Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Seismic retrofit of infilled RC frames with textile reinforced mortars:

State-of-the-art review and analytical modelling
D.A. Pohoryles *, D.A. Bournas
European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Ispra, Italy

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Significant damage to existing reinforced concrete (RC) frame structures during recent earthquakes has high­
Textile reinforced mortar lighted the potential detrimental effect of non-structural masonry infills. Several experimental studies have hence
Seismic retrofit investigated the use of composite materials for in-plane retrofitting to reduce the risk of brittle collapse of the
Infilled RC frames
infills. In this review, the state-of-the-art on strengthening infilled RC frames with textile-reinforced mortars
Masonry infills
Macro-model
(TRM), a new class of composite material consisting of open-mesh textiles embedded in a cementitious matrix, is
presented, highlighting the great potential of this retrofit solution for large-scale interventions on the existing
building stock. A database of experimental results is compiled to evaluate the effect of different parameters on
the effectiveness of the retrofitting applications. The stiffness of the fibre material, as well as the angle of
application are found to be crucial factors. To ensure adequate analytical modelling for predicting the retrofitted
behaviour, a macro-model, using an additional tensile tie to account for the TRM, is first calibrated by means of
the experimental data gathered from the literature. Correlation between experimental parameters and the ob­
tained effective strain is then assessed and an empirical formulation of effective strain in terms of fibre stiffness
and retrofit amount is finally proposed.

1. Introduction ensuring a global lateral load resistance mechanism. Conventional

techniques such as RC jacketing [6] are generally seen to be labour
Empirical evidence of heavy damage observed in recent earthquakes intensive, to use large quantities of materials and lead to a significant
has highlighted the vulnerability of existing infilled reinforced concrete increase in wall thickness. Aiming to reduce the thickness of the jacket,
(RC) structures [e.g.: [1–4]]. While the effect of masonry infills is typi­ researchers have suggested steel reinforced plasters [7,8], or mortars
cally ignored in structural design, their presence was found to cause combined with short composite fibres (ECCs) [9,10]. The application of
brittle damage and failure mechanisms in existing buildings. Local thin layers of non-corrosive lightweight epoxy-based materials, such as
failure of the infill panels due to in and out-of-plane mechanisms, but fibre-reinforced polymers (FRP) have also gained attention [11–15], as
also due to their combination, can lead to a sudden drop in capacity and they lead to improved durability, reduced mass and quicker application.
hence cause global brittle failure of the structure. Even at lower intensity This study instead focusses on the use of an innovative composite
earthquakes, damage to infilled frames can lead to high economic losses system, the so-called textile reinforced mortars (TRM) and their recent
and loss of life [1]. application for the in-plane seismic retrofit of masonry-infilled RC
These vulnerable masonry infilled structures however constitute one frames. TRM constitutes a new generation of composite materials [16] in
of the most typical building typologies constructed between the 1960s which unidirectional fibre sheets are replaced by textiles (typically
and 1990s in Europe [5]. They generally tend to have high occupancy bidirectional – see Fig. 1a) and the epoxy resin is replaced by a
and include schools and hospitals, next to commercial and residential cementitious matrix, shown in Fig. 1b. This novel composite uses
properties. There is hence a need for fast, reliable and effective retrofit open-mesh textiles produced typically from knitted or woven fibre
strategies applicable at scale for the existing European building stock. rovings of high-strength (e.g. carbon, glass or basalt), but can also take
Typical retrofit strategies aim to strengthen the infills to prevent brittle advantage of textiles made from natural fibres (e.g. hemp or flax).
collapse modes and to provide adequate connection to the frame, thus TRM has been proven effective for strengthening both concrete

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (D.A. Pohoryles), [email protected] (D.A. Bournas).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107702
Received 31 July 2019; Received in revised form 6 November 2019; Accepted 12 December 2019
Available online 13 December 2019
1359-8368/© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

mechanisms is developed. Based on this newly compiled database of

recent research efforts on TRM-strengthened infills, a simplified
modelling approach is used to assess the effective strain in the textile
reinforcement. The correlation of experimental parameters with the
effective strain in the composite material is then evaluated.
Finally, an empirical equation for effective strain of the textile
reinforcement is proposed to be used within simplified macro-models of
infilled RC frame. This new empirical definition for TRM effective strain
is based on all available experiments, and hence a step towards the
generation of design-oriented equations for TRM retrofits of infills.

2. Background

Strengthening masonry infilled frames with TRM aims to achieve a

Fig. 1. (a) Carbon based textile (b) Application of textile with inorganic matrix
reliable building response, utilising the strength and stiffness of the
on masonry infill walls [30].
infills. As shown in Table 1, TRM forms part of a family of composite
materials that have been tested in the literature. The composites can be
[17–22] and masonry [23,24] structures. Due to the combination with
applied as bands or strips or over the full surface of the infill. The
inorganic binders, such as lime or cement based mortars, which are
orientation of the fibres can be orthogonal, with fibres in the vertical and
granular unlike epoxy resins, a mechanical interlock between the textile
horizontal directions, at �45� or in the diagonal angle of the infill. A
layers and binder is activated. Moreover, the good mechanical behav­
variety of composite strengthening materials can be used, ranging from
iour of inorganic matrices at high temperatures renders TRM more
fibre-based textile meshes embedded in mortar (TRM), unidirectional
fire-resistant than epoxy based composites [21–25].
fibre-sheets bonded using epoxy raisins (FRP) and short fibres randomly
Very recently, a new generation of composites, combining TRM with
orientated and embedded in mortar (ECCs), to steel meshes for rein­
advanced thermal insulation materials or systems (see Fig. 2), offered
forcing thin layers of plaster.
new avenues for the concurrent seismic and energy retrofitting of
existing building envelopes [25–28]. Their novel use for the in-plane
2.1. Retrofitting of infills with composite materials
[29] and out-of-plane strengthening [30,31] of masonry-infilled RC
frames is of particular interest to this study. Experimental efforts on
An example of composite retrofits for infilled frames are FRP sheets
TRM strengthened infills are rather limited, but there is still a lack of
applied in the diagonal of the infill wall [12] or applied as a series of
research on their analytical modelling. In particular with the emergence
horizontal strips [11]. The latter was however found not to increase the
of new fields such as concurrent seismic and energy retrofitting using
lateral capacity of the infilled frames. Their small thickness increase,
TRM, compiling the available experimental evidence is crucial to reveal
important for architectural reasons, and corrosion resistance make FRP a
promising avenues for research and to establish safe design recom­
very popular retrofitting material, their behaviour at high temperature
mendations for such composites as retrofit materials.
and difficulty of application at low temperatures, as well as on wet
In order to gain better understanding of TRM retrofitting for
surfaces , are however practical constraints. Instead of using
masonry-infilled RC framed structures, this study presents an exhaustive
epoxy-based resin as binder, inorganic matrices, such as cementitious
review of experimental efforts in the field. A detailed database of
mortars or plasters, are a viable alternative. Their advantages over FRP
experimental parameters and obtained results, including damage
systems are a better fire resistance and behaviour at high temperatures
[21,22], better bond and strain compatibility with masonry [23], as well
as their applicability at low temperatures or on wet surfaces and lower
costs. Moreover, unidirectional FRP as a retrofit material can rupture in
the weaker orthogonal direction, which can be avoided when using
randomly arranged fibres or orthogonal meshes [32,33].
In terms of retrofits with cement-based composites, using (sprayable)
engineered cementitious composites (EEC) for masonry infills is
increasingly studied [9,10,34–37]. The disadvantage of ECCs is however
the non-directionality and uncertainty of equal distribution of fibres,
which make predicting the strength increase more challenging. Rein­
forced plasters, on the other hand, consist of mesh reinforcement with
two orthogonal directions embedded in a thin layer of plaster for
strengthening infills [7,8]. This kind of retrofit is analogous to the
orthogonal TRM strengthening method, but instead of fibres woven into
a textile mesh, a steel reinforcement mesh is used, which can be asso­
ciated to similar durability concerns regarding corrosion as RC
jacketing.

