm that absorption continues at
significant rates after the nonúnal one núnute period (as used in the IRA test), with the
rate of increase differing for each material. This has obvious implications on the
mechanism of bond development, particularly with regard to the hydration rate of the
cementitious materials in the mortar at or near the brick-mortar interface.

-
16

~12
E
14
.. .....
.. ' .+ -.. - ' .. - - . .. -.- ._.-...
Solid Clay

Extruded Clay

e;, 10 Calcium Silicate

~ ........
c 8
.2 .,,* Concrete
ã. - 8- ·
o
VI
6
.c - - -o
« 4

O
O 5 10 15 20 25
Time (Hours)

Figure 3. Absorption OfMasonry Units

6. BOND STRENGTH DATABASE

A database has been established as part of the joint program of research between the
CSIRO and the University ofNewcastle. It is intended as a research tool rather than as a
source of design data, although findings from studies of the data núght lead to changes in
the Australian Masonry Code AS 3700. The database is an attempt to gather
information on ali relevant factors affecting bond trom as wide an area as possible and to
thereby provide the means of analysing the various factors individually and in
combination.
By its formal structure the database also acts as a guide to the factors considered worthy
of measurement and recording in any future bond strength investigations. It also defines
the preferred method of measuring each parameter and the appropriate precision of
recording.
Fields considered essential for each data set indude - test method (beam or wrench), date
of test, specimen preparation (Iaboratory or site), number of courses in specimens,
number of replicate measurements, mean bond strength , standard deviation, material of
the units and type ofunits (pressed, extruded etc.). Fields considered desirable include -
age at test, IRA of the units, origin of the units, mortar composition, information on
mortar ingredients and additives. Fields considered optional include total water

914
absorption of the units and water retentivity of the mortar. Obviously, the more
information that is available, the more useful is the data.
Data for input to the database is welcome iTom ali sources. However, in the interests of
the overall integrity of the database it is essential that ali data be carefully verified for
accuracy before being submitted and that it conform to the structural requirements of the
database. Initially, the available Australian bond data covering about the last 20 years
will be input and the operation of the database tested . Once the database is fully
functional a guide for submitting data will be made available and data input iTom other
sources will be invited.

7. PLANNED INVESTIGATIONS
The CSIRO and the University of Newcastle are together seeking sponsorship for a
broad-ranging investigation ofthe factors affecting bond. The proposed work is divided
into a number of inter-related parts. The early parts establish appropriate test procedures
and identifY the most important factors affecting bond. Later parts investigate those
factors under controlled conditions and include fundamental studies of the interface to
improve predictability ofbond. Site surveys to confirm findings and provide design data
are also included.
The parts ofthe proposed investigation are as follows:
7.1 Variability In The Bond Wrench Test
It is well known that there is a high levei of random variability in masonry bond strength.
AS 3700, in the procedures for calculating characteristic strength when fewer than 10
specimens are used, assumes that the coefficient of variation (CV) of bond strength is
0.25 . Many experimental investigations have observed higher values ofCV. It has been
suggested that at least some of this variability is due to the bond wrench method of
testing and that altemative methods might measure a lower variability, more indicative of
the random variation in the material itseif An investigation is planned, using bond
wrench testing under controlled conditions to assess the variability inherent in bond
strength and the variability due to the testing method.
7.2 Effect Of Age And Curing Conditions
The literature reports several investigations of the effects of age and curing conditions on
bond strength but the results are not consistent. It seems likeiy that the effects of age
and curing vary depending on the type of mortar mix and other factors. Although
AS 3700 now requires bond strength to be assessed at an age of 7 days it would be
useful to investigate the rate of strength development with time iTom one day to one year
and the effect of controlled humidity as opposed to ambient curing conditions.
Some preliminary work by the authors has already revealed that bond strength continues
to increase with age (at least for some masonry types). Figure 4 shows the results of a
recent study of the variation of flexural bond strength with age for solid and extruded
clay brick masonry prisms. The samples were constructed with aI: 1:6 mortar, moist
cured for 7 days and then stored under ambient laboratory conditions until testing. Each
point represents the mean value of 10 joint strengths determined by bond wrench. The
coefficients ofvariation for the tests were in the range of 15% to 30%. The rate of bond
strength increase is obviously an area which requires detailed investigation as it has direct
implications in relating standard tests to masonry performance in situ o

915
7.3 Identification OfImportant Factors
Identification of the most important factors for further investigation is essential. To
some extent this can be done by entering ali available data into the bond strength
database and examining relationships between the various factors. However, there are
still some factors not c1early identified, which are not measured in current tests but which
are suspected of causing anomalous results. Examples are sand properties such as
partic1e shape and unit properties such as suction rate, which is present1y measured over
the first rninute of immersion but is perhaps equally relevant over the first one or two
hours.
1.2,-----------------------------------------,

- _----..._---
... .......

