International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM)

Volume 4, Issue 7 July 2022, pp: 1248-1251 www.ijaem.net ISSN: 2395-5252

Seismic Analysis of Interlocking Blocks in

Walls
Dr. Gopisiddappa¹, Prathiksha R²
¹ Professor,² M. tech Student, Department of Civil EngineeringPES College of Engineering, India
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted: 10-07-2022 Revised: 18-07-2022 Accepted: 23-07-2022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABSTRACT-. Brick walls aremade of interlocking
bricks that do not use mortar to connect the blocks. I.I INTERLOCKING BRICKS
The interfacial connection of inter connected This interlocking bricks does not need any
blocks subjected to lateral loading was investigated mortar joints like conventional bricks and also
in this work by modelling 1m*4m masonry wall. reduce the construction cost, well stabilized
This masonry wall is analyzed by determining the interlocking blocks will be artistically in nature.
shear load in a plane of various sizes and Blocking isa method of erecting solid walls without
comparing the results with an existing masonry mortar. It consists of fly ash, M-Sand, Cement and
wall. The individual dimensions for each block of 6mm Course aggregate. Interlocking concrete
both types are detailed in modelling. This models blocks are uniquely shaped precast concrete blocks
are analyzed in the ANSYS workbench module. are designed to be connected to each other using
Total deformation, Equivalent stress (von- mises), pre-measured holes and slots. They consist of
Equivalent strain (von-mises) was observed for both unique profiles and features that blend perfectly
normal masonry and masonry walls, and thus stress without mortar. Brick is used to build a house, and
strain and deformation under load diagrams were the mortar is not needed.
constructed. As a result, there is a percentage
deviation in deformation under a certain load II. METHODOLOGY
compared to conventional masonry. This present study deals with ANSYS
INDEX TERMS- Conventional bricks and FEM software is used for seismic analysis , and
Interlocking bricks. the conventional bricks and interlocking bricks are
designed using NEX11 software. Here the model
I. INTRODUCTION from NEX11 software is imported to ANSYS
Housing is in short supply in most software through IGES format. Here the masonry
developing countries with grown population. Due wall is modeled as 1m*4m is taken and then for the
to rapid urbanization, prices for land and building loading conditions for different magnitude are
materials are rising rapidly. As a result, the poor checked the plot the graph for mode vs frequency,
cannot afford adequate housing. A new building for both the bricks and then compare the result and
element that need to be developed during the conclude that which is the better building masonry
construction of masonry is the mortar block for block for theconstruction.
mortar block light mortar load bearing walls built
from blocks differ from conventional brick system I. Modal analysis and its shapes: Modal
in that they do not contain mortar, but instead each analysis is the main type of dynamic analysis and
block is connected by planting and a canopy blocks determines the natural frequency at which the
placed in compacted stable soil are good resistant structure vibrates. Modal analysis helps to
to fire and thermal insulation properties. When determine the vibrational properties (mode shapes
there is a dry climatic condition it will possess a and natural frequency) of a structure or
good Compressive strength. One of the best component and can be used under dynamic
technology to produce the low cost construction loading condition. Eg: Lateral seismicforces
element is this new interlocking block in such a
case it found that lateral loads act upon a building
walling construction element comprises of total
22% of its overall cost of the building during
construction find the best material available in the
market.

DOI: 10.35629/5252-040712481251 Impact Factor value 7.429 | ISO 9001: 2008 Certified Journal Page 1248
 International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM)
Volume 4, Issue 7 July 2022, pp: 1248-1251 www.ijaem.net ISSN: 2395-5252

Table 1. Mode withfrequency in Hz forboth the

walls
M ODE CONVENTIO INTER-
S NAL BRICK LOCKING
BRICK

1 0 0
2 0 0
3 0 0
4 0 3.3469e-
004
5 1.2773e-003 4.5334e-
004
6 1.6382e-003 6.0777e-
004
7 60.064 33.57
8 85.209 43.86
9 111.7 64.229
10 146.14 78.69