2.2. Retrofitting of infills with TRM

Focussing on TRM applications, a summary of retrofitted infilled RC

frame specimens tested in the literature can be found in Table 2. It in­
dicates the scale of the tested specimens, the height (H) and width (W) of
the frame, the angle of the diagonal (θ), the infill wall thickness (tinf) and
its compressive strength (fm,inf), as well as properties of the retrofit,
including the TRM fibre type (glass, basalt, carbon or steel), the elastic
Fig. 2. Concept for concurrent seismic and energy retrofitting with TRM [28]. modulus of the fibres (Ef), mesh size, number of sides retrofitted (ns),

2
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

Table 1
Summary of composite retrofit applications in the literature.
Type Layout Strengthening material Fibre direction Examples

Orthogonal TRM Fibre-textile 2 [29,38–41]

TRM at 45� Fibre-textile 2 [40]

Diagonal TRM bands Fibre-textile 2 [42]

Diagonal FRP strips Fibre-sheet 1 [12]

Horizontal FRP strips Fibre-sheet 1 [11]

ECCs Lose fibres ∞ [9,34–37]

Reinforced Plasters Steel bars 2 [7,8]

number of textile layers per side (nt), the angle of the fibres (αT) and the of a 2/3-scale three-storey fully infilled RC frame retrofitted with TRM.
anchorage used (steel ties or bolts, textile anchors or no anchorage). The The aim of the retrofit was to achieve a more ductile failure mechanism
main experimental results are also shown, including the shear capacity with a regular displacement demand along the height of the structure.
of the retrofitted specimen (Vexp), the difference in capacity to the The scheme consisted of applying two layers of glass TRM (G-TRM) in
control specimen (ΔVexp), the drift at maximum (Δmax), as well as the the first storey and one layer in the second and third storeys, using
observed damage patterns. The damage patterns of interest include previously tested textile anchors [43] at the perimeter of the infills.
infill-related damage, namely crushing of bricks in the corners (CC), Moreover, the column-ends were wrapped with TRM to prevent column
horizontal sliding (HS), infill detachment from the frame (ID), diagonal shear failure observed in the control specimen.
cracking (DC), but also TRM related damage including partial debond­ The as-built specimen failed in a brittle single-storey mechanism,
ing (PTB) and rupture of fibres (PTR), as well as RC frame damage, such with damage concentrated in the ground storey. As shown in Table 3, for
as joint shear failure (JS), column shear failure (CS) and column bar the ground storey, diagonal cracking along the infill surface was
buckling (CB). The main damage observation from the control and observed, with spalling of the bricks closer to the corners, and finally
respective retrofitted specimens for all studies is summarised schemat­ shearing of the columns at the top corner. The retrofitted structure
ically in Table 3. It is important to note that in all cases the failure of instead presented a behaviour characterised by a regular distribution of
retrofitted frames occurred at much larger values of drift compared to lateral storey displacements along the height of the structure, which led
their respective control specimens. to an enhanced deformation capacity (þ52%). Shear damage to the
Initial work by Koutas et al. [29] consisted of cyclic tests up to failure columns was successfully prevented by the local TRM jacketing. The use

3
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

of anchors at the infill perimeter successfully delayed debonding of TRM

Note: fibres: G: glass; C: carbon; B: basalt; S: steel; damage: CC: corner crushing; HS: horizontal sliding; ID: infill detachment; DC: diagonal cracking; CS: column shear; CB: column bar buckling; PTR: partial TRM rupture;
Observed damage and hence ensured an adequate lateral load resisting system with a good
infill-frame connection up to localised rupture of the TRM fibres at the
CC; HS; PTR

DC; CC; HS

CC; DC; ID

DC;HS;ID*
interface. Looking at the results in Table 2, an increased lateral strength

DC;CS;ID*
DC;HS*
DC;CS*
DC; CB

ID; DC

ID; DC

ID; DC
(þ54%) and initial stiffness (two-fold) were observed for the retrofitted

CC; ID

ID*
ID structure. The cracking pattern on the TRM surface indicated horizontal
ID

ID

ID

ID

ID

ID
sliding of the bricks. After removal of the retrofitting material, signifi­
cant corner crushing was observed in the underlying infill. The observed
1.00%
1.50%
0.29%
0.18%
0.29%
0.19%
0.26%
0.18%
0.90%
0.75%
0.75%

1.00%

0.84%
0.78%
0.69%
0.98%
0.82%
damage appears to indicate that the TRM retrofit successfully confined
Δmax

the infill wall and allowed it to ultimately reach crushing of the bricks,

/
/

/
without losing full integrity of the wall up to large levels of lateral
displacement. The test on a three-storey specimen also highlighted that a
10.7%
2.0%

9.2%
54.2%
66.3%

25.1%
29.6%
22.6%
31.6%
40.5%
37.5%
72.6%
99.4%
53.6%
25.0%
15.4%
11.0%
29.8%
28.5%
non-uniform distribution of lateral displacements, leading to soft-storey
ΔVexp

0.1%
%

failure, can be successfully prevented by a well-designed TRM retrofit

with different numbers of layers along the height of the structure.
Selim et al. [41] tested two non-seismically designed 1/3-scale
407.0
131.7
422.8
432.0
285.5
283.8
118.4
122.6
206.0
221.0
236.0
231.0
290.0
335.0
258.0
285.0
263.0
253.0
296.0
293.0
Vexp

infilled RC frames, of which one was retrofitted with G-TRM. The

kN

retrofit consisted of two layers of TRM on each face of the infill wall,
extended onto the columns and using five fabric anchors applied
Anchor

through the infill. Due to inadequate reinforcement detailing and highly

fibre
fibre

fibre
fibre
steel

steel

steel
steel
localised forces in the corners of the infilled frame, the control specimen
no

no
no

no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no

no

failed by a beam-column joint shear failure mechanism, combined with

extensive corner crushing observed in the infill wall. A brittle failure at
36.3
36.3
36.3
36.3
36.3
36.3

1% drift with 79.2 kN lateral force was observed. The TRM retrofit
45
αT

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
�

ensured the corner crushing and joint shear mechanisms were pre­
vented. TRM jacketing of the infill ensured crushing of the bricks was
nt

2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1

prevented, despite the higher sustained lateral loads of 131.7 kN

(þ66.3%, Table 2). TRM contribution in tension was demonstrated by
increased diagonal cracking (see Table 3) and an improved ductility.
ns

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1

While damage to the RC frame was generally reduced by the retrofit,

ultimately, failure due to column bar buckling at the foundation was
Mesh

mm

observed.
25
25
10
10
10
10
25
25
20
20
20
20

25
25
25
25
25
8
8
8

Da Porto et al. [39] studied the effect of TRM strengthening on eight

full-scale RC frames infilled with light clay masonry walls. After in-plane
13.8
GPa

252
252

114
114
114
114
114

cycling testing up to 1.2% drift, the out-of-plane residual capacity of the

73
72

90
90
90
72
72
32
32

89
89
89
Ef

specimens was assessed in this study. Two test series were conducted,
using stronger masonry mortar for the first four specimens (two control
GþS
BþS
BþS
BþS
Fibre

and two retrofitted) and a weaker mortar to bind the bricks in the latter
G
G

G
G
G
G

G
G
G
G
G
C
C
B
B
B

four. As shown in Table 2, for the textile, a combined glass and steel fibre
mesh was used for one specimen, while a basalt and steel fibre mesh was
used for the other three. The influence of the inorganic binder used for
10.4
MPa
fm,inf

5.7
2.5
2.7
2.7
2.4
2.4
1.4
1.4
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
7.8
8.0
7.5
9.6

the TRM was also investigated with high strength mortar (fm,f ¼ 5.4
MPa) used for two retrofitted specimens (3-GC-NR and 4-GC-FN), while
for two other specimens (6-BG-NR and 8-BC-NR), a low strength gypsum
mm

110

120
120
120
120
140
140
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
tinf

75

76
76
76
76
76

plaster or natural hydraulic lime plasters, respectively, were used (fm,f ¼

TRM strengthened infilled RC frame specimens tested in the literature.

1.1 MPa). The gypsum plaster has the benefit of being more environ­
mentally friendly and being able to capture volatile organic pollutants.
36.3
40.6
34.5
34.5
34.5
34.5
36.5
36.5
36.3
36.3
36.3
36.3
36.3
36.3
36.3
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5

Finally, anchorage of the mesh to the upper beams using steel-ties was
PTD: partial TRM debonding; * includes out-of-plane damage.
θ
�

provided for one specimen (4-GC-FN).

During the in-plane tests, the control specimens experienced heavy
2.5
1.1
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
2.7
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
W

damage, including spalling and crushing of masonry units at the corners.

This was not observed for any of the retrofitted units, for which damage
was delayed significantly, with no cracking up to 0.5% drift. For the
2.0
1.0
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.2
2.2
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
m
H

specimens retrofitted using low strength mortar, a higher level of

damage was observed, with visible cracking initiating at 0.5% drift,
Scale

compared to 1.2% for the higher strength mortar. For the specimen with
2/3
1/3

1/2
1/2
2/3
2/3
2/3
2/3
2/3
2/3
2/3
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1
1
1
1

weaker masonry mortar, horizontal sliding was observed for the control
and retrofitted specimens. For the three unanchored specimens, limited
local detachment of the TRM was observed. This ultimately led to
SRG-2-2-A

RFG-D3-3
RFG-D6-4
RFC-D3-5
RFC-D6-6
RFB-D3-7
RFB-D6-8
Specimen

RFB-Fu-9
3-GC-NR

6-BG-NR
8-BC-NR
4-GC-FN

DU0–90
DA0–90
SU0–90
SA0–90

localised crushing at the corners of the infills in two specimens, which

CTRM
BTRM

DA45
TRM

was prevented in the specimen with steel tie anchorage. Despite the
reduction in damage, the recorded results in Table 2 indicate that in-
plane strength and stiffness were not affected by the retrofit. Still, pre­
Akhoundi

vention of brittle failure in the retrofitted specimens resulted in

Da Porto
Author
Table 2

Koutas

Ismail
Selim

Sagar

considerably improved ductility and reduced post-peak strength

degradation. This allowed the retrofitted walls to behave better in the

4
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

Table 3
Observed final damage in control and retrofit frames in the literature.
Study Control TRM-retrofitted

Koutas [29]

Selim [41]

Da Porto [39] (strong mortar)

Da Porto [39] (weak mortar)

Akhoundi [44]

Ismail [42]

Sagar [40]

Note:

subsequent out-of-plane tests, with higher residual strength recorded Ismail et al. [42] performed cyclic tests on infilled 2/3-scaled frames
compared to the control specimens. with three different TRM layouts, including an orthogonal full-surface
More recently, Akhoundi et al. [38,44] tested two G-TRM retrofitted application and two diagonal band configurations with varying width
frames, using a commercial and a custom-made braided textile, (one-sixth and one-third of the diagonal length of the infill). The latter
respectively. The braided textile, previously tested on masonry [45], diagonal band application is similar to the application of FRP strips for
was specifically designed to maximise the mechanical interlock between infill strengthening (see Table 1). For the diagonal application, the effect
textile mesh and mortar. To enhance the effectiveness of the retrofit, of three different fibre materials was evaluated (carbon, basalt and
twelve glass fibre connectors through the infill and four connectors at glass), while the orthogonal application employed B-TRM only. A low
the interfaces to each RC member were used for anchorage. As shown in extend of damage was observed for all retrofitted specimens. Some
Table 2, next to a significant increase in initial stiffness, strength in­ infill-frame separation was observed in all cases and for the diagonal
creases of 25% and 30% were obtained for the commercial and braided application of TRM, cracks perpendicular to the strips were observed to
TRM. The commercial TRM surface was fully cracked along the diagonal form at drift levels above 0.3%. For the full-face TRM retrofit, only
after testing, while the braided TRM specimen only presented infill minor cracks appeared in the bottom interface and a small extend of
detachment cracks at the interfaces. After removal of the jacket diagonal cracks was observed on the TRM surface, with limited
post-testing, crushing of the infill corners was observed for both speci­ debonding. The initial stiffness of the specimens was not found to be
mens, but more extensively for the specimen using a commercial TRM. significantly affected by the retrofit, with differences between 5% up to
No diagonal cracks in the brick infill were observed. Overall, the use of 24% observed. Interestingly, the stiffness was found to be higher for the
the braided textile achieved the same global behaviour as the com­ specimens with the thinner TRM strips. In terms of lateral load capacity,
mercial material, while reducing the amount of visible damage large increases in capacity were observed for all specimens. The increase
significantly. in width of the diagonal TRM layers was not found to significantly affect