... _--_._----_... _- •......._................

-
Solid Clay

Extruded Clay
_ _ _o

56 84 112 140 168 196

Age (Days)

Figure 4. Influence Of Age On Bond Strength

7.4 Laboratory Tests OfThe Most Important Factors

Having identified the important factors a series of laboratory tests is required, where the
factors are carefully varied in a controlled way over their full range and the effects on
bond are studied. These factors will inc1ude parameters ofthe mortar and the units. It is
also planned to control the work:manship factor by using controlled laying conditions.
7.5 Exarnination OfThe Interface Between Mortar And Units
Our current hypothesis about the bonding mechanism is based on rnicroscopic
exarninations of interfaces carried out in the last five years. That work was only of a
prelirninary nature and should be extended to study interfaces for a wider variety of
conditions. In particular, the effect of air entrainers, blended cements, masonry cements,
lime and various cement additives should be thoroughly studied by these techniques in
order to deve10p a more complete understanding ofbonding mechanisms. Work in this
area is about to commence.
7.6 Extension OfField Surveys
A fie1d survey of material properties and site bond strengths has been carried out in
Melbourne and one is under way in Newcastle. For full national coverage it is planned to
extend the survey to other major population centres inc1uding Sydney/Wollongong,
Brisbane/Gold Coast, Perth and Adelaide.
Some funding towards this work has been received from the Australian Research Council
in· 1994, with indicative funding for the following two years. The parts of the work

916
 covered by this funding are the gathering of information on masonry materiaIs and the
development ofthe bond strength database (Section 7.3), rnicroscopic exarnination ofthe
interface between mortar and units for selected materiaIs (Section 7.5) and lirnited testing
ofthe important factors (Section 7.4).

8. SUMMARY
The establishrnent of an effective bond between mortar and masonry unit is an essential
requirement for the satisfactory performance of a masonry structure. At present in-situ
bond strengths can range trom extremely high values to almost zero. The mechanism of
bond formation is not fully understood, nor is the influence of various parameters on
bond strength clearly established. There is an obvious need for a comprehensive study of
bond strength at both a fundamental and applied leveI. A major collaborative research
project in this area between the CSIRO Division of Building, Construction &
Engineering and the University ofNewcastle is in progress in an attempt to resolve many
of these issues. This paper has reviewed the factors influencing bond strength and
surnrnarised the progress and intentions of the collaborative research.

9. REFERENCES
I SAA Masonry Code, AS 3700-1988, Standards Australia, Sydney, 1988.

2 Evans, P . Factors Influencing the Flexural Bond Strength ofMasonry, Centre for
Architecture and Planning Research, Curtin University, Perth, March 1992, 55p.
r;'\Groot, C.J.W.P . Effects ofWater on Mortar-Brick Bond, Thesis, Technical University
ofDelft, Delft, Nov.1993, 185p.
4 Fischer, H. C. Old Research on Masonry Bond, TMS Joumal, Aug.1992, pp.86-87.

5 Grandet, l Physico-Chernical Mechanisms ofthe Bond Between Clay Products and

Cement, Proc. of the Third Intemational Brick Masonry Conference, Essen, April
1973, pp 217-221.
6 Chase, G.W. Investigation ofthe Interface Between Brick and Mortar, TMS Joumal,

Jul-Dec.1984, pp.Tl-T9.
7 Jung, E . The Binding Between Mortar and Brick, Proc. ofthe 8th Intemational

BrickIBlock Masonry Conference, Dublin, 1988, pp.182-193 .

8 Lawrence, S.l & Cao, H.T. Microstructure ofthe Interface Between Brick and

Mortar, Proc. ofthe 8th Intemational BrickIBlock Masonry Conference, Dublin, Sept.
1988, pp.194-204.
9 Groot, C.lW.P. First Minutes Water Transfer From Mortar to Brick, Proc. ofthe 9th
Intemational BrickIBlock Masonry Conference, Berlin, 1991 , pp.71-78.
10 McNei11y, T.H. ; Zsembery, S.; Scrivener, lC. & Lawrence, S.l Bond Strength and
the Australian Masonry Code, Proc. of the 9th Intemational BrickIBlock Masonry
Conference, Berlin, Oct.l99I , pp.301-307.
11 Lawrence, S.l & So, L. The Influence of Some Factors on the Tensile Bond Strength
ofMasonry, 10th rn 2MaC, Calgary, July 1994.
12Page, AW. The Design, Detailing and Construction ofMasonry - The Lessons From
the Newcastle Earthquake, Civil Engineering Transactions, I.E .Aust. , VoI.CE34, No.4,
Dec.1992, pp.348-353 .
13 Morgan, lW. Brick Absorption, Architectural Science Review, V20, N3/4, Sept.
1977, pp.66-68.

917
918