FRCM Sisma

Ruredil
Technical notebook – Buildings Seismic Retrofit with FRCM Di.Te.R

Concrete and masonry structures Ruredil Technical Direction
TECHNICAL NOTEBOOK
Ruredil TEchnical DIrection
Buildings seismic retrofit with FRCM – Fiber Reinforced

Cementitious Matrix composite
Concrete and masonry structures July 2009
1
INTRODUCTION
This technical notebook aims to demonstrate that Ruredil X Mesh C10 and Ruredil X Mesh Gold
FRCM systems can be used for existing buildings seismic retrofit (masonry, concrete and
reinforced concrete) by increasing their structural ductility.
This document is conceptually an extension specifically focusing on details of the design criteria
for use of FRCM contained in the:
“Instructions for Planning Static Consolidation Projects with use of Fiber Reinforced
Cementitious Matrix Compounds or FRCM”
Following design guidelines of CNR DT200-2004, this document takes a closer look at
theoretical and design aspects, supported by a range of examples in application, of key projects
for seismic retrofit of existing buildings, such as shear reinforcement of pillars, confinement,
partition walls, etc.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. DELAMINATION DILATATION
2. REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES

2.1 Reinforcement work with FRCM aims
2.2 Beams and pillars shear reinforcement
2.2.1 Reinforcement Design
2.2.1.1 Examples
Example 1. Shear reinforcement of a pillar
2.3 Pillars confinement
2.3.1 Local effect: confinement of concrete
2.3.1.1 Examples
Example 1. Rectangular pillar confinement: concrete confinement
2.3.2 Effect on section: moment and bending
2.3.2.1 Examples
Example 1. Confinement of a rectangular pillar: ultimate bending and
ultimate moment
2.3.3 Effect on the element: Rotation ability with reference to the chord
2.3.3.1 Examples
Example 1. Confining a rectangular pillar: Rotation ability with reference to
the chord
3. MASONRY STRUCTURES
3.1Aims of reinforcement with FRCM
3.2Vault reinforcement
3.2.1 Reinforcement design
3.2.1.1 Examples
Example 1. Reinforcement of the extrados of a barrel vault.
Unreinforced structure
Horizontal collapse multiplier
Location of pressure centres
Acceleration of the activation of the mechanism
Reinforced structure
Horizontal multiplier of collapse
Location of the pressure centres
Stresses (moment and normal force)
Reinforcement section
Shear
4. PARTITION WALLS
4.1Aims and criteria of reinforcement with FRCM
4.1.1.1 Examples
Example 1. Reinforcement against out-of-plane seismic action.
3
1. DELAMINATION DILATION
If we follow the instructions [1], with reference to the diagram appearing in figure 1.1, maximum delamination
force of the end of an external reinforcement may be estimated as:
Pdbu = 2p f E f A f ⋅ G f (1.1)
corresponding to an end delamination dilatation of:
Pdbu 2p f G f
ε dbu = = (1.2)
Ef A f Ef A f
where:
Ef is the modulus of elasticity of the fibers;
Af is the area of the cross section of the fibers;
pf is the width of the interface surface;
Gf is the fracture energy of the interface surface.
Pdb Pdb
Pdbu L
Pdb
bf
L
0 Le
Figure 1.1. Delamination of an extremity.
Intermediate delamination dilation may be estimated as:
2p f G f
ε dbm = k cr (1.3)
Ef A f
where kcr is a coefficient to be calibrated by comparison with experimental evidence.