LATERAL LOADING OF ASTRUCTURE

After importing the models into the
ANSYS software, both the conventional and
interlocking walls are analyzed with the assigned
lateral seismic waves with the magnitude of 17480
N and for different ranges of frequency. Here in
this wall structure the lower part of the wall is fixed
and the loads are assigned on the horizontal side of
the brick wall as the seismic waves propagates in
the horizontal way. Here the total deformation of
the structure, equivalent elastic strain (von-mises),
equivalent stress (von-mises) is observed in both
theparameters.
After importing the models into ANSYS
software, for conventional brick model dimension
is taken as 190mm*90mm*90mm with 10mm
thicknessaddition to cement mortar
200mm*100mm*100mm and the interlocking
bricks dimension are 230mm*120mm*125mm and
the material property of them are assigned.
Here is the model of conventional brick
and interlocking brick of load 17480N for
frequency 10Hz for Total deformation, Equivalent
stress(von-mises), Equivalent strain(von-mises) are
shown.

DOI: 10.35629/5252-040712481251 Impact Factor value 7.429 | ISO 9001: 2008 Certified Journal Page 1249
 International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM)
Volume 4, Issue 7 July 2022, pp: 1248-1251 www.ijaem.net ISSN: 2395-5252

Fig shown above is for conventional bricks

Figures for Interlocking Brick

Table for frequency 10Hz

Parameters Conve Inter-
nti lock
on ing
al Bri
Br ck
ic
k
Total 0.0 0.00013
Deformat 002 41
ion 965 mm
1
mm
Equivalen 3.9 3.91825
t Stress 973 e-
(von- e 5 MPa
mises) -

DOI: 10.35629/5252-040712481251 Impact Factor value 7.429 | ISO 9001: 2008 Certified Journal Page 1250
 International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM)
Volume 4, Issue 7 July 2022, pp: 1248-1251 www.ijaem.net ISSN: 2395-5252

5 of interlocking brick show lesser value when

compared to conventional brick. Hence
M interlocking bricks are cost effective and can resist
P seismic load than that of the conventionalbrick.
a
Equivale 4.9 1.9892e-5 REFRENCES
nt strain 238 [1]. Bhavani Shankar, Anusha (2016), “ Seismic
(von- e-8 Analysis of Interlocking Block as Infill
Wall”, International Research Journal of
mises) Engineering and Technology (IRJET),
Volume:03 Issue:10.
[2]. M.S. Jaafar, F.Hejazi, A.A.Abang Ali,J.
Noorzaei (2010), “Seismic Analysis of
Interlocking in wall-foundation-soil
system”,www.researchgate.net/publication/2
56288065
[3]. Mubeena Salam, S. Siva Rama Krishna
(2018), “ Seismic Analysis of Interlocking
Blocksin Walls”, International Journal for
Science Research & Development (IJSRD),
Volume:6,Issue 05
[4]. S.S. Deshmukh, Prof. G.H. Kumbhar, Prof.
M.N. Shirsath (2019), “Seismic Analysis
ofInterlocking Blocks of Walls”, Journal of
Applied Science and Computation
(JASC),Volume:06, Issue06
[5]. Farzad Hejazi, (2015), “Seismic Analysis of
Interlocking mortarless hollow
Graph for conventional brick block”,Challenge Journal of Structural
Mechanics, Volume:01,Number01
[6]. Dhaval H. Joravia, (2015) “Study of
Performance of Infill wall Masonry RCC
Frames using Alternate types of Bricks”,
IJETST-Volume02:Issue 06, pp 2747-2752
[7]. I Jaswanth Reddy, S. Kesavan, (2017) “
Lateral load behavior of Interlocking Block
Masonry wall”, International Journal of civil
Engineering and Technology
(IJCIET),Volume08:Issue03, pp831-841
[8]. Dattatraya L, Bhusnar, (2016), “Seismic
Behavior of Multi-storey considering
different infill materials”, www.ijera.com ,
Volume06:Issue10

Graph for Interlocking brick

III. CONCLUSION
The lateral seismic loads when applied on
both conventional and interlocking brick wall are
subjected to, the total deformation, equivalent
stress(von- mises), equivalent strain(von-mises) are
checked where total deformation, equivalent stress

DOI: 10.35629/5252-040712481251 Impact Factor value 7.429 | ISO 9001: 2008 Certified Journal Page 1251