Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-020-01583-9 (0123456789().,-volV)
( 01234567
89().,-volV)

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Analytical model for masonry walls strengthened

with vegetal fabric reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM)
composites and subjected to cyclic loads
Luis Mercedes . Ernest Bernat-Maso . Lluis Gil

Received: 13 May 2020 / Accepted: 9 November 2020

 RILEM 2020

Abstract Masonry is one of the eldest construction behaviour of masonry walls strengthened with FRCM,
systems in the building industry, currently in use but limited to failures not related with debonding
because some advantages like compressive capacity, neither sliding of FCRM material and substrate.
traditional aesthetics, low cost and good practices.
However, damages recorded in walls as a result of Keywords Masonry walls  FRCM 
cyclic loads, have given rise to an important develop- Vegetable fibres  Analytical model  Cyclic loading
ment in the area of strengthening and rehabilitation of
this type of structural element. To counteract this
problem, the vegetal FRCM arises as a strengthening
competitive system for the improvement of the 1 Introduction
mechanical properties of masonry walls. In this study,
an analytical model evaluates the behaviour of walls The growing concern for the preservation of old
strengthened with FRCM. The model is compared buildings and the wide use of masonry in the civil
with existing codes and it is validated with experi- construction works has led to a great innovation in the
mental results of shear diagonal-compression tests and development of specific techniques to study structures
shear under cyclic loads. It proved to be an effective made with these materials.
calculation tool, useful enough to reproduce the The mechanical behaviour of masonry structures is
more complex than concrete, largely because the
L. Mercedes (&)
masonry consists of two different components, these
LITEM Laboratory for Technological Innovation of are the masonry units and the mortar joints. As result,
Structures and Materials , Polytechnic University of masonry structures are not homogeneous and contain
Catalonia, Terrassa, Spain many discontinuities. The degree of complexity is
e-mail: luis.enrique.mercedes@upc.edu
further increased by the inherent variations in mate-
E. Bernat-Maso  L. Gil rials and variations in the workforce. Therefore,
Department Strength of Materials, Polytechnic University reproducing the real behaviour of this type of structure
of Catalonia, Terrassa, Spain through an analytical or numerical model is a complex
e-mail: ernest.bernat@upc.edu
task.
L. Gil Reliable and accurate analytical methods reveal to
e-mail: luis.gil@upc.edu
be fundamental for engineering calculations and these
E. Bernat-Maso support the definition of rational design rules.
Serra Húnter Fellow, Terrassa, Spain
148 Page 2 of 14 Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

There are several studies that have already obtained inspired by the architecture of the human nervous
analytical models capable of reproducing the beha- system consisting of a large number of neurons that are
viour of masonry walls. One of the most used responsible for learning and decision making. In this, a
procedures was presented in [1]. This one identifies matrix of numerical value weighting and a bias for
4 types of shear failures in masonry walls, which are each neuron is proposed to adjust the model. For the
validated by the experimental results. The shear calibration of the model, experimental campaigns of
failures identified in masonry walls tested at diagonal diagonal compression tests carried out on walls
compression are defined as shear sliding, shear strengthened with FRCM were selected and analyzed.
friction, diagonal tension, and toe crushing failures. The selected database includes a sufficient variety of
A study presented by Silva et al. [2] used the types of masonry (material and texture), as well as the
probabilistic Monte Carlo simulation model (MCS) type of reinforcement, referring to several fibress
for the evaluation of the shear strength in the (glass, carbon, steel, basalt, PBO, etc.) and matrixes
reinforced and unreinforced concrete and clay (cement, lime, hydraulic mortar). The database devel-
masonry walls. This model was modified and cali- oped and the subsequent analysis allowed to provide
brated based on experimental results. Finally, the an effective model to predict the in plane shear
proposed analytical model was able to accurately strength of masonry walls strengthened with FRCM
predict failure modes and in-plane shear strength systems. However, this model not considered masonry
within a 95% confidence interval. strengthened with FRCM of vegetal fibres.
On the other hand, seismic damage has led to an Babaeidarabad et al. [1] uses the methodology
important development of strengthening techniques proposed by ACI 549 [9] based on the classic
for masonry structures. in this context, fabric rein- formulation of shear strength to analyze the behaviour
forced cementitious matrix (FRMC) arises as an of strengthened walls with carbon FRCM. This is one
alternative strengthening system for the improvement of the most used methodology, since it has proven to
of the mechanical properties of masonry structures be effective in predicting the shear strength of
against seismic actions. Fabric reinforced cementi- masonry walls. Ismail et al. [10] also used this
tious matrix (FRCM) is a composite material formed methodology to analyze walls strengthened with glass,
by a mesh embedded in an inorganic mortar matrix, basalt and carbon FRCM. In the case of walls
which emerged as a substitute option to the organic strengthened with glass and basalt FRCM, the analyt-
matrix of the FRP (fibre reinforced polimers). Since ical model showed a conservative shear strength,
having less toxic emissions, greater fire resistance, where the relationship between the predicted and
water vapor permeability, compatibility with inor- experimental values was 0.38 to 0.71. However, in the
ganic substrates and removability capacity (except for case of walls strengthened with carbon FRCM, the
the case of confinement as stated in [3]), researchers shear strength was conservative only when the crush
have pointed it as a possible alternative to FRP in the limitation was not verified.
structural strengthening and rehabilitation field. On the other hand, FRCM composites present two
Numerous researches oriented to experimentally technical drawbacks still to be overcome: the high
characterize this type of material [4–7] have been stiffness of synthetic fibre meshes commonly used
carried out in the recent years. Hence, the development make the dissipation of energy against cyclic loading
of calculation tools capable of reproducing these difficult, which results in a stress concentration on the
experimental studies on masonry walls strengthened existing structure, and secondly, obtaining these used
with FRCM is a need. In particular, development of synthetic fibres supposes a high economic and envi-
analytical models for accurately reproduce the shear ronmental cost.
behaviour of these structures has been restricted by the In view of the above, the use of natural resources
difficulties associated to modeling the bond behaviour and sustainable materials is a topic that is becoming
between FRCM and masonry walls. more and more interesting for the scientific commu-
Another study published by Cascardi et al. [8] nity, the alternative of using vegetable fibres as
proposed an analytical model to predict the shear reinforcements of polymers and mortars is an example
strength of masonry strengthened with FRCM using of this [11–15]. The mechanical properties that fibres
the artificial neural network (ANN) approach, which is such as flax, hemp, sisal, jute or banana among many
Materials and Structures (2020)53:148 Page 3 of 14 148