In the case of the Ruredil XMesh GOLD/M750 product, in accordance with the experiments conducted
(figure 1.2), we may assume:
⎧1 se n = 1
p f (n) = 2nb f ⋅ k (n) k (n) = ⎨ (1.4)
⎩0.8 se 2 ≤ n ≤ 4
J
G f = 211 kcr = 1.8 (1.5)
m2
in which n is the number of layers of mesh layered one on top of the other, bf is the width of the
reinforcement and k(n) is an efficiency coefficient depending on the number of layers.
4
P db Delamination Intermediate
of an extremity delamination
L
Pdb
P db (kN ) εdbm (‰)
bf 15 .6 5
16 18
12 .6 0
16
εdb (‰) 12
8.25 9 .5 0 1 0.03
8 7 .40 7.82 8 .9 9 14
6.2 9 7.64
6.44 8 12
6 4.53
5.19 P 1 Strato
4 εdb = db 5.50 10
Ef Af 4 2 Strati
2 8 Numero di strati, n
L (mm) L (mm)
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250 1 2 3 4
Figure 1.2. Delamination forces and dilations.
Considering the first of these (1.4) and taking into account that Af = n⋅t1f⋅bf,, (1.1) - (1.3) become:
k (n)G f k (n)Gf
Pdbu = 2nb f k (n) ⋅ E f t1f G f ε dbu = 2 ε dbm = 2k cr (1.6)
E f t1f E f t1f
where t1f = 0.046 mm is the thickness of a single layer of mesh (“strong” direction).
Use of (1.6) in the plan requires adoption of the “calculation” properties of the materials:
2nb f 2 k (n)Gfd 2k cr k (n)Gfd
Pfde = k (n) ⋅ E f t1f G fd ε fde = ε fdm = (1.7)
γ Rd γ Rd E f t1f γ Rd E f t1f
where:
γRd is the partial coefficient of the adherence model (to be assumed to be 1.2);
Gfd is the calculated fracture energy of the interface surface:
G fd
G fd = (1.8)
γg
where γg is the partial safety coefficient (values between 1.3 and 1.6 are suggested).
Note that the limits (1.6) on delamination of extremities and the corresponding calculated values (1.7)
refer to a fiber anchorage length greater than effective transfer length, Le (figure 1.1). For the product under
consideration this length is about 250 mm (figure 1.2).
Moreover, the limits (1.6) and the corresponding calculation values (1.7) have been estimated on the
basis of the results of experiments with specimens consisting of good quality concrete (Rck > 35 MPa). In the
event of application on poor quality concrete, these limits must be reduced appropriately.
2. REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES

2.1 Aims of reinforcement work with FRCM
Reinforcement of structures with a reinforced concrete frame with FRCM materials in seismic zones is
particularly useful for achieving the following aims.
i) Increasing resistance to shearing stress of beams and pillars to create the correct hierarchy of
resistances between fragile mechanisms and ductile mechanisms.
ii) Increasing the ductility of the terminal parts of beams and pillars which are likely to contain plastic
hinges.
iii) Improving anchorage of longitudinal bars in overlapping areas.
iv) Creating an obstacle to warping of longitudinal bars in pillars.
v) Increasing the strength of nodes.
5
These aims fit into the context of the more goal of increasing seismic capacity by increasing structural
ductility. Structural ductility, by which we mean the capacity of structures to be deformed well beyond the
elastic limit on materials, is in fact an essential requirement for the survival of structures subject to seismic
action, as recognised by the most recent standards and instructions.
Some of the aims listed above result in an increase in the collapse loads associated with fragile
mechanisms (cutting, local node breakage, withdrawal of reinforcement bars, compression of concrete),
making them superior to the collapse loads associated with ductile mechanisms (bending with abundantly
yielded reinforcement).
The other aims, on the other hand, increase local ductility at the points corresponding to parts of the
structure which, upon collapse, reach the limits on resistance (plastic hinges).
Achievement of these aims therefore promotes structural collapse due to formation of plastic hinges and
increases their deformational capacity.
2.2 Reinforcing shear strength of beams and pillars
The shear strength of a reinforced concrete structure may be improved by applying FRCM composite
materials to its side surfaces, with the fibers lying across the longitudinal axis (figure 2.1). The most frequent
case is definitely that in which fibers lie at right angles to the axis of the element (figure 2.2).
2.2.1 Design of the reinforcement

According to the approach described in the guidelines [1], the shear strength of a concrete element
reinforced with composite materials may be estimated as follows:
{
VRd = min VRdct + VRds + VRdf ; VRd max } (2.1)
where VRdct and VRds are the contributions to resistance associated with the concrete and the cross steel
reinforcements, VRd max is the resistance associated with breakage of the connecting rods in the compressed
concrete wall and VRdf is the contribution to resistance associated with reinforcement with composite
material. The quantities VRdct and VRds are estimated as usual in the case of unreinforced elements.
Reinforcement
Reinforcement
Reinforcement
Reinforc ement Reinforc ement

Reinforcement
Figure 2.1. Reinforcement of a girder’s shear strength. Figure 2.2. Reinforcement of a girder and a pillar.
The contribution associated with fiber reinforcement is created by:
VRdf =
1
γ Rdv
2t w
( )
⋅ 0.9 ⋅ d ⋅ f f ⋅ E f ⋅ ε fdv cot θ + cot β ⋅ sin β
if
(2.2)
where (figure 2.3):