5
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

this strength increase and the behaviour of the full-surface retrofit was cracking was delayed for larger levels of drifts for all retrofitted speci­
similar to the diagonal strengthening layout. Interestingly, despite the mens. This reduction in in-plane damage was generally found to
carbon textile having the highest strength of the three fibre materials, improve the out-of-plane residual capacity significantly [39,40].
the highest strength increase was obtained with the basalt TRM (þ99%). Cracking at the interface to the frame was observed for all retrofitted
For the carbon TRM the peak was reached at a load 40% higher than the specimens, indicating that separation of the infill from the frame cannot
control specimen, while the glass TRM retrofit achieved a slightly lower be prevented, albeit it was significantly delayed in most cases. It is worth
increase of up to 32%. noting that strengthening with orthogonal fibre orientation is effective
Finally, Sagar et al. [40] looked at the interaction of in- and in preventing diagonal shear cracks, but cannot prevent sliding shear as
out-of-plane damage in masonry infilled RC frames with TRM retrofit­ observed in specimens with relatively low strength masonry mortar [29,
ting. Six single-storey, half-scale frames were tested under cyclic 39].
in-plane loading, with out-of-plane testing on a shake table carried out at
different levels of in-plane drift. The TRM was applied in a single layer to 3. Analytical modelling
the outer face of the infills only. The investigated parameters were the
angle of the fabric mesh (orthogonal vs �45� in Table 1), the contri­ The effectiveness of TRM retrofitting was highlighted by various
bution of mechanical anchors, as well as the sequence of fabric place­ experimental campaigns in the literature. Albeit limited, the experi­
ment. In direct bond tests, the latter was found to affect bond strength, mental data gathered on TRM strengthened frames is used here to
with a direct application of the textile on the wall having a higher bond develop an empirical equation for effective strain for simplified macro-
strength (0.83 MPa) compared to 0.63 MPa obtained for the conven­ modelling applications. Macro-modelling of infilled frames is a well-
tional “sandwich application”, with a base layer of mortar applied first studied topic in the scientific literature, with multiple approaches
on the infill. In three specimens, mechanical anchors (steel bolts) were leading to an appropriate representation of their response [e.g.:46–50].
installed and a tighter mesh size of the fabric (8 mm instead of 25 mm) For TRM-strengthened infills, finite-element modelling approaches have
was used at the frame-infill interface to improve the transfer of forces to been investigated [51,52]. Reliable simplified models are however
the anchors, but also to strengthen the interface. The experimental re­ important to facilitate the use of TRM for the existing building stock.
sults focused on the interaction of in-plane damage and out-of-plane However, only one macro-model for TRM retrofits developed by Koutas
behaviour, with a reduction in connection between frame and infill et al. [53] can be found in the literature. This model was calibrated for
observed due to out-of-plane plane damage. For the anchored speci­ effective strain in the textile using the first available experiments [29].
mens, a better out-of-plane behaviour was observed, however, without With the range of new experimental results, a modification of the model
anchorage, the connection between frame and infill was significantly parameters is hence proposed. The analytical model used consists of a
reduced. This also meant that the in-plane behaviour displayed a more single strut model in compression with an additional tensile tie, ac­
gradual strength degradation for the specimens with anchorage. The counting for the added strength from the retrofit in tension described in
specimens with orthogonal TRM application presented a more ductile 3.1 and 3.2.
and dissipative behaviour. In general, strength increase was very similar
for all retrofitted specimens, with values close to þ30%.
3.1. Infill strut model
2.3. Main observations
Here the empirical equation for the calculation of the equivalent
strut width (w) by Mainstone [48,54] is taken, as it is not only widely
Based on the reviewed experimental campaigns a number of inter­
used in the literature [e.g.:55–57], but also suggested in the FEMA 306
esting observations can be made. Firstly, in terms of retrofit application,
[58] guidelines. For the maximum strength of the infill w can be
TRM was generally applied with one or two layers on both sides of the
expressed by Equation (1):
wall, with the exception of Sagar et al. [40] who tested a one-sided
intervention. It is note-worthy that even in the one-sided configura­ w ¼ 0:56ðλ⋅HÞ 0:875
⋅dm ½m� (1)
tion, a significant in-plane strength increase was obtained despite
additional out-of-plane damage. Applying the fibres at an angle ach­ In which H is the height of the frame, dm the diagonal length, and λ
ieved higher strength increase then equivalent orthogonal applications represents the relative panel-to-frame stiffness, defined based on the
[40,42], as it also controls the shear sliding of the infill and is applied in elastic moduli of the infill and the concrete framing members, Em and Ec,
the direction of largest tensile strain. In terms of anchorage, steel ties respectively, in Equation (2) by Stafford Smith and Carter [59]:
and bolts, as well as fibre anchors have been used. Compared to sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
4 Em ⋅t⋅sin 2 θ � �
non-anchored specimens, anchorage was found to prevent or delay TRM λ¼ ​ ​ ​ ​ m 1 (2)
4⋅Ec ⋅I⋅hw
debonding [e.g.:39], retrofits with anchorage were hence found to give
the highest strength increase. Still, significant increase was also
observed without any anchorage [e.g.:42]. Where t is the wall thickness, hw is the wall height, and I is the second
In terms of materials, as shown in Table 2, a variety of fibre materials moment of area of the column. To obtain the maximum sustained shear
have been used in the experimental campaigns, including Carbon (C), force, the maximum compressive stress carried by an area of infill
Basalt (B), Glass (G) and Steel (S) fibres. The retrofit applications were defined from the equivalent strut width, w, and the actual infill thick­
made with a range of orthogonal mesh sizes between 8 and 25 mm, the ness, t, is calculated. The maximum compressive stress can be defined
thickness per layer of TRM (textile þ mortar) is between 4 and 20 mm according to multiple failure mechanisms, however, corner crushing is
and the elastic moduli range from 13.8 GPa for softer glass textiles to generally seen to be the most crucial to define the maximum force
252 GPa for stiffer carbon textiles. The effectiveness of the retrofit was developed in the infill, while other mechanisms like sliding shear usually
found to be affected more by the stiffness of the fibres than the amount precede this state [58]. A commonly adopted empirical equation
of material applied [42]. Moreover, the stiffest textiles were found not to formulated by Decanini et al. [60] is chosen here. Such an approach is
provide the highest strength increase and therefore glass or basalt tex­ compatible with the chosen strut width definition and is based on the
tiles would appear to be more cost effective than carbon. The textile vertical infill compressive strength fm,inf, the strut angle θ and the rela­
mesh was found to have an effect on visible damage and strength in­ tive panel-to-frame stiffness λ, as given by Equation (3):
crease, with an increased mechanical interlock with the mortar for 1:12⋅fm;inf ⋅sin θ⋅cos θ
fmθ ¼ (3)
braided textiles. K1⋅ðλ⋅HÞ 0:12
þ K2⋅ðλ⋅HÞ0:88
Finally, in terms of observed damage mechanisms, generally

6
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

Where K1 and K2 are empirical parameters defined based on the values Table 4
Equations for estimated mechanical properties.
of λ [60].
Infill Property Equation Source

3.2. TRM tie model Compressive fm;inf ¼ 0:4⋅f 0:65

b ⋅ (9) EC 6 [64] – eq. (3.1); for Group
strength a f 0:25 3 masonry units
m
Following the approach by Koutas et al. [53], the tensile force in the Elastic modulus Einf ¼ 700⋅fm;inf (10) ACI 530-11 [65] - 1.8.2.2.1
retrofit material is evaluated in the diagonal of the infill, assuming a Shear modulus G ¼ 0:4⋅Einf (11) ACI 530-11 - 1.8.2.2.2
multilinear stepped-crack pattern. The force developed in the tie de­ a
Where fb represents the brick compressive strength and fm the compressive
pends on the relative orientation of the tie angle θ, angle of the fibres, α,
strength of the mortar.
and the angles θcr,j of the assumed cracks. These consist of an inclined
crack (j ¼ 1), defined as the linear approximation of a stepped crack, and
a horizontal crack (j ¼ 2). The total force mobilised in the two axes i of
the TRM fibres is then transformed geometrically into the direction of properties of the infills based on well-accepted equations from design
the diagonal tie as in Equation (4): guidelines and standards. It is not an aim of this study to evaluate the
effect of the material parameters of the control specimens, which have
X been studied extensively in the literature [e.g.: 57]. For the mechanical
2 X 2
At;i � �
Ftie ¼ ðεte;i ⋅ Et;i Þ ⋅ dj ⋅ cotθcr;j þ ð2i 3Þ ⋅ cotβi ⋅sinβi (4)
i¼1 j¼1
s i properties of TRM, most researchers only provided manufacturer data
for the textile and did not perform coupon tests. The equation provided
Where, At is the area of TRM and Et the elastic modulus from a TRM by Bilotta et al. [63] is used to convert the elastic modulus of the fibre,
coupon test, βi the angle of the fibres to the level normal to the tie-axis, si Ef, to the value Et of the TRM coupon needed for the tensile tie Equation
is the textile mesh spacing and dj the crack lengths, both projected to the (4).
normal to the tie-axis [53]. To predict the shear force of the strength­
ened specimen, Koutas suggested that the effective strain developed in 4. Results and discussion
the textile at maximum load, εte, is the main parameter. The same
assumption is generally made for FRP strengthened members [32,61]. In Calibration of the macro-model using the experimental data in the
this model, TRM effective strain can be considered as a smeared average literature was used to obtain the required effective strain, εeff, for the tie-
strain along the length of the tie. model. The effective strain required to achieve the experimentally ob­
tained strength increase for all experimental specimens retrofitted with
3.3. Model calibration TRM is shown in Fig. 3. Note that while 20 TRM-retrofitted specimens
are found in Table 2, only 16 of these are used for the evaluation, as
The main difficulty in defining the effective strain is the lack of specific material data was lacking and no strength increase was observed
experimental measures. Based on a single experiment, Koutas calculated by da Porto et al. [39]. The average effective strain was found to be
an effective strain of 0.8% for one layer of TRM for matching their equal to 0.24%, whereas its maximum and minimum values were equal
experimental results. For multi-layered TRM, the effective strain was to 0.66% (with G-TRM) and 0.03% (with C-TRM), respectively. A very
reduced using a hypothesis formulated for FRP [62], rendering a value low effective strain value for the two specimens retrofitted with C-TRM
of 0.57% strain for double-layer TRM. Here, to determine a new by Ismail et al. [42] can be related to the high stiffness of the textiles
expression for effective strain, the tie-model is calibrated to match used. Note that a value of 0.4%, corresponds to the design limit for
experimental strengths for the specimens found in the literature. This retrofitting masonry walls in ACI 549.4R [66].
approach assumes the capacity of the infilled frames to be dominated by
the infills and not by the frame (Vframe) and that the TRM retrofit does
4.1. Correlation between experimental and modelling parameters
not significantly influence the secant stiffness, a behaviour which is in
line with experimental observations.
To adequately assess the effect of geometric and material properties
As the macro-modelling of retrofitted frames is the main objective, it
on the effective strain, their correlation coefficient r is evaluated. The r-
is important not to accumulate the error from modelling the control
values and hence correlation between the factors is summarised in
specimens. To avoid this effect, the assessment of the retrofit model is
Table 5. An r-value of 0.37 between the angle of the tie θ and the
done based on the increase in strength due to retrofitting. As shown in
effective strain is obtained, indicating a low to moderate positive cor­
Equations (5)–(7), the difference in capacity between retrofitted and
relation. This is reasonable, as a lower aspect ratio will lead to higher
control specimens, ΔV ¼ VR – Vcon, can be defined based on the addi­
forces developed in the diagonal and hence also increase the effective
tional force generated by the TRM tie, Vtie, and any difference in
strain in the TRM. This effect is however not very pronounced due to the
compressive strut force, ΔVstrut. The latter corresponds to the difference
combination of a diagonal and horizontal crack considered in the defi­
of the retrofitted specimen (Vstrut,R) and the strut force in the control
nition of the tie. In turn a strong positive correlation (r ¼ 0.83) between
specimen (Vstrut,C) due to potential differences in fm,inf related to: 1)
the area ratio of textile, given as a fraction of the infill wall surface (ρt),
differences in material properties of bricks and mortar; 2) small increase
and the effective strain is obtained. This effect is differing from obser­
in compressive strength due to the retrofit.
vations for strengthened RC members with FRP [62].
Vcon ¼ Vframe þ Vstrut;C (5) An important material parameter is the elastic modulus of the fibres.
In the database a variety of different fibre types with different values of
VR ¼ Vframe þ Vstrut;R þ Vtie ¼ Vframe þ ðVstrut;C þ ΔVstrut Þ þ Vtie (6) Ef are found. It appears that the effective strain is anti-proportional to
the elastic modulus of the material, with a correlation coefficient of
ΔV ¼ Vtie þ ΔVstrut (7) 0.5. This is an interesting observation with respect to the experimental
observations by Ismail et al. [42] in which stiffer fibres led to a lower
3.4. Material properties strength increase. It would hence appear that using high strength C-TRM
does not provide any benefit over lower-cost glass or basalt based tex­
To model the specimens tested in the literature, some mechanical tiles. Finally, another important aspect to investigate is the effect of the
properties of materials may be unavailable. Table 4 summarises the unretrofitted infill wall strength, fm,inf, on the retrofit effectiveness. No
empirical Equations (9)–(11) used to quantify the missing mechanical correlation with the effective strain in the TRM was however found (r ¼

7
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

Fig. 3. Calibrated effective strain and experimental increase in lateral capacity for each retrofitted specimen.

Table 5
Correlation between experimental parameters and the effective strain (r-value).
θ ρt Ef fm,inf

r-value 0.37 0.83 0.50 0.01

Correlation Low High Moderate None

formulated using the full data set, as well as the data set excluding the
specimens retrofitted with diagonal TRM bands. As shown in Fig. 4, the
factors in the two equations are very similar, however, a higher
goodness-of-fit (R2) is obtained when looking at the fully wrapped
specimens only, for which Equation (8) is obtained:
1:40⋅ρ �
εeff ¼ pffiffiffiffiffi t R2 ¼ 0:86 (8)
Ef

The goodness-of-fit for this equation is acceptable, considering that

very low R2 values are often observed for effective strain models
calculated from empirical data [e.g.:67]. Still, the concentration of data
Fig. 4. Empirical fit equation for effective strain for the analytical model.
on the lower end of the x-axis indicates that further experiments are
required in order to achieve more reliable empirical equations for design
purposes. The empirical Equation (8) formulated based on the experi­
0.01). This can be explained by the effective strain not only being
mental evidence at-hand is a first step towards creating reliable
governed by the diagonal deformation, but also by horizontal defor­
simplified models of TRM retrofitted infills. The observation of reduced
mation (sliding shear), which is not affected by the vertical infill
effectiveness for increased stiffness may be an important observation,
strength.
suggesting the use of less stiff fibre materials for strengthening masonry
infills.
4.2. Empirical equation for effective strain
5. Conclusions
In order to facilitate implementation of the TRM macro-models, an
empirical equation for εeff is proposed. Using the results from the cor­ A state-of-the-art review of infilled frames retrofitted with textile
relation study between the assessed parameters, it can be deduced that reinforced mortars was presented. The use of this new class of com­
the model needs an empirical formula related to the TRM area ratio (ρt), posite, which can be made from a range high strength open-mesh textiles
similar to equations proposed by Breveglieri et al. [32] for FRP. The in combination with a cementitious matrix, was shown to yield satis­
negative correlation with the elastic modulus of the textiles (Ef), in turn, factory strengthening results for the variety of materials and layouts
will lead to an inverse relationship to effective strain. tested thus far. Damage to the infills can be reduced significantly and
Fig. 4 displays the obtained effective strain (in %) against the ratio larger lateral forces can be sustained, as well as providing larger out-of-
ρt/√Ef for the experimental data in the literature. It is important to note plane residual capacity. The use of anchorage was found to be beneficial,
that the tie force Equation (4) used here was developed for fully wrap­ but not necessarily critical to achieve strength increase. It was observed
ped infills. To separate the results for specimens tested with diagonal that very stiff retrofitting textiles may not achieve the highest strength
bands of TRM [42], these are plotted separately (blue crosses) in Fig. 4. increase and that the fibre orientation is an important factor in retrofit
By means of multi-variate non-linear regression, two empirical equa­ effectiveness.
tions for effective strain (in mm/mm) against a ratio of TRM area (ρt in The compiled database of experimental results was used to calibrate
%) and the square root of textile elastic modulus (Ef in MPa) are

8
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

a simplified analytical model, using a macro-model based on a pair of [14] Umair S, Numada M, Amin M, Meguro K. Fiber reinforced polymer and
polypropylene composite retrofitting technique for masonry structures. Polymers
compressive strut and tensile tie. The definition of effective strain was
2015;7:963–84. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym7050963.
found to be crucial in the development of the tensile tie model and [15] Binici B, Ozcebe G, Ozcelik R. Analysis and design of FRP composites for seismic
factors affecting the effective strain were determined. Based on a cor­ retrofit of infill walls in reinforced concrete frames. Compos B Eng 2007;38:
relation study on experimental parameters to the calibrated effective 575–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.08.007.
[16] Triantafillou TC, Papanicolaou CG, Zissimopoulos P, Laourdekis T. Concrete
strain, an empirical equation for effective strain based on the TRM area confinement with textile-reinforced mortar jackets. ACI Struct J 2006;103:28–37.
ratio and elastic modulus was proposed. https://doi.org/10.14359/15083.
The empirical equation provided a relatively good fit, however it [17] Koutas LN, Tetta Z, Bournas DA, Triantafillou TC. Strengthening of concrete
structures with textile reinforced mortars: state-of-the-art review. J Compos Constr
highlighted that currently only limited experimental data is available. 2019;23:03118001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000882.
Moreover, a majority of the experimental data comes from scaled [18] Ebead U, Shrestha KC, Afzal MS, El Refai A, Nanni A. Effectiveness of fabric-
specimens, and it was shown in previous research that scaling has a non- reinforced cementitious matrix in strengthening reinforced concrete beams.
J Compos Constr 2017;21:04016084. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-
proportional effect to retrofit effectiveness for composite materials [68, 5614.0000741.
69]. There is also a lack of data for a wider range of TRM area ratios and [19] Pino V, Hadad HA, De Caso y Basalo F, Nanni A, Ebead UA, El Refai A. Performance
frame aspect ratios. To develop more precise and reliable macro-models, of FRCM-strengthened RC beams subject to fatigue. J Bridge Eng 2017;22:
04017079. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001107.
a systematic testing campaign and detailed finite-element modelling are [20] Del Vecchio C, Di Ludovico M, Balsamo A, Prota A. Seismic retrofit of real beam-
hence required. Future work will further look at considering the increase column joints using fiber-reinforced cement composites. J Struct Eng 2018;144:
of compressive strut force as a result of TRM jacketing, which may 04018026. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001999.
[21] Elsanadedy HM, Abbas H, Almusallam TH, Al-Salloum YA. Organic versus
constitute a strengthening mechanism of importance.
inorganic matrix composites for bond-critical strengthening applications of RC
structures – state-of-the-art review. Compos B Eng 2019;174:106947. https://doi.
Declaration of competing interest org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.106947.
[22] Raoof SM, Bournas DA. TRM versus FRP in flexural strengthening of RC beams:
behaviour at high temperatures. Constr Build Mater 2017;154:424–37. https://doi.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.07.195.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence [23] Kouris LAS, Triantafillou TC. State-of-the-art on strengthening of masonry
the work reported in this paper. structures with textile reinforced mortar (TRM). Constr Build Mater 2018;188:
1221–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.08.039.
[24] Giaretton M, Dizhur D, Garbin E, Ingham JM, da Porto F. In-plane strengthening of
Acknowledgements clay brick and block masonry walls using textile-reinforced mortar. J Compos
Constr 2018;22:04018028. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-
5614.0000866.
The work of this study was carried out under the European Com­ [25] Triantafillou TC, Karlos K, Kefalou K, Argyropoulou E. An innovative structural and
mission, Joint Research Centre (JRC) Exploratory Research project energy retrofitting system for URM walls using textile reinforced mortars combined
iRESISTþ. with thermal insulation: mechanical and fire behavior. Constr Build Mater 2017;
133:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.032.
[26] Triantafillou TC, Karlos K, Kapsalis P, Georgiou L. Innovative structural and energy
References retrofitting system for masonry walls using textile reinforced mortars combined
with thermal insulation: in-plane mechanical behavior. J Compos Constr 2018;22:
[1] De Luca F, Verderame GM, G� omez-Martínez F, P�erez-García A. The structural role 04018029. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000869.
played by masonry infills on RC building performances after the 2011 Lorca, Spain, [27] Gkournelos PD, Bournas DA, Triantafillou TC. Combined seismic and energy
earthquake. Bull Earthq Eng 2014;12:1999–2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/ upgrading of existing reinforced concrete buildings using TRM jacketing and
s10518-013-9500-1. thermal insulation. Earthq Struct 2019;16:625–39. https://doi.org/10.12989/
[2] Fikri R, Dizhur D, Walsh K, Ingham J. Seismic performance of reinforced concrete EAS.2019.16.5.625.
frame with masonry infill buildings in the 2010/2011 Canterbury, New Zealand [28] Bournas DA. Concurrent seismic and energy retrofitting of RC and masonry
earthquakes. Bull Earthq Eng 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0476-8. building envelopes using inorganic textile-based composites combined with
[3] Kouris LA, Borg RP, Indirli M. The L’Aquila Earthquake, April 6th, 2009: a review insulation materials: a new concept. Compos B Eng 2018;148:166–79. https://doi.
of seismic damage mechanisms. In: Proc. Final conf. COST action C26 urban org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.04.002.
habitat constr. Catastrophic events, Mazzolani, FM September; 2010. p. 16–8. [29] Koutas L, Bousias S, Triantafillou T. Seismic strengthening of masonry-infilled RC
[4] Ricci P, De Luca F, Verderame GM. 6th April 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, Italy: frames with TRM: experimental study. J Compos Constr 2015;19:04014048.
reinforced concrete building performance. Bull Earthq Eng 2011;9:285–305. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000507.
[5] CTCV. Report on types of structural frames, related enclosure wall systems, and [30] Koutas LN, Bournas DA. Out-of-Plane strengthening of masonry-infilled RC frames
requirements for the construction systems. Portugal: Centro Tecnol� ogico da with textile-reinforced mortar jackets. J Compos Constr 2019;23:04018079.
Cer^amica e do Vidro (CTCV); 2015. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000911.
[6] Varum H. Seismic assessment, strengthening and repair of existing buildings. PhD [31] Furtado A, Rodrigues H, Melo J, Ar^ede A, Varum H. Experimental assessment of
Thesis. University of Aveiro; 2003. strengthening strategy to improve the masonry infills out-of-plane behaviour
[7] Altın S, Anıl O,
€ Kopraman Y, Ç Belgin. Strengthening masonry infill walls with through textile reinforced mortar. Comput Methods Struct Dyn Earthq Eng 2019:
reinforced plaster. Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 2010;163:331–42. https://doi. 19. Crete, Greece: ECCOMAS.
org/10.1680/stbu.2010.163.5.331. [32] Breveglieri M, Camata G, Spacone E. Strengthened infilled RC frames: continuum
[8] Korkmaz SZ, Kamanli M, Korkmaz HH, Donduren MS, Cogurcu MT. Experimental and macro modeling in nonlinear finite element analysis. Compos B Eng 2018;151:
study on the behaviour of nonductile infilled RC frames strengthened with external 78–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.05.042.
mesh reinforcement and plaster composite. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 2010;10: [33] Valluzzi MR, da Porto F, Garbin E, Panizza M. Out-of-plane behaviour of infill
2305–16. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-10-2305-2010. masonry panels strengthened with composite materials. Mater Struct 2014;47:
[9] Koutromanos I, Kyriakides M, Stavridis A, Billington S, Shing PB. Shake-table tests 2131–45. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-014-0384-6.
of a 3-story masonry-infilled RC frame retrofitted with composite materials. [34] Ayatar ME, Canbay E, Binici B. Strengthening of reinforced concrete frames with
J Struct Eng 2013;139:1340–51. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943- engineered cementitious composite panels. Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 2018:
541X.0000689. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1680/jstbu.18.00001.
[10] Kyriakides MA, Billington SL. Cyclic response of nonductile reinforced concrete [35] Dehghani A, Nateghi-Alahi F, Fischer G. Engineered cementitious composites for
frames with unreinforced masonry infills retrofitted with engineered cementitious strengthening masonry infilled reinforced concrete frames. Eng Struct 2015;105:
composites. J Struct Eng 2014;140:04013046. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.013.
ST.1943-541X.0000833. [36] Li Y, Zhu J, Wang Z. Investigation on mechanical properties of masonry infill wall
[11] Almusallam TH, Al-Salloum YA. Behavior of FRP strengthened infill walls under in- strengthened with ECC. KSCE J Civ Eng 2019;23:295–306. https://doi.org/
plane seismic loading. J Compos Constr 2007;11:308–18. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s12205-018-5424-2.
10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2007)11:3(308). [37] Yaman TS, Canbay E. Seismic strengthening of masonry infilled reinforced concrete
[12] Erol G, Karadogan HF. Seismic strengthening of infilled reinforced concrete frames frames with steel-fibre-reinforced mortar. Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 2014;167:
by CFRP. Compos B Eng 2016;91:473–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1680/stbu.11.00076.
compositesb.2016.01.025. [38] Akhoundi F, Vasconcelos G, Lourenço P, Silva LM, Cunha F, Fangueiro R. In-plane
[13] Spyrakos CC, Maniatakis CA, Smyrou E, Psycharis IN. FRP strengthened brick- behavior of cavity masonry infills and strengthening with textile reinforced mortar.
infilled RC frames: an approach for their proper consideration in design. Open Eng Struct 2018;156:145–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.11.002.
Constr Build Technol J 2012;6:306–24. https://doi.org/10.2174/ [39] da Porto F, Guidi G, Verlato N, Modena C. Effectiveness of plasters and textile
1874836801206010306. reinforced mortars for strengthening clay masonry infill walls subjected to

9
D.A. Pohoryles and D.A. Bournas Composites Part B 183 (2020) 107702

combined in-plane/out-of-plane actions. Mauerwerk 2015;19:334–54. https://doi. [55] Chrysostomou CZ, Asteris PG. On the in-plane properties and capacities of infilled
org/10.1002/dama.201500673. frames. Eng Struct 2012;41:385–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[40] Sagar SL, Singhal V, Rai DC. In-plane and out-of-plane behavior of masonry-infilled engstruct.2012.03.057.
RC frames strengthened with fabric-reinforced cementitious matrix. J Compos [56] Perrone D, Leone M, Aiello MA. Non-linear behaviour of masonry infilled RC
Constr 2019;23:04018073. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943- frames: influence of masonry mechanical properties. Eng Struct 2017;150:875–91.
5614.0000905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.08.001.
[41] Selim M, Okten C, Ozkan M, Gencoglu. Behavior of RC frames with infill walls [57] Tanganelli M, Rotunno T, Viti S. On the modelling of infilled RC frames through
strengthened by cement based composites. International Society of Offshore and strut models. Cogent Eng 2017;4:1371578. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Polar Engineers; 2015. 23311916.2017.1371578.
[42] Ismail N, El-Maaddawy T, Khattak N. Quasi-static in-plane testing of FRCM [58] FEMA, editor. FEMA 306 - evaluation of earthquake damaged concrete and
strengthened non-ductile reinforced concrete frames with masonry infills. Constr masonry wall buildings: basic procedures manual. Redwood City, CA, USA: ATC;
Build Mater 2018;186:1286–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 1998.
conbuildmat.2018.07.230. [59] Stafford Smith B, Carter C. A method of analysis for infilled frames. Proc Inst Civ
[43] Koutas L, Pitytzogia A, Triantafillou TC, Bousias SN. Strengthening of infilled Eng 1969;44:31–48. https://doi.org/10.1680/iicep.1969.7290.
reinforced concrete frames with TRM: study on the development and testing of [60] Decanini LD, Fantin GE. Modelos simplificados de la mampostería incluida en
textile-based anchors. J Compos Constr 2014;18:A4013015. https://doi.org/ porticos. J Argent Ing Estructural 1986;2:817–36.
10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000390. [61] Pohoryles DA, Melo J, Rossetto T, Fabian M, McCague C, Stavrianaki K, et al. Use
[44] Akhoundi F, Vasconcelos G, Lourenço P, Vasconcelos G, Lourenço P. In-plane of DIC and AE for monitoring effective strain and debonding in FRP and FRCM-
behavior of infills using glass fiber shear connectors in textile reinforced mortar retrofitted RC beams. J Compos Constr 2017;21:04016057. https://doi.org/
(TRM) technique. Int J Struct Glass Adv Mater Res 2018;2:1–14. https://doi.org/ 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000715.
10.3844/sgamrsp.2018.1.14. [62] Triantafillou T, Antonopoulos C. Design of concrete flexural members strengthened
[45] Vasconcelos G, Abreu S, Fangueiro R, Cunha F. Retrofitting masonry infill walls in shear with FRP. J Compos Constr 2000;4:198–205. https://doi.org/10.1061/
with textile reinforced mortar. Lisbon, Portugal: Proc. 15th World Conf. Earthq. (ASCE)1090-0268(2000)4:4(198).
Eng.; 2012. p. 10. [63] Bilotta A, Ceroni F, Lignola GP, Prota A. Use of DIC technique for investigating the
[46] Crisafulli FJ, Carr AJ, Park R. Analytical modelling of infilled frame structures-a behaviour of FRCM materials for strengthening masonry elements. Compos B Eng
general review. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 2000;33:30–47. 2017;129:251–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.05.075.
[47] Fardis MN, Panagiotakos TB. Seismic design and response of bare and masonry- [64] CEN BS. EN 1996-1-1:2005 Eurocode 6. Design of masonry structures - Part 1-1:
infilled reinforced concrete buildings. Part II: infilled structures. J Earthq Eng general rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures. London: BSI;
1997;1:475–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469708962375. 2005.
[48] Mainstone RJ. On the stiffness and strengths of infilled frames. Proc Inst Civ Eng [65] American Concrete Institute, American Society of Civil Engineers, Masonry
1971;49:230. Society, Masonry Standards Joint Committee. TMS 402-11/ACI 530-11/ASCE 5-11
[49] Rodrigues H, Varum H, Costa A. Simplified macro-model for infill masonry panels. - building code requirements and specification for masonry structures. Boulder,
J Earthq Eng 2010;14:390–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460903086044. Co.; Farmongton Hills, Mi.; Reston, Va.: the masonry Society; American concrete
[50] Furtado A, Rodrigues H, Ar^ ede A, Varum H, Grubi�si�c M, Sipo�
� s TK. Prediction of the institute. American Society of Civil Engineers; 2013.
earthquake response of a three-storey infilled RC structure. Eng Struct 2018;171: [66] ACI. ACI 549.4R - guide to design and construction of externally bonded fabric-
214–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.05.054. reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM) systems for repair and strengthening
[51] Basili M, Marcari G, Vestroni F. Nonlinear analysis of masonry panels strengthened concrete and masonry structures. Farmington Hills, Mich.: American Concrete
with textile reinforced mortar. Eng Struct 2016;113:245–58. https://doi.org/ Institute; 2013.
10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.12.021. [67] Ceroni F, Salzano P. Design provisions for FRCM systems bonded to concrete and
[52] Filippou CA, Kyriakides NC, Chrysostomou CZ. Numerical modeling of masonry- masonry elements. Compos B Eng 2018;143:230–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
infilled RC frame. Open Constr Build Technol J 2019;13:135–48. https://doi.org/ compositesb.2018.01.033.
10.2174/1874836801913010135. [68] Choudhury AM, Deb SK, Dutta A. Study on size effect of fibre reinforced polymer
[53] Koutas L, Triantafillou TC, Bousias SN. Analytical modeling of masonry-infilled RC retrofitted reinforced concrete beam–column connections under cyclic loading.
frames retrofitted with textile-reinforced mortar. J Compos Constr 2015;19: Can J Civ Eng 2013;40:353–60. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2012-0041.
04014082. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000553. [69] Pohoryles DA, Melo J, Rossetto T, Varum H, Bisby L. Seismic retrofit schemes with
[54] Mainstone RJ. Supplementary note on the stiffness and strength of infilled frames. FRP for deficient RC beam-column joints: state-of-the-art review. J Compos Constr
Current Paper CP 13/74 Build Res Establ Lond 1974. 2019;23:03119001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000950.

10