others have shown, together with their low cost, low degradation coefficient (not considered in the initial
density, recyclability and biodegradability, have made formulation) to approximate analytical to the exper-
vegetable fibres a powerful alternative to synthetic imental results. These models were useful to repro-
fibres [16]. duce the behaviour of walls with high compatibility
Despite all these advantages, unfortunately, the between FRCM-masonry, and mesh-mortar inter-
organic origin of vegetal fibres favours their degrada- faces. Furthermore, the present work incorporates
tion in the environment of cementitious matrix additional results from other experimental studies in
composites [17] owing to high alkalinity and humidity order to increase the testing database and to make the
cycles. In view of this drawback, some authors have proposed analytical model more representative.
studied the feasibility of applying treatments to avoid
the degradation of the fibres. The most popular and
easy is the coating of fibres with a resin [18] and it is 2 Materials Properties
widely used for commercial meshes applied to the
strengthen solutions with FCRM composites. It has 2.1 Masonry
been proved that this technique slows down the fibre
degradation within the cementitious matrix [19], and The mechanical properties of masonry walls con-
in other cases, it improves the mechanical properties structed with fired clay bricks are presented in Table 1.
and the bond of the meshes with the matrix [20, 20]. As These values were obtained from other studies previ-
a paradox, the resin prevents the degradation of the ously carried out [23, 23]. In these, compression tests
fibre but at the same time rises down the benefits of and shear tests were carried out on the masonry
sustainability and low cost of the solution. Therefore, (performed according to the UNE-EN 1052–3: 2003
for vegetal fabrics used in this study the addition of a [25]). The data presented in this table is the necessary
coating is justified for the protection of the fibre in an one to define the properties of masonry in the
aggressive cementitious matrix, for improving the analytical models presented in this study.
mechanical and mesh-matrix interaction [15] and The values of shear strength (0.17 MPa) and
finally, as a partial replacement of synthetic fibres coefficient of friction (0.73) were obtained from the
with long term durability. linear regression obtained from 8 experimental tests.
In spite of the numerous studies of masonry walls
strengthened with FRCM, in the authors’ records there 2.2 FRCM
are no studies oriented to the analytical analysis of
masonry walls strengthened with FRCM of vegetal Table 2 shows the properties of the cementitious
fibres (more deformable than synthetic fibres) and matrix and the vegetable fibres necessary to define the
subject to shear cyclic loads. material properties of the analytical models. These
This study represents the continuation of an exper- data are obtained from experimental tensile tests on
imental study previously realized [22]. Therefore, the FRCM samples presented in [15]. Also the mesh
main objective of this is to develop analytical models properties are listed in Table 3 (obtained from [22]).
capable of reproducing the experimental behaviour.
In this study, four types of masonry walls were
analyzed, one unreinforced, one strengthened with 3 Experimental camping and results
hemp FRCM, one strengthened with cotton FRCM
and another strengthened with glass FRCM. To do 3.1 Construction of walls and test setup
this, modifications were proposed to equations already
established, since from the theory of the mixture it was Walls of 90 9 100 cm were designed with fired clay
possible to introduce the matrix contributions and the bricks are presented in Table 1, of these walls 2 of
fabric deformation capacity (typically limited to 0.004 them were strengthened with hemp FRCM, 2 were
in established formulations). strengthened with cotton FRCM, 2 were strengthened
In addition, a coefficient obtained from the rela- with glass FRCM, 2 were strengthened with only
tionship of the FRCM materials elastic properties mortar and 2 were left unreinforced. The FRCM
(fabric and matrix) was used together with a stiffness thickness was 10 mm.
148 Page 4 of 14 Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

Table 1 Masonry properties

Compression strength Tensile strength Modulus of deformability Shear strength Coefficient of friction
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (/)

10.8 (23%) 1.61 (23%) 780 (38%) 0.17 0.73

Table 2 Cementitious Properties Mortar Hemp Cotton Glass

matrix and vegetal fibres
properties [15] Tensile strength (MPa) 4.61 520.76 91.95 676.76
Compression strength (MPa) 39.25 – – –
Modulus of elasticity (GPa) 8.92 38.74 0.93 60.95

Table 3 Mesh properties [22]

Mesh Hemp Cotton Glass
Tuft direction Warp Weft Warp Weft Warp Weft

Equivalent thickness (mm) 0.08 0.06 0.24 0.18 0.04 0.04

Yarns/tuft (-) 12 6 –
Tensile strength of mesh (KN/m) 40.88 30.66 32.48 24.36 28.32 28.53
Strain (%) 1.30 7.81 1.22
Weight/area (g/m2) 520 771 225

After that the walls were subjected to cyclic load which cracks appeared in these specimens indicates a
test [26] to study the effectiveness of vegetal fibres more favourable distribution of stress in the strength-
FRCM at strengthening masonry. The tests consisted ening systems, as well as the possibility of dissipating
of restraining the horizontal displacement of the wall additional energy through cracks. However, the fact
tops and allowing in-plane displacement of the wall that the FRCMs detached may indicate that the volume
bottoms. A distributed compression load was applied of fibres used affects connection to the matrix [13]
to the wall tops and in-plane lateral cyclic displace- until the point of connection failure.
ment was applied to the wall bottoms (see Fig. 1).
3.3 Experimental results
3.2 Types of failure
A representative diagram of the properties calculated
The failure of unreinforced walls (WN), walls from a hysteresis diagram defined by the envelope and
strengthened with only mortar (WMN), and walls the idealized bilinear model are shown in Fig. 4. This
strengthened with glass fibre FRCMs (WG) was bilinear previously used by [27], was used to process
characterised by shear crack formation, resulting in the experimental results and to do the analytical
two large diagonal cracks (Fig. 2). approach. This model was chosen because the shear
In the walls strengthened with vegetal fibre load had fairly sharp drop once reached the maximum
FRCMs, cracks were distributed diagonally across shear.
the FRCM system and there was detachment of the This model [27] is defined by an equivalent shear to
FRCMs near the corners of the walls, where local 0.75 of the maximum shear, the maximum shear
masonry failure was observed (see Fig. 3). The way in (Vmax), the last shear equivalent to 0.80Vmax, from
Materials and Structures (2020)53:148 Page 5 of 14 148

Fig. 1 Test setup: in-plane cyclic loading [22]

Fig. 2 Specimen failures: WN, WNM, and WG

which the total failure of the structure, the crack 4 Analytical model
displacement (dc), the effective displacement (de)
corresponding to the extrapolation of the limit state of For the analytical study of masonry walls strengthened
cracking, the displacement where it reaches the with FRCM, the method described by ACI 549.4R-13
maximum shear, and the displacement corresponding [9] was used as a reference, where the in-plane
to the failure shear (df) can be calculated. The results nominal shear strength of walls strengthened with
of the cyclic loading tests are shown in Table 4 (more FRCM is determined by the following equation:
details are presented in [22]).
Vn ¼ Vw þ V r ð1Þ
148 Page 6 of 14 Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

Fig. 3 Specimen failures: WH and WC

friction failures occur due to joint failure followed

by the propagation of the crack through the horizontal
and vertical joints. The diagonal tension failure is
produced by main tension induced by high compres-
sion and shear stresses that exceed the masonry tensile
strength. The toe crushing occurs when the stresses
generated at the ends of load exceed the compressive
strength of the masonry, this type of failure is
presented in the walls tested to diagonal compression,
so in this study this type of failure was not considered.
Attending to these types of failures Silva et al. [2]
proposed equations to determine the shear strength,
taking as a design criterion the use of the minimum
value resulting from these 4 equations. Taking into
Fig. 4 Idealized bilinear model [27] account that this analytical study is carried out for
comparative purposes with the experimental results
made in this study, the value that best fits the
where Vn is. the nominal shear strength, Vw is the shear experimental results (failure mode) will be adopted
strength of unreinforced walls and Vr is the contribu- as wall shear strength. Below, the equations for each
tion of shear strength from the FRCM to the wall. type of failure are presented:

4.1 Unreinforced walls shear strength 1. Diagonal tension failure

s0
Vss ¼ An ð2Þ
To determine the shear strength of the unreinforced 1  l0 tanh
walls used in this study, the procedures described in
[1, 2] were taken as reference. These identify 4 types
of shear failures in masonry walls, which were 2. Diagonal tension failure
validated by experimental results. s0;m
These shear failures are defined as shear sliding, Vsf ¼ An ð3Þ
1  l0;m tanh
shear friction, diagonal tension, and toe crushing (in
the case of walls under diagonal compression testing) s0
s0;m ¼   ð4Þ
failures. 1 þ 1:5l0 wh
Shear sliding failure occurs due to the failure
between the masonry unit and the mortar, resulting in a
crack along one horizontal masonry joint. Shear
Materials and Structures (2020)53:148 Page 7 of 14 148

l0 frv ¼ Ef efv ð7Þ

l0;m ¼   ð5Þ
1 þ 1:5l0 wh
where Ef is the modulus of elasticity of the fibres.
From the above equation, it is possible to determine
the FRCM shear strength contribution with the
3. Diagonal tension failure
following equation:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
tanh þ 21:16 þ tan2 h 0 Vr ¼ 2nAf Lfrv ð8Þ
Vdt ¼ ft;w An ð6Þ
10:58
where Af is the area of fibres per unit length, L the
Where the one that most closely matches the
length wall parallel to the direction of the shear force
experimental results (type of failure and shear
applied, and n is the number of meshes used.
strength) of Vss, Vsf and Vdt, will be equal to the
shear strength of the unreinforced wall (Vw). s0 is
4.3 Failure displacement of unreinforced walls
the bond strength between mortar and brick joints,
l0 is the coefficient of shear friction, and h is the
The procedure described in Kwok and Ang [28] was
angle between the diagonal of the walls and the
used to calculate the failure displacement (df) as a
horizontal length parallel to the action line of the
multiple of the displacement corresponding to the
cyclic load, An is the parallel shear are to the
maximum shear (dmax).
direction of the cyclic loads, h y w are the
thickness and length of the masonry unit respec- df ¼ admax ð9Þ
tively, and f’t,w is the masonry tensile strength
qffiffiffiffiffi where a is an experimental constant and the maximum
0 0
calculated from 0:5 f w , being f w the masonry shear can be obtained from:
compressive strength. Vmax
dmax ¼ kc ð10Þ
Ke
4.2 FRCM contribution to wall shear strength (Vr) where Ke is the initial stiffness of the wall which is
obtained from the modulus of elasticity (Ew) and shear
For the determination of the FRCM contribution to in- modulus (Gw) of the wall, where:
plane shear strength of strengthened masonry walls,
the ACI 549.4R-13 proposes that the tensile strain in Ew
Gw ¼ ð11Þ
the FRCM must be less than or equal to 0.004, and the 2ð1  vÞ
shear design stress (frv) for the FRCM is calculated
from the following equation:

Table 4 Results of cyclic loading test

Wall Specimen Vmax 0.75Vmax dmax dmax/h (%) de Ke
(KN) (KN) (mm) (mm) (KN/mm)

Unreinforced 40.54 30.4 7.03 1 4.2 7.25

(12.39%) (7.07%) (13.12%) (0.82%) (8.23%)
Only Mortar 105.87 79.4 19.65 2.81 12.39 6.62
(9.78%) (5.42%) (19.47%) (15.16%) (6.07%)
Hemp FRCM 156.57 117.43 30.22 4.32 20.53 5.72
(6.7%) (3.14%) (0.18%) (0.11%) (3.24%)
Cotton FRCM 162.35 121.76 29.83 4.26 20.86 5.85
(1.38%) (0.7%) (2.68%) (3.47%) (2.43%)
Glass FRCM 147.73 110.79 27.13 3.88 19.01 5.85
(0.19%) (0.09%) (12.04%) (3.48%) (3.15%)
(CoV %): Coefficient of variation
148 Page 8 of 14 Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

Gw An Table 5 Results of analysis of shear strength of unreinforced

Ke ¼ ð12Þ walls
h
An is the shear area, and h is the effective height of Properties Value D (%)
the wall, m is the Poisson coefficient assumed as 0.2 Unreinforced wall
(suggested by EHE [29]), and kc is a factor obtained l0 (/) 0.73 –
from a regression analysis performed by Kwok and tanh (/) 0.78 –
Ang [28], which results in the following equation: T0 (MPa) 0.17 –
1 An (mm2) 115,200.00 –
kc ¼   ð13Þ
Vss (KN) 45.58 12.43
0:052 þ 0:82 rf 0c
w Vsf (KN) 30.92 -23.73
rc is the applied compression stress, and f’w is the Vsd (KN) 125.21 208.85
compressive strength of the masonry.
Considering that the total failure of the specimens
occurred when reaching the maximum shear in the
experimental study, for this study it is assumed that for the prediction of the contribution of the FRCM of
df = dmax. vegetable fibres and the contribution of glass FRCM to
masonry walls subjected to shear.
4.4 Failure displacement of FRCM-strengthened In these tables, the volumetric fraction of fibres (vf),
walls the volumetric fraction of mortar (vm), shear strength
of the unreinforced wall (Vw), the bond strength
To determine the failure displacement of FRCM between the brick and mortar joint (s0) taken from
reinforced walls, the same equations for unreinforced Table 1, the coefficient of shear friction (l0) also taken
walls were used with the inclusion of the theory of the from Table 1, the tangent of the angle between the
mixture: diagonal of the walls and the horizontal length (tanh),
the shear area (An), the stress values (ffv) and shear
Ah ¼ Aw vw þ AFRCM vFRCM ð14Þ
load (Vf) contributed by the FRCM, calculated from
Em ¼ Ew vw þ EFRCM vFRCM ð15Þ the modulus of elasticity, the maximum displacement
and the tensile strength of the fibres and mortar
where vw and vFRCM are the volumetric factors of the obtained experimentally (see Table 2) are shown.
masonry wall and the FRCM, Aw and AFRCM are the The results presented in Table 4 show that of the
wall shear area and the homogenized shear area of the calculated shear stresses, the one that most closely
FRCM, and EFRCM is the modulus of elasticity of the approximates the experimental results obtained in this
FRCM which is equal to the modulus of elasticity of study is the slip failure shear. This also coincides with
the fibres by its volumetric factor, because it defines the failure identified in the specimens of unreinforced
the elastic behaviour of the FRCM once the matrix walls tested. Based on this, the shear for slide failure
reaches the cracking stress. will be considered as the shear strength of the
EFRCM ¼ Ef vf ð16Þ unreinforced wall (Vw).
The results shown in Table 6 show a high difference
between the shear strength calculated from model ACI
4.5 Results and discussions 549.4R-13 and the experimental results obtained in
this study, which shows the lack of precision of this
4.5.1 Shear strength model for the considered cases. Hence, it was neces-
sary to modify the original equations in order to adjust
Tables5 and 6 summarize the analytical results analytical results to the experimental results.
calculated with the model of ACI 549.4R-13 and the From the mixture theory of composite materials,
results obtained from some adjustments made to this and considering the significant strength contribution
model to improve its approximation and applicability that showed the walls strengthened with mortar only,
Materials and Structures (2020)53:148 Page 9 of 14 148

Table 6 Results of analysis of shear strength of strengthened walls

Model ACI 549.4R-13 Adjusted-ACI 549.4R-13 Cascardi
Mesh Hemp Cotton Glass Hemp Cotton Glass Hemp Cotton Glass

Walls strengthened with FRCM

vf (/) 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.01
vm (/) 0.99 0.94 0.99 0.99 0.94 0.99 0.99 0.94 0.99
Af (mm2) 144 424 76 144 424 76 144 424 76
Am (mm2) 17,856 17,492 17,352 17,856 17,492 17,352 17,856 17,492 17,352
Ah,FRCM (mm2) – – – 17,633 16,529 17,224 – – –
Efvf (Gpa) – – – 0.49 0.05 0.47 – – –
L (mm) 900 900 900
frv (Mpa) 155 4 245 6.35 4.12 5.75 – – –
u (/) – – – 1 1.48 1 – – –
Vr (kN) 22.31 1.58 18.52 111.89 68.07 99.1 – – –
Vf (kN) – – – – – – 25.00 12.99 17.05
Vm(kN) – – – – – – 11.19 11.01 11.23
Vn (kN) 67.89 47.16 64.1 157.79 168.3 144.8 106.50 87.97 94.40
D (%) - 56.64 - 70.95 - 56.61 0.78 3.67 - 1.97 - 31.98 - 45.81 - 36.10

the area of the homogenized composite was calculated In spite of the previous modifications, the shear
(Ah, FRCM). strength of walls strengthened with cotton-FRCM was
much lower than the experimental results. This can be
Ah;FRCM ¼ Af vf þ Am vm ð17Þ
explained by the low modulus of elasticity and tensile
where Am is the mortar area, and the modulus of strength that cotton presents compared to the fibres
elasticity of the FRCM (EFRCM) was determined by the commonly used in FRCM systems such as glass fibres.
Eq. (16). As a result of this, a coefficient (u) determined from
Once the modulus of elasticity of the FRCM is the relationship between the mechanical properties of
determined, it is possible to determine the shear stress the matrix and fibres was determined.
contributed by FRCM, using the fibre peak strain rm Em
experimentally determined for a tuft (see Table 3), u¼1þ ð20Þ
rf Ef
since the experimental results of FRCM showed
approximately the same peak strain as the fibre tuft. So the nominal shear strength of the walls was
Therefore, the shear stress contributed by the FRCM determined with the equation:
will be equal to:
Vn ¼ uðVw þ Vr Þ ð21Þ
frv ¼ EFRCM Df ð18Þ
The adjusted model was also compared with an
From this, the shear strength is determined by the analytical approach used in other studies [8] and [30].
equation: Cascardi’s model was chosen because it depends from
the matrix (V m is the shear matrix contribution) and
Vr ¼ frv Ah;FRCM
fabric properties (V f is the shear fabric contribution),
With the shear strength contributed by the wall and just like the adjusted model proposed in the present
by the determined reinforcement, the nominal strength study.
of the reinforced FRCM wall can be determined by The variations between the adjusted-ACI 549.4R-
Eq. (1). 13, the original ACI 549.4R-13 formulation and the
Cascardi’s model are presented in Table 6, and can
148 Page 10 of 14 Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

Experimental ACI 549.4R-13 all cases except for the cotton case as results of
Adjusted-ACI 549.4R-13 Cascardi
200 computing this variable with Eq. 20.
Δ4%
160
Δ1%
Δ2%
Notice that the variation between the analytical and
experimental loads presented in Table 7 achieves
Vn (kN)