γRdv is the partial coefficient of the resistance model (assumed to be equal to 1.2);
d is the useful height of the section;
wf is the width of each band of reinforcement;
if is the centre-to-centre distance between bands of reinforcement;
Ef is the modulus of elasticity of the reinforcement;
εfdv is the calculated dilatation of reinforcement of shear strength (linked with
dilatation of the ends);
θ is the inclination of compressed concrete connecting rods in relation to the element’s axis;
6
β is the inclination of the reinforcement fibers in relation to the element’s axis.
P db
z d
hw L Thickness tf
P db
θ β wf wf
if
V f = 2 ⋅ sin β⋅ E f
∫ t (ζ )⋅ ε (ζ )dζ
f db
Le ζ
⋅ ∑ w = E ⋅ t (ζ )⋅ ε (ζ )dζ
φ ⋅ tt ⋅ E f ⋅ εfde
i
fi f
∫ f db
εdb
εf de
Pd b
L ≤ Le ⇒ εdb ≤ εfde εdb =
Ef w ft f
Vf L
L > Le ⇒ ε db = εfde
εfde 0 Le
εdb
Figure 2.3. Calculation diagram for reinforcement of shear strength.
(2.2) follows directly from the Mörsch’s trellis approach and may be applied to reinforcement with FRCM
materials, once calculation dilation εfdv and effective transfer length Le have been defined.
Calculated dilation of reinforcement of shear strength is equal to the average dilation of the fibers that
cross an ideal crack due to shear stress, under the conditions of delamination of the reinforcement.
In the case of FRCM reinforcements arranged in a U shape around the core of the beam (figure 2.3), we
must take into account the fact that not all the fibers crossing a generic cut caused by shear stress are
anchored by more than Le. And so, upon delamination of the reinforcement, not all the fibers can reach the
dilatation of delamination of the extremity εfde. In this case dilation εfdv is determined by dilation of
delamination of the reinforcement fibers, as shown in figure 2.3. This is the same as introducing an
“efficiency” coefficient φ defined as:
1 Le
φ = 1− ⋅ ⋅ sin β (2.3)
3 hw
and determining calculated dilation of the reinforcement of shear strength as:

ε fdv = φ ⋅ ε fde (2.4)
In the case of pillars reinforced with FRCM (figure 2.2), the fibers wrap around the entire section, and we
may suppose that they are all anchored by more than Le. And so it seems reasonable to assume:
ε fdv = ε fde (2.5)
In the frequent case of U-shaped reinforcement with FRCM arranged continuously with the fibers at right
angles to the element’s axis, (2.2) and (2.3) become:
0 .9 ⋅ d
VRdf = ⋅ 2t f ⋅ E f ⋅ ε fdv = (2.6)
γ Rdv
1 Le
φ = 1− ⋅ (2.7)
3 hw
2.2.1.1 Examples
Example 1. Shear reinforcement of a pillar (Resistance Hierarchy).
Let us consider a pillar with a section measuring 300 x 400 mm2, a height of lp = 3 m, consisting of concrete
with fck = 20 MPa and the reinforcements shown in figure 2.4, made of Feb44k steel.
7
NSd = 300 kN
εc = εcu fcd
d3 Rs3(x)
εs3 σ
As3 x Rcc(x)
d2 fcd
fck = 20 MPa
MRd fcd = 11.3 MPa
H d As2 εs2
εc0 = 2‰
Rs2(x) ε
d1 ϕu(x) εcu = 3.5‰
As1 εc0 εcu
εs1
c σ fyk = 430 MPa
Rs1(x) fyd = 374 MPa
B ftd ftd = 450 MPa
fyd εyd = 1.78 ‰
As1 = 943 mm2 (3φ20) ε
B = 300 mm −εud −εyd εud = 67.5 ‰
H = 400 mm As2 = 628 mm2 (2φ20) εyd −εud
c = 30 mm As3 = 943 mm2 (3φ20)
-fyd
d1 = 370 mm
d2 = 200 mm -ftd
d3 = 30 mm
Figure 2.4. Pillar: section and materials.
If we want to determine the scale of reinforcement of shear strength with XMesh GOLD/M750 so as to
satisfy the ratio of the Resistance Hierarchy:
s i
MRd + MRd
VRd ≥ VEd = γ Rd
lp
where:
VRd is the calculated shear strength;
VEd is the shear stress used in calculation, in accordance with the Resistances Hierarchy;
s
MRd is the moment of resistance of the top section;
i
MRd is the moment of resistance of the bottom section;
γRd is the over-resistance coefficient, assumed to be equal to 1.1 (CD B).
Combined compressive and bending stress calculation at the end sections of the pillar gives us the
resistance domain (MRd, NRd) shown in figure 2.5.
H
N Sd MRd (kNm)
γRd ⋅ M sRd 200
s
MRd
VE d
B 100
N Sd N Rd (kN)
H lp
-1000 -500 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Reinfor. Reinfor. -100

