CEN'mAL BUILDING RESEARCH INSTITUTE, ROORKEE-247667 (INDIA)

B. R. N. 30
THIN PRECAST R.C.C LINTELS IN BRICKWALlS

In a wall with beam and masonry The masonry above the lintel acts like an
above, the two components act together in arch nnd transmits the load to the supports of
supporting the load. This phenomenon of the li nte l and the lintel acts like a tie for the
composite action has been establishHd by many arch. For the lintel to act as a tie, it is necessary
research workers. Studies carried out at the that the bond or friction between the masonry
Institute on thin precast HC.C. lintels in brick­ and lintel near supports, is more than the
walls during 1964-65 has also shown that they horizontal shear stress caused by the thrust of
act together, te nsion being taken by the lintel the arch .
and compression by the brickwork Based on
(b) Crushing strength of masonry :
these studies, 7.5 cm thick and 23 cm wide
precast R.C. lintels with 3 Nos. 10 mm dia m.s. The arch action developed in the masonry
bars as main reinforcement were recommended causes vertical stress concentration in th e mas­
for spanning openings upto 1.8 m. provided the onry near supports When this stress exceeds
bricks used have minimum compressive strength the crushing strength of masonry, fail ure sets in.
of 10 N/ mm2, the mortar is not leaner than 1:6
(c) Shear strength of masonry:
cement: sand mortar and height of masonry
above the lintel is at least 45 cm . Based on Once the shear stress developed in masonry
these recommendatio ns, such thin precast li ntels near the support exceeds the shear resistance
are being adopted by many co nstruction of masonry, failure sets in.
departments.
(d) Masonry bond :
However, in most parts of the country.
For better composite action stretcher bonds
bricks of strength 10 N/mm2 are not available.
are preferred to header bonds.
The Institute had been receiving queries from
several agencies regarding the use of thin lintels (h) Height of masonry above lintel:
in such situations. So, the feasibi li ty of adopt­
ing thin li ntels with low strength brickwork was If the height of masonry above the lintel is
studied and this Bui lding Research Note is the too little, physically it may not be possible for
outcome of the study. an arch t o be formed in the masonry and hence
compos ite action w ill be less.
Factors Affecting Composite Action
(f) Whether the mason ry is already stressed to
Composite action of lintel with masonry limit or not :
above is a complex phenomer.on and the
In case t he masonry is already stressed to
fol lowing are the major factors affecting it.
the li mit, th en there will be no reserve strength
(a) Bond/friction at the interface of li ntel and left for accommodati ng the peak vertical stresses 1.
masonry : demanded by composite action .
(g) Reinforcement in lintel: The ult imate load increased with the heigh t
of brickwork . For t he same height, the load
Normally, this is not a controlling fac tor.
carrying capacity decreased wit h masonry
If the area of reinforcement provided is extre·
strength. The I ad at f irst crack var ied from
mely low and the masonry above is comparati­
45% to 75% of the utli mate load.
vely strong . fai lure of composite action by
yielding of reinforcement could be expected. The al lowable load was calc ulated taki ng a
f[jctor of safety of 2 against load at f irst crack
Studies Carried out
and a factor of safety of 5 against failure load.
Brick strength, mortar proportion and height The present kno w ledge indicates that the load
of masonry above lintel were the three para acting on a linte l in a multistoreyed load bearing
meters of the study carried out at the Institute. wall is that from on e storey above. The
Bricks having three different strengths, viz., allowable loads w ere fo u nd t o be more t han the
3 N/mm2 4 N/mm2 and 6 N/mm1 approximately loads act ing in cases, where the brick strength
were used in the tests The cement: sand mortar is not less than 3 N/mm2, mortar is not leaner
proportions used in the tests were 1:6 and t han 1:6 cO'ment: sand mortar and the height
while 1:8 the height of ma <onry above t he l intels of brickwork above lintel is not less than 45 cm.
was kept as 30 cm and 45 cm . In all, twe lve (c) Compariso n of fa ilure loads:
lintel masonry panels were made and tested.
Uniformly distributed load was applied in stages The actual fa il ure loads were found to be
on the panels. The strains, deflections and 1.6 to 2.6 t imes the ultimate load comp uted far
development of cracks were noted at each stage the panels, consideri ng them as reinforced brick
of loading , till the panels failed. Masonry beams. Th is indicates that at least part of the
load is transmitted by arch action.
cubes made along with the panels were also
tested in a 100 ton nes capacity Universal Testing (d) Variation of vertica l and horizontal stresses
Machine to determine the stress-strain relation­ in panels :
ship for the stresses in the masonry panels for
corresponding strains. The results of the The average vert ical compressive stress
studies are given below : developed adjacent to the supports of lintels
were found to be 1.75 times the uniformly
(a) Crack pattern and mode of fai lure: appli ed streS3. In general, the horizontal stress
intensity was found to be more than half the
The first cracks started at the top of the vertical stress i ntensity.
masonry above the edges of the opening and
extended downwards and outwards at an angle (e) Deflection:
of about 70° to the horizontal. The develop­
ment of these cracks appeared to be mainly due The maximum deflection recorded at the
to the intensity of shear stress developed in penultimate stage of loading was found to be
brick-work near edges of openings being more 1 in 232 to 1 in 381 of the spa n. This var iation
than the shear strength of brickwork. As the in deflection is due to difference in strength and
load was increased, cracks also extended and height of masony above lintel.
in almost all cases, the failure occurred by the' (f) Stress developed in reinforcement:
extension of these cracks to the full depth of
brick-work and separation of horizontal joint The stress developed in the reinforcement
between lintel and brickwork near the supports. even at the failure stage was found to be less
In all the tests, shear strength o f brickwork than the permissible stress in steel. This
governed t he failure. indicates that a major portion of the load is
transferred to the supports by arch action
(b) Loads at f irst crack, fai lure and all owable developed in the brickwork. The equivalent ,
working loads: bending moment in lintel varied from WL/74.5

to WL/ 344 where W is the total load and L is Recommendations

the span. In general, panels having higher
The composite action of lintel with brick­
strength of masonry and more height showed
lesser bending moments. work above is governed by a number of para­
mL ters. The design of composite lintel is
Conclusions somewha t complicated and not easily amenable
to calc ulation. For the ready use of site engin­
(a) There is composite action of l intel with
eers, design chart for thin precast l intels in
brick-work above, even when the brick
masonry is of low strength and the height brickwalls of normal residential buildings is
gi ven in Table 1. It is applicable only when the
of brickwork above lintel is 45 or 30 em
on ly. load on the composite lintel is a uniformly
distributed one. The brickwo rk over the lintel
(b) For a given masonry, the load carrying shall be not less than 45 cm in height and shall
capacity increases with increase in the be constructed in a mortar not leaner than 1 :6
height of brickwork above lintel. cement : sand mortar. Thin lintels shal l not be
(c) For a given height of brickwork, the load used in briekwa l ls made in mud mortar. It shall
carrying capacity increases with strength be noted that th ere is no composite action in
of masonry above lintel. . continuous li ntels at intermediate supports,
where the top portion of t he I inte l is intension.
(d) When the height of brickwork above l intel
is less than 0.37 span and the masonry is The thickness of the lintel shall be t he
of low strength, fail ure occurs by shearing th ickness of the brick i e, 7 em in case of
modular bricks and the lintel shall preferably
of masonry over supports.
have a bearing of 23 cm/20 em on either
(e) Compared to deep panels, verti cal stress supports. Details of a thin precast l intel in a
concentration in brickwork is less in case single briekwall over an opening of span 120 cm
of shallow panels. is shown in Fig. 1.

Table 1

Design Chart for Thi n Prec ast R.C.C.

Maximum clear Width of lintel Minimum crushing Main reinforcement

span of opening strength of brick
(cm) (em) In wall (N/mm2)

120

120

120

150
150

150

180
180
180
 1

•I
,
I
I

I
I

T
I
I

T
i
I

T
I

T
I
I

1
I

I
I
IT
I

T
•
T

1
I

T
I

J
I

•I
..l
I

~
I _I
I

_1
•
.~

1
I

1
II
I
•
I

I
I · I
I
I

I
,
I

I
I

I
I

I
•T
I

I
I

I
-I

I
I

I
-r ~rlekmasonry
'5 em min
1/ • 23 em
I
; lintel 7cm thick
r '-bearIng
J ~I
I

I
I
II
I bea r ing
--.
I
~
, 23 em I ..1
I
I I
I

I I f 1
I
I
I 1
"
--1-y-..l 1
I
I 1
T
rl ' 1 I I - I • 1
I
•I
I
I Span 120 em , T
I
I I .::-. r: I
.1 1 i l 1. I I J
, .. 1 'Or I I
I II I I I J I
I J
I

-, ~
~ I 1
I
I 1
I ••
~ 1 ~ J I 1 ~
I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I
I I ~ I 1 I 1 I
T I I I
-T 'T --q- 1 I I Ir
I I I I '
I I ~ I I I I I
I I T I )

LI NTEL IN POSITION

__- - 6 mm¢ m.s. bars @ ----...,

30 em elc

7C~
C-___~---....a:.----__: . . _ _... nl.._ _ _ _
• _"'J I
.
166 em

2 nos. ,Omm , m.~ bars 2nos. (Imm_

m.s. bars
LONGITl)OtNAL SECTION CROSS SECTION

Fig. 1. Details of a Thin Precast Lintel

Lintels can be cast ove r a concrete topped shall be spaced @ 30 cm c/c above the main

casting platform, fi nished level and smooth after reinforcement and tied with it with G.!. wires.

app lying a coat of used engine oil or any other The concrete used shall be of grade M 15 with
bond-breaking material. Simple timber/steel coarse aggregate of 20 mm and down size and
mould duly oi led can be used for the casting. shall be compacted by vibrators. The top of the I
The main reinforcement as given in Table 1 lintels shall be finished rough with chequered
shall be placed at the centre of the t hickness of lines while the bottom and sides shall be fini­
the lintel and 6 mm dia m.s. distribution bars shed smooth . The lintels shall be water cured

( 4
 for two weeks and air dried for another t wo have to be kept propped in either case. ti ll the
weeks before using them in any construction. concrete and masonry attai n strength.
During construction, in case the li nte ls are not
resting on door/window frames, they shall be Advantages
suppa/ted to a length of 30 cm at the midspan,
Use of pracast lintels speeds up the const·
before the wall above is bui lt and for at least a
ruction of wa lls, besides eliminat ing shuttering
week' s time after the wall is co mpleted.
and centering . Adoption of t hin lintels res ults
In case, t he lintel is having a chajja proje­ in about 50 per cent saving in materials and
ction, both may be precast together. A detai l of overall cost, compared to lintels based on
lintel with chajja is sh own in Fig . 2. A lternc:te ly, conve ntional desig ns.
the lintel portion may be precast with th e
reinforcement for the chajja proj ecting out. The Material and Labour Requirement
chajja port ion can be cast-in -situ. In either
The labour and material for casting, curing.
case, the chajj a projection has to be kept
site t ransportation , hoisting and pl acing in
propped up till the wa ll above is bui lt to pro vide
position thi n precast lintels 23 x 7 cm for a ciear
sufficient counterweight agai nst overturni ng.
span of 120 cm and lintel-cum-chajja for the
Where two lintels cross each other at the same span with a chajja projection of 45 cm are
bearing portion, the lintels may be precast upto given below. From this basic data, knowing
the bearing po rtion on ly with the reinforcemen t the rates for labour and materials, the cost of
for the bearing portion exposed This portion the lintel and linte i-cum-chajja can be w Ofked
shall be cast- in·situ. A lternately, both t he out for any place. Contractor's profi t and over.
lintels may be cast completely insitu. Linte ls heads are to be added.

---+

-I-'
_.~ El u
2nosGm rn prn.sbo
""'J. omm!6msbarsfY
1Hem 23emj
E
~\
'Scm clc
7c~ ~~==~===~~
rD=-+-<s,mJ
. $ cm

2nos'Omm~
m.s bars drip cour
2 em radius

8 . SECT ION B.B

PLAN 6 mm~ m s bar tie
6mm~m. s.bQrs@15em (Ie

17(n,

23em I A-r---.-._23 c m

120 em bea r lf'l9

bearing
2 nos 10 mm,lf m.s bars

166em
-+-- - - -- -­
SECTION A-A

Fig. 2. Detai ls of a Thin Precast Lintel w ith Cha jja

5
1. Lintels (Fig. 1.)-10 Nos. II. Lintel-Cum-Chajja (Fig. 2.}-1 0 Nos.

(a) Casting and Curing (a) Casting and Curing

Mould casting platform,

Mould, casting platform,

mould oil, vibrator etc. (L.S.) Rs. 10.00

mould oil, vibrator etc. (L.S.) Rs. 20.00

Cement 1.7 bags 3.8 bags
Cement
Coarse sand 0.13 m3 Coarse sand 0.29 ma
20 mm and down coarse 0.26 m3 20 mm and down coarse 0.58 ma
Qggregate aggregate
Water charges and T. & P. Re. 2.00 Water charges and T.&P. (L.S.) Rs. 3.00
(L.S.) Mild steel 42 kg.
Mild steel 24 kg. Mason 0.6 mandays
Mason 0.4 man days Bar Bender 0.4 mandays
Bar Bender 0.25 mandays 1.2 mandays
Mazdoor
Mazdoor 0.8 mandays Add 2'1., for breakage of the units
Add 1 % for breakage of the li ntels
(b) Site transportation, hoisting and placing
(b) Site transportation, hoisting and placing

Mason 0.1 mandays Mason 0.1 mandays

Mazdoor 0.6 mandays Mazdoor 1.2 mandays
Scaffold charges etc. (L.S.) Rs. 5.00 Scaffold charges etc. (L.S.) Rs. 10.00 _

Prepared by : M.P. Jaisingh, Lathika Jaisingh,

S K. Jain
Published by :
Central Building Research Institute
Printed at : Roorkee (U.P.) India
Anubhav Printers & Packers, Roorkee. Ph. 72007 First Published as B.D . 141 in January, 1981
Cop ies, 2000 Reprinted: Feb. 1987, March 1995