120 Δ32%
Δ46% Δ36% moderate values (between 1–24%) for the failures
80 Δ57% Δ56%
Δ71% related with fabric rupture and local damages. On the
40 contrary, for the cases where there is a failure related
0 with debonding or sliding, the variation reaches large
WH WC WG
values (up to 88%). This limits the use of the analytical
Fig. 5 Shear strength: variation between analytical results and approach only for situations where the FRCM has a
experimental ones strong bond with the substrate or when the fabric
stiffness is so hight [33].
also be seen in Fig. 5. In this WH is the walls
strengthened with hemp-FRCM, WC with cotton- 4.5.2 Failure displacement
FRCM and WG with glass-FRCM.
Figure 5 shows how the modifications to the The results of the analytical model presented by Kwok
formulations of ACI 549.4R-13 were useful to propose and Ang and the corresponding adjusted model are
an effective adjusted model to determine the shear presented in Table 8. Here the modulus of elasticity
strength of walls strengthened with flexible FRCM, (E), the shear modulus (G), the shear area (A), are
which includes glass and vegetal fabrics. The presented. In the case of walls strengthened with
adjusted- ACI 549.4R-13 model presents a better FRCM, the value of these properties corresponds to
approximation to the experimental results (in contrast the results of the homogenization using the volumetric
to the very conservative results obtained with the ACI factors of the wall (vw) and the FRCM (vFRCM). The
549.4R-13 model), with variations respect to the compressive strength (f’c) and the applied compres-
experimental data from 0.78 to 3.67%. This better sion stress (rc) on masonry are also summarized. For
approximation is due to the fact that in the adjusted the two models used, the results of initial stiffness
model the contribution of the homogenized area of (Ke), effective distortion (de/h), distortion at maximum
FRCM is taken into account, and that the strain of the load (dmax/h) and variation of the distortion at
fabric is not limited to 0.4%. maximum load with respect to the experimental
On the other hand, results of the adjusted- ACI results (Ddmax) are also presented.
549.4R-13 model also show a better approach than Table 6 shows a large difference of the failure
Cascardi’s model. This is probably because in the displacement calculated with the Kwok and Ang
database of the neuronal network approach there were model with respect to the experimental results.
not included any masonry wall strengthened with Because of this, it was necessary to make adjustments
FRCM of vegetal fibres. Nevertheless, for this prob- to the Kwok and Ang model to have a better
lem, the neural network approach performs better than approximation to the experimental results obtained.
the original ACI549.4R-13 formulation. This adjustment consisted in applying an adjust-
ment coefficient of initial stiffness reduction of 0.14
4.5.1.1 Comparison with other experimental (obtained of the stiffness relations with the experi-
studies The analytical approach used in this study mental results of all the walls). It was necessary
is validated reproducing experimental results from because the initial stiffness calculated was much
other researchers found in the literature. Table 7 shows higher than the initial stiffness experimentally
the materials properties of some FRCM strengthened obtained. This coefficient supposes the degradation
masonry walls tested with diagonal compression. The of the stiffness by cyclic load until reaching 75% of the
analytical nominal shear strength (Vn) calculated with maximum shear (see Fig. 4). So Ke was calculated
the adjusted model presented in this study is compared with the following equation:
to the ultimate experimental load (Vexp).
GAn
The first thing to highlight in Table 7 is that the Ke ¼ 0:14 ð22Þ
h
value of the coefficient u is numerically equal to 1 for
Table 7 Comparison of the analytical approach with other experimental results
Specimen References Fabric An fm Af Ef rf fcm Vexp u Vn D (%) Failures
(mm2) (MPa) (mm2) (GPa) (MPa) (MPa) (kN) (/) (kN)
Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

WH – Hemp 72 38.74 520.76 156.57 1.00 157.79 0.78 Local failures

WC Cotton 115,200 10.8 216 0.93 91.95 39.25 162.35 1.48 168.30 3.66 Local failures
WG Glass 36 60.95 676.76 147.73 1.00 144.83 - 1.96 Fabric broke
C-HFC_PT Menna et al. [11] 16.10 312.52 1.00 237.16 - 24.12 Fabric broke
295,000 12.5
C-HFC_MW Hemp 284 21.30 169.3 14.20 318.37 1.00 309.72 - 2.71 Fabric broke
NYT- 16.10 210.89 1.00 240.4 - 13.98 Fabric broke
HFC_PT 300,000 5.4
NYT- 14.20 319.09 1.00 325.3 - 1.94 Fabric broke
HFC_MW
LDB Garcia-Ramonda et al. Basalt 90.00 1700 295.00 1.00 289.53 - 1.85 Fabric broke
LDS [31] Steel-low density 393,700 17.99 190.00 2800 14.04 279.00 1.00 404.66 45.04 Debonding
failures
MDS Steel-medium 190.00 3000 227.00 1.00 428.22 88.64 Debonding
density failures
1 ply Babaeidarabad et al. [32] 209 69.00 802 22.00 170.00 1.00 131.16 - 22.71 Fabric broke
Carbon 105,340 24 69.00 802 22.00
4 ply 836 329.7 1.00 352.21 6.83 Local failures
fm = masonry compression strength, rf = fabric tensile strength, fcm = FRCM-mortar compression strength, D = variation analytical vs experimental results
Page 11 of 14
148
148 Page 12 of 14 Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

Table 8 Analytical results of fault distortion

Reinforcement Without Hemp Cotton Glass

Materials properties
vFRCM (/) – 0.86 0.86 0.86
vm (/) – 0.14 0.14 0.14
E (MPa) 780 741 648 704
G (MPa) 325 309 270 293
An (/) 115,200 102,015 101,866 101,960
f’c (MPa) 10.80 14.41 14.41 14.41
rcp (MPa) 0.22 0.25 0.25 0.25
Kwok and Ang model
kc (/) 15.04 15.64 15.63 15.64
Ke (kN/mm) 53.49 44.97 39.27 42.74
dmax/h (%) 1.78 7.59 9.28 7.34
Ddmax /h (%) - 77.02 - 75.81 - 143.94 - 112.10
Ajusted- Kwok and Ang model
K (kN/mm) 7.49 6.30 5.50 5.98
dc/h (%) 0.87 3.58 4.37 3.46
dmax/h (%) 0.97 4.00 4.90 3.87
Ddmax (%) 3.03 5.96 - 14.95 0.08

From this stiffness value, it was possible to The results shown in Table 6 and Table 8 indicate a
determine the value of the effective displacement considerable approximation to the experimental
corresponding to the extrapolation of the cracking results by the adjusted analytical models presented in
limit state ðde Þ. this study. However, walls strengthened with vegetal
fibres presented FRCM detachment failures, which
Vmax may cause the shear strength and experimental failure
de ¼ ð23Þ
Ke displacement not being representative for the case that
Then, from the relation between the failure dis- they reached the tensile fabric break. This analytical
placement and the effective displacement experimen- model also has the drawback of not being able to
tally obtained, another experimental coefficient reproduce the hysteretic behaviour of the walls, the
equivalent to 1.12 was determined. Therefore, the degradation of stiffness and the amount of energy
fault or maximum displacement is equal to: dissipated by the walls.

dmax ¼ 1:12de ð24Þ

The results presented in Table 8 are better displayed 5 Conclusions
in Figs. 6 and 7, where the variations of the analytical
results with the experimental results are shown, and From the experimental results of cyclic loading test of
the bilinear diagrams resulting from the adjusted walls strengthened with flexible (vegetal or glass
analytical models presented in this study are compared fibres) FRCM it was possible to develop analytical
to the experimental results. models, and compare their results with experimental
In Fig. 6 it is seen how the Kwok and Ang model ones. From the discussion, the following conclusions
presents great variations with respect to the experi- are reached:
mental results. This is because the stiffness (Ke) was • The ACI 549.4R-13 model was not effective in
calculated without taking into account the stiffness predicting the shear strength of the walls subjected
degradation due to load cycles. to cyclic loading because it does not consider the
Materials and Structures (2020)53:148 Page 13 of 14 148

Experimental Kwok and Ang Adjusted-Kwok and Ang • In accordance with the results from other experi-
10 ∆143.94%
mental studies, the proposed analytical approach
8 ∆75.81% ∆112.10% was useful to predict the maximum shear strength
δmax/h (%)

when the ultimate load was not reached by

6
∆14.95% debonding neither sliding failure.
∆5.96% ∆0.08%
4

2 ∆77.02% Acknowledgements Authors want to thanks the research

∆3.03% project SEVERUS (RTI2018-099589-B-I00) of the Spanish
0 Research Agency. Authors also want to acknowledge the
WN WH WC WG support provided by Bernat Almenar Muns during
experimental testing. Second author is a Serra Húnter Fellow.
Fig. 6 Failure distortion: variations of analytical results with
experimental ones Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no

conflict of interest.

References

1. Babaeidarabad S, De Caso F, Ph D, Nanni A, Ph D, Asce F

(2004) Italian supplier expands its markets. Foundry Trade J
178:242. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.
0000441
2. Silva PF, Yu P, Nanni A (2008) Monte Carlo simulation of
shear capacity of URM walls retrofitted by polyurea rein-
forced GFRP grids. J Compos Constr ASCE 12:405–415.
Fig. 7 Bilinear curves of analytical model and experimental
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2008)12:4(405)
results: blue = WN, green = WH, orange = WC, yellow = WG
3. Cascardi A, Dell’Anna R, Micelli F, Lionetto F, Aiello MA,
Maffezzoli A (2019) Reversible techniques for FRP-con-
shear strength contribution of the matrix and the finement of masonry columns. Constr Build Mater
shear strength increase due to the deformation 225:415–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.
capacity of the mesh. 07.124
4. Escrig C, Gil L, Bernat-Maso E (2017) Experimental
• The Cascardi’s model is based in a neural network comparison of reinforced concrete beams strengthened
were no any wall was strengthened with FCRM against bending with different types of cementitious-matrix
and vegetal fibres. Therefore, its results differ from composite materials. Constr Build Mater 137:317–329.
the experimental values of the test, but its approach https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.01.106
5. Alecci V, Focacci F, Rovero L, Stipo G, De Stefano M
performs better than ACI 549.4R-13 model. (2017) Intrados strengthening of brick masonry arches with
• The Kwok and Ang model was also not effective in different FRCM composites: Experimental and analytical
predicting the failure distortion of the specimens investigations. Compos Struct 176:898–909. https://doi.org/
subjected to cyclic loading. Values of initial 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.06.023
6. Pino V, Nanni A, Arboleda D, Roberts-Wollmann C, Cou-
stiffness and failure displacements extremely high sins T (2016) Repair of damaged prestressed concrete
in contrast with the experimental results. girders with FRP and FRCM composites. J Compos Constr
• To reproduce the experimental results, it was 21:04016111. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-
necessary to include a majoring coefficient result- 5614.0000773
7. Prota A, Marcari G, Fabbrocino G, Manfredi G, Aldea C
ing of the relationship of the elastic properties from (2006) Experimental in-plane behavior of tuff masonry
FRCM materials (fabric and matrix), and also to strengthened with cementitious matrix-grid composites.
include a stiffness degradation coefficient. J Compos Constr 10:223–233. https://doi.org/10.1061/
• The adjusted models results indicate considerable (ASCE)1090-0268(2006)10:3(223)
8. Cascardi A, Micelli F, Aiello MA (2016) Analytical model
approximation to the experimental results. Using based on artificial neural network for masonry shear walls
the mixture law allowed to introduce the matrix strengthened with FRM systems. Compos Part B Eng
contributions and the strain capacity of the fabrics. 95:252–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.
03.066
148 Page 14 of 14 Materials and Structures (2020)53:148

9. ACI Committee 549 (2013) ACI 549.4R-13 - Guide to Compos Part B Eng 127:78–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
design and construction of externally bonded fabric-rein- compositesb.2017.02.034
forced cementitious matrix (FRCM) systems for repair and 22. Mercedes L, Bernat-Maso E, Gil L (2020) In-plane cyclic
strengthening concrete and masonry structures. ISBN: loading of masonry walls strengthened by vegetal-fabric-
9780870318528 reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM) composites. Eng
10. Ismail N, El-Maaddawy T, Khattak N, Najmal A (2018) In- Struct 221:111097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.
Plane shear strength improvement of hollow concrete 2020.111097
masonry panels using a fabric-reinforced cementitious 23. Bernat-Maso, Ernest (2013) Analysis of unreinforced and
matrix. J Compos Constr 22:04018004. https://doi.org/10. TRM-strengthened brick masonry walls subjected to
1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000835 eccentric axial load. PhD Thesis. Universitat Politècnica de
11. Menna C, Asprone D, Durante M, Zinno A, Balsamo A, Catalunya, Spain
Prota A (2015) Structural behaviour of masonry panels 24. Bernat-Maso E, Escrig C, Aranha CA, Gil L (2014)
strengthened with an innovative hemp fibre composite grid. Experimental assessment of Textile Reinforced Sprayed
Constr Build Mater 100:111–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Mortar strengthening system for brickwork wallettes.
conbuildmat.2015.09.051 Constr Build Mater 50:226–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
12. Snoeck D, Smetryns PA, De Belie N (2015) Improved conbuildmat.2013.09.031
multiple cracking and autogenous healing in cementitious 25. UNE-EN 1052–3:2003 (2003) Methods of test for
materials by means of chemically-treated natural fibres. masonry—Part 3: Determination of initial shear strength.
Biosyst Eng 139:87–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystem European Standard
seng.2015.08.007 26. ASTM-E 2126 – 02a (2002) Standard test methods for
13. Olivito RS, Cevallos OA, Carrozzini A (2014) Develop- cyclic (Reversed) load test for shear resistance of walls for
ment of durable cementitious composites using sisal and buildings. American Standard
flax fabrics for reinforcement of masonry structures. Mater 27. Ismail N, Ingham JM (2016) In-plane and out-of-plane
Des 57:258–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.11. testing of unreinforced masonry walls strengthened using
023 polymer textile reinforced mortar. Eng Struct 118:167–177.
14. Cevallos OA, Olivito RS (2014) Effects of fabric parameters https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.03.041
on the tensile behaviour of sustainable cementitious com- 28. Kwok Y-H, Ang AS (1987) Seismic damage analysis and
posites. Compos Part B Eng 69:256–266. https://doi.org/10. design of unreinforced masonry buildings, Civil engineer-
1016/j.compositesb.2014.10.004 ing studies. Structural research no. 536. ISSN: 0069-4274.
15. Mercedes L, Gil L, Bernat-maso E (2018) Mechanical University of Illinois
performance of vegetal fabric reinforced cementitious 29. EHE-08 (2008) Normativa de hormigón estructural en
matrix (FRCM) composites. Constr Build Mater España. Spanish Standard
175:161–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018. 30. Longo F, Cascardi A, Lassandro P, Aiello MA (2020) A new
04.171 Fabric Reinforced Geopolymer Mortar (FRGM) with
16. Wambua P, Ivens J, Verpoest I (2003) Natural fibres: can mechanical and energy benefits. Fibers. 8(8):49. https://doi.
they replace glass in fibre reinforced plastics? Compos Sci org/10.3390/FIB8080049
Technol 63:1259–1264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266- 31. Garcia-Ramonda L, Pelá L, Roca P, Camata G (2020) In-
3538(03)00096-4 plane shear behaviour by diagonal compression testing of
17. Ardanuy M, Claramunt J, Toledo Filho RD (2015) Cellu- brick masonry walls strengthened with basalt and steel
losic fiber reinforced cement-based composites: a review of textile reinforced mortars. Constr Build Mater 240:117905.
recent research. Constr Build Mater 79:115–128. https://doi. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117905
org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.01.035 32. Babaeidarabad S, De Caso F, Nanni A (2014) URM walls
18. Ahmad H, Fan M (2018) Interfacial properties and structural strengthened with fabric-reinforced cementitious matrix
performance of resin-coated natural fibre rebars within composite subjected to diagonal compression. ASCE
cementitious matrices. Cem Concr Compos 87:44–52. 549:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.12.002 33. Cevallos OA, Olivito RS, Codispoti R, Ombres L (2015)
19. Micelli F, Aiello MA (2016) Residual tensile strength of dry Flax and polyparaphenylene benzobisoxazole cementitious
and impregnated reinforcement fibres after exposure to composites for the strengthening of masonry elements
alkaline environments. Compos Part B Eng. https://doi.org/ subjected to eccentric loading. Compos Part B Eng
10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.03.005 71:82–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.10.
20. Donnini J, Corinaldesi V (2017) Mechanical characteriza- 055
tion of different FRCM systems for structural reinforce-
ment. Constr Build Mater 145:565–575. https://doi.org/10.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with
1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.051
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
21. D’Antino T, Papanicolaou C (2017) Mechanical charac-
institutional affiliations.
terization of textile reinforced inorganic-matrix composites.