i
VE d M Rd
i
-200
γRd ⋅ M Rd
N Sd
Figure 2.5. Reinforcement configuration.
Considering a normal acting force of NSd = 300 kN, under breakage conditions (figures 2.4 and 2.5), we
obtain:
x = 156.4 mm distance of the neutral axis from the compressed edge
ε c = 3 .5 ‰ maximum concrete deformation
ε s1 = 4.77 ‰ deformation of reinforcement on three levels
ε s2 = 0.97 ‰
8
ε s3 = 2.83 ‰
MRd = 178.7 kNm calculated moment of resistance
And so the acting shear stress in accordance with the Resistance Hierarchy will be:
s i
MRd + MRd
178 .7 + 178 .7
VEd = γ Rd = 1 .1 = 131 .05 kN
lp 3
If we neglect the concrete’s contribution and consider θ = 45° (inclination of compressed connecting rods),
the calculated shear strength will be:
A sw 1.005 ⋅ 10 −4
VRd0 = VRds = 0.9 ⋅ d ⋅ ⋅ f yd = 0.9 ⋅ 0.37 ⋅ ⋅ 3.74 ⋅ 105 = 62.58 kN
is 0 .2
Considering that the pillar is wrapped in two layers of XMesh GOLD reinforcement (figure 2.5), the
contribution the reinforcement gives to shear strength is:
0 .9 ⋅ d 0.9 ⋅ 370 270000 5.3
VRdf = ⋅ 2t f ⋅ E f ⋅ ε fdv = ⋅ 2 ⋅ 0.09 ⋅ ⋅ = 71.48 kN
γ Rdv 1. 2 1000 1000
as
t f = 2 ⋅ t1f = 0.09 mm
where t1f = 0.045 mm is the nominal thickness of the individual layer of reinforcement, and having assumed,
in accordance with (1.7) and (1.8):
2 k (n)Gfd 2 0.8 ⋅ 0.156 G fd =

Gf
=
211 J
= 156 2
ε fde = = = 5.3 ‰
γ Rd E f t1f 1.2 270000 ⋅ 0.045 γ g 1.35 m
where k(2) = 0.8, γRd = 1.2, Gf = 211 J/m2, γg = 1.35.

Shear strength with reinforcement is therefore:
VRd = VRds + VRdf = 62.58 + 71.48 = 134.07 kN > VEd = 131.05 kN
Note that the estimates above were made in a simplified, precautionary manner, without taking into account
the effect of reinforcement confining, discussed in the next section.
2.3 Confining pillars

Confinement of a pillar with FRCM composite material is achieved by winding the composite material
around the drum of the pillar (figure 2.6). The effects of this reinforcement configuration are:
- increase in shear strength (as discussed in the previous point);
- increase of deformation capability of the compressed concrete;
- increase in the concrete’s compression strength.
Reinforc.
Reinforc.
Figure 2.6. Confinement of the ends of a

pillar.
9
2.3.1 Local effect: confinement of concrete

Confining with composite material produces an obstacle to the transverse dilatation of concrete
associated with normal compression force and therefore an increase in the concrete’s resistance and
ultimate deformation under compression. Having determined these increases, we may make structural
assessments considering the binding link of the confined concrete.
According to the approach set forth in the guidelines [1], the confined concrete’s calculated compression
strength fccd and ultimate deformation under compression εccu are:
⎡ 2⎤
⎢ ⎛f ⎞3 ⎥
fccd = fcd ⋅ ⎢1 + 2.6 ⋅ ⎜ Leff ⎟ ⎥ (2.8)
⎢ ⎜ fcd ⎟ ⎥
⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥
⎣ ⎦
fLeff
ε ccu = 0.0035 + 0.015 ⋅ (2.9)
fcd
where:
fcd is the calculated compression strength of the unconfined concrete;
fLeff is the effective confining pressure produced by the reinforcement.
Effective confining pressure fLeff is the product of an efficiency coefficient keff which depends on geometry
to determine encircling pressure fL:
fLeff = k eff ⋅ fL (2.10)
Confining pressure fL (figure 7) may be calculated as:
1
fL = ρ f E f ⋅ ε fdc (2.11)
2
where εfdc is the calculated actual dilation of the confining reinforcement, while the geometric reinforcement
percentage is:
4t f b f
ρf = ⋅ for circular sections of diameter D
D if
(2.12)
2t ⋅ (B + H) b f
ρf = f ⋅ for rectangular sections with dimensions B and H
B ⋅H if
Ac Ac Ac
εfdc·Ef εfdc·Ef
fL
bf
Ac Ac Ac i1f if
kh = =1 kh = ≅ 0.35 ÷ 0.65 kh = ≅ 0.17 ÷ 0.38
A tot A tot A tot
εfdc·Ef εfdc·Ef rc bf
fL
D B B
B H
Figure 2.7. Confinement of pillars.
The efficiency coefficient depends on the shape of the section and the geometry of the reinforcement and is
calculated as follows:
10
k eff = k h ⋅ k v ⋅ k α (2.13)
where kh takes into account the shape of the section and is the ratio between the effectively circled concrete
section Ac, the total section Atot, kv takes into account the distribution of reinforcements along the axis of the
pillar and kα takes into account the inclination α of the fibers (figure 2.7):
2
kh =
Ac ⎛ i ⎞ 1
k v = ⎜1 − 1f ⎟ kα = (2.14)
A tot ⎝ 2 ⋅ d min ⎠ 1 + tan 2 α
as dmin is the minimum crosswise dimension of the element (diameter D in circular sections), and i1f the
extension of the unreinforced area between two consecutive strips, measured along the axis of the element.
In the case of pillars with a rectangular section with corners rounded off and a rounding radius of rc, the first
of (2.7) becomes:
(B − 2rc )2 + (H − 2rc )2
kh = 1− (2.15)
3 ⋅ Ag
where Ag is the area of the cross section (not including rounded off corners).
The guidelines [1] suggest, in the case of assessment of resistance to simple compression of the
confined pillar, that we assume:
ε fdc = 4 ‰ (2.16)
and, for calculating resistance to flex fatigue and ductility, that we assume:
ε fdc = 0.6 ⋅ ε fk (2.17)
where εfk is the reinforcement’s characteristic breakage dilatation.
In the case of FRCM XMesh GOLD/M750 reinforcement, taking into account crisis caused by
delamination, in the second case it is reasonable to assume:
ε fdc = ε fde (2.18)
2.3.1.1 Examples
Example 1. Confining a rectangular pillar: confined concrete.
If we consider a pillar with a rectangular section measuring 30 x 40 cm2 consisting of concrete with a
characteristic resistance to cylindrical compression of fck = 20 MPa, and suppose that we adopt a corner
curve radius of rc = 30 mm (figure 2.8) and encircle the section with two continuous layers of XMesh GOLD
reinforcement, laying the fibers horizontally (the mesh’s strong direction) and vertically, the unconfined
concrete’s calculated compression strength, according to [2], will be:
αc 0.85
fcd = ⋅ fck = ⋅ 20 = 11.3 MPa
γc 1 .5
The geometric reinforcement percentage is:
ρf =
( ) (
2t f ⋅ B + H b f 2 ⋅ 0.09 ⋅ 300 + 400
⋅ =
)
= 1.05 ‰
B ⋅H if 300 ⋅ 400
where tf = 0.09 mm (double layer) and bf/if = 1 (continuous wrapping along the axis).
The efficiency coefficients are:
kh = 1−
(B − 2rc )2 + (H − 2rc )2 = 1 − (300 − 60)2 + (400 − 60)2 = 0.516
3 ⋅ Ag ⎡ ⎛ π⎞ ⎤
3 ⋅ ⎢300 ⋅ 400 − ⎜⎜1 − ⎟⎟ ⋅ 30 2 ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ 4⎠ ⎥⎦
2
⎛ i1f ⎞
k v = ⎜1 − ⎟ =1
⎜ 2 ⋅ dmin ⎟
⎝ ⎠
11
1
kα = =1
1 + tan 2 α
as in this case α = 0 and i1f = 0.
Confining pressure will be:
1 1 1.05 5. 3
fL = ρ f E f ⋅ ε fdc = ⋅ ⋅ 270000 ⋅ = 0.751 MPa
2 2 1000 1000
and effective confining pressure will be:
fLeff = k eff ⋅ fL = k h ⋅ k v ⋅ k α ⋅ fL = 0.751 ⋅ 1⋅ 1⋅ 0.516 = 0.387 MPa
The calculated compression strength and ultimate deformation of the confined concrete will therefore be:
⎡ 2⎤ ⎡ 2⎤
⎢ ⎛f ⎞3 ⎥ ⎢ ⎛ 0.387 ⎞ 3 ⎥
fccd = fcd ⋅ ⎢1 + 2.6 ⋅ ⎜ Leff ⎟ ⎥ = 11.3 ⋅ ⎢1 + 2.6 ⋅ ⎜
⎜ 11.3 ⎟⎟ ⎥ = 11.3 ⋅ 1.275 = 14.4 MPa
⎢ ⎜ f ⎟ ⎥
⎝ cd ⎠ ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎥⎦ ⎣ ⎦
fLeff 0.387
ε ccu = 0.0035 + 0.015 ⋅ = 0.0035 + 0.015 ⋅ = 6.27 ‰
fcd 11.3
As we can see, confining has a much greater impact on ultimate deformation (a 79.2% increase) than on
strength (a 27.4% increase).
Appendix D to the guideline [1] also suggests that when modelling the mechanical behaviour of confined
elements we should adopt a constitutive relation consisting of an initial parabolic section, up to 2‰
deformation, and a second section at a constant slope up to a deformation of εccu (figure 2.9).
B
B
σ
H H
Confined
fccd
rc
Unconfined
fcd
π/4
σ
fcd
fck = 20 MPa B = 300 mm
fcd = 11.3 MPa H = 400 mm
εc0 = 2‰ rc = 30 mm
ε εcu = 3.5‰ ε (‰)
εc0 εcu εc0 = 2‰ εc u = 3.5‰ εcc u
Figure 2.8. Reinforcement configuration. Figure 2.9. Link constituting confined and
unconfined concrete.
In the case under consideration, if we apply the procedure illustrated, we obtain the constitutive relations
shown in figure 2.10, pertaining to adoption of a number of layers of reinforcement, corresponding to the
ultimate strengths and deformations shown in table 2.1.
Compression strength, fccd Ultimate deformation εccu

(MPa)
fccd/fcd εccu/εcu
(‰)
Unreinforced 11.3 -- 3.50 --
1 layer 13.3 1.17 5.46 1.56
2 layers 14.4 1.27 6.27 1.79
3 layers 15.4 1.36 6.90 1.97
4 layers 16.3 1.43 7.42 2.12
Table 2.1. Effect of confining on the concrete’s behaviour under compression. fcd: calculated compression
strength without reinforcement; εcu: ultimate deformation without reinforcement.
12
σ ( MPa) 4 layers
15 3
2
1 layer H rc Confined
10
B
H Unconfined
B = 300 mm
5 B H = 400 mm
rc = 30 mm
ε (‰)
0
0 2 4 6 8
Figure 2.10. Constitutive relation in concrete with different degrees of confining.
2.3.2 Sectional effect: moment and bending

The constitutive relations in figure 2.10 may be used in a conservation model of flat sections (figure 2.11)
for determination of calculated moment of resistance and ultimate bending of the section.
εc σc σ
d2 Rsc(x)
x εsc fccd
As2 Rcc(x) σcc(ε)
fcd
MRd d1
H d ε
ϕuR(x)
εc0 εcu εccu
As1
εst
c σ
Rst(x)
B ftd
fyd σs(ε)
ε
−εud −εyd
εyd −εud
-fyd
-ftd
Figure 2.11. Diagram for determination of ultimate moment and ultimate bending.
The ultimate bending of the confined section is:

ε ud in the case of breakage due to reaching the steel’s
ϕuR (x ) = d− x ultimate deformation point
(2.19)
ε ccu in the case of breakage due to ultimate deformation of
ϕuR (x ) = x confined concrete
where the distance x of the neutral axis of the compressed edge is the solution to the equilibrium equation:
R cc (x ) + R sc (x ) − R st ( x ) = NSd (2.20)
as Rcc (x ) R sc (x ) , R st (x ) and NSd are, respectively, the result of compression tensions in the concrete, the
results of compression and the results of tensile stress in the steel and the normal calculated acting force.
These results may be calculated as follows:
R sc (x ) = A s2 ⋅ σ s (ϕuR ( x ) ⋅ (x − c )) R st (x ) = A s1 ⋅ σ s (ϕuR (x ) ⋅ (d − x ))
x
(2.21)
R cc (x ) = B ⋅ ∫ σ cc (ϕuR ( x ) ⋅ z ) dz
0
where σcc(ε) and σs(ε) are the constitutive relations of confined concrete and steel (figure 11).
The calculated moment of resistance of the confined section is given by the equilibrium equation:
13
x
MRd = B ⋅ ∫ σ cc (ϕuR (x ) ⋅ z ) ⋅ ⎛⎜ − x + z ⎞⎟ dz + A s2 ⋅ σ s (ϕuR ( x ) ⋅ ( x − c )) ⋅ ⎛⎜ − c ⎞⎟ +
H H
0 ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
(2.22)
+ A s1 ⋅ σ s (ϕuR (x ) ⋅ (d − x )) ⋅ ⎛⎜ d − ⎞⎟
H
⎝ 2⎠
2.3.2.1 Examples
Example 1. Confining a rectangular pillar: ultimate bending and ultimate moment.
If we once again consider the pillar taken in the previous example, if it is confined with two layers of XMesh
GOLD we have the constitutive relation in the confined concrete shown in figure 2.10. Considering NSd = 350
kN and the reinforcements shown in figure 2.12, the solution to the equilibrium equation (2.20) gives us:
x = 101 .5 mm
which corresponds to the crisis due to reaching the encircled concrete’s ultimate deformation point, and
therefore ultimate curve:
εccu 6.28 1
ϕuR (x ) = = = 0.062
x
1000 ⋅ 0.1014 m
Upon breakage the materials’ deformation points are as follows:
ε c max = ε cccu = ϕuR ( x ) ⋅ x = 0.062 ⋅ 0.1014 = 6.28 ‰
ε s1 = ϕuR (x ) ⋅ (d − x ) = 0.062 ⋅ (0.37 − 0.1014 ) = 16.63 ‰
ε s2 = ϕuR (x ) ⋅ (x − c ) = 0.062 ⋅ (0.1014 − 0.03 ) = 4.22 ‰
The results of tensile stress and compression are:

x 0.1015
R cc (x ) = B ⋅ ∫ σ cc (ϕuR ( x ) ⋅ z ) dz = 0.3 ⋅ ∫ σcc (0.062 ⋅ z ) dz = 355.6 kN
0 0
R sc ( x ) = A s2 ⋅ σ s (ϕuR (x ) ⋅ (x − c )) = 402 ⋅ σ s ⎛⎜
4.22 ⎞
⎟ = 151.6 kN
⎝ 1000 ⎠
R st (x ) = A s1 ⋅ σ s (ϕuR (x ) ⋅ (d − x )) = 402 ⋅ σ s ⎛⎜
16.63 ⎞
⎟ = 157.2 kN
⎝ 1000 ⎠
Lastly, by applying (2.22), we may obtain calculated moment of resistance:
MRd = 107 .9 kNm
If we repeat the calculation for unconfined concrete (figure 2.12), that is, repeating the formulas above with
the constitutive relation of unconfined concrete in place of that of confined concrete, we have:
εcu 3.5 1
x = 127 .8 mm ϕu ( x ) = = = 0.027
x
1000 ⋅ 0.1278 m
ε c max = ϕu ( x ) ⋅ x = 0.027 ⋅ 0.1278 = 3.5 ‰
ε s1 = ϕu (x ) ⋅ (d − x ) = 0.027 ⋅ (0.37 − 0.1278 ) = 6.63 ‰
ε s2 = ϕuR (x ) ⋅ ( x − c ) = 0.027 ⋅ (0.1278 − 0.03 ) = 2.68 ‰
MRd = 103.2 kNm
Comparison of the breakage point of the confined section and the unconfined section is shown in figure 2.12.
As we may see, in terms of sections too, the effect of confining is much greater when it comes to ultimate
deformation (a 126% increase) than resistance (a 4.5% increase).
Table 2.2 shows the moments and ultimate bendings determined for the section under consideration as
described above, for different layers of reinforcement.
14
MRd ϕuR
MRd/MRd0 ϕuR/ϕuR0
(kNm) (1/m)
Unreinforced 103.3 -- 0.027 --
1 layer 106.4 1.03 0.051 1.85
2 layers 107.9 1.05 0.062 2.26
3 layers 109.1 1.06 0.071 2.60
4 layers 110.0 1.07 0.080 2.91
Table 2.2. Calculated moment of resistance and ultimate bending. MRd0:
calculated moment of resistance without reinforcement (corresponding
toNSd); ϕuR0: ultimate bending without reinforcement.
εc = εcu σc = fcd fck = 20 MPa

d2 Rsc(x) fcd = 11.3 MPa
εsc
x
Rcc(x) εc0 = 2‰
As2 εcu = 3.5‰
MRd d1 ϕu(x) fccd = 14.4 MPa
H d
εcu = 6.27‰
As1
εst
c
Rst(x)
B
εc = εccu σc = fccd
d2 Rsc(x) fyk = 430 MPa
x εsc fyd = 374 MPa
As2 Rcc(x)
ftd = 450 MPa
εyd = 1.78 ‰
MRd d1 εud = 67.5 ‰
H d
ϕuR(x)
As1
εst
c
Rst(x)
B σ σ
fccd ftd
fyd σs(ε)
2 σcc(ε) ε
B = 300 mm As1 = 402 mm (2φ16) fcd −εud −εyd
H = 400 mm As2 = 402 mm2 (2φ16) εyd −εud
c = 30 mm d1 = 370 mm
d2 = 30 mm ε -fyd
εc0 εcu εccu -ftd
Figure 2.12. Comparison of confined section and unconfined section at the breakage point.
If we repeat the calculation for different values of normal acting force, we obtain the resistance domains
(MRd, NRd) for the reinforced section shown in figure 2.13.
M (kNm)
200
Unconfined
Confined
N Sd
100
1 4 stra ti
N (kN)
0
-100
-200
-500 0 500 1000 1500 2000
Figure 2.13. Resistance domains upon variation of the degree of confining.
15
2.3.3 Effect on the element: capacity for rotation with respect to the chord
The increase in the section’s capacity for deformation produces an increase in the structure’s overall
capacity for deformation. This increased capacity may be calculated on the basis of capacity for rotation with
respect to a chord, defined as the ratio between transverse shift of a section with a moment of null and the
shear span Lv (figure 2.14).
According to [1], rotation capacity with respect to the chord of the confined pillar may be calculated as
follows:
⎡ ⎛ L pl ⎞ ⎤
⋅ ⎢θ y + (ϕu − ϕ y ) ⋅ ⎜⎜1 −
1
θu = ⎟⎟ ⋅ L pl ⎥ (2.23)
γ el ⎣ ⎝ 2LV ⎠ ⎦
where:
γel is a factor equal to 1.5 for the main structural elements and 1.0 for the secondary ones;
θy is rotation with respect to the chord upon yielding of tense longitudinal bars;
ϕu the section’s ultimate bending;
ϕy the section’s curve when the steel bars yield;
Lpl the length of the plastic hinge;
Lv the shear span.
δ y1 δ t1
θ y1 = θu1 =
L v1 L v1 z
End 1 End 1 MRd1
Lpl2
Lv1, Lv2: Shear spans.

Lv2
δ y1
δ y1
δ t1
δ θ pl2
δy 1, δy 2:
θ y1, θ y2 :
Shifts upon yielding.
Rotation with respect to the cord upon yielding.
M= 0 Lpl1, Lpl2: Length of the plastic hinges.
δy 2 δt2 θ pl1 , θpl2 : Rotation of the plastic hinges.
δt 1, δt 2: Shifts upon breakage.
δy 2
θpl1 θ u1 , θ u2 : Rotation capacit y with respect to the cord.
Lv 1
M(z)
Lpl1
MRd2
End 2 End 2
δ y2 δt 2
θ y2 = θu 2 =
L v2 Lv 2
Figure 2.14. Rotation with respect to the chord.
Also in accordance with [1], rotation with respect to the chord upon yielding of tense longitudinal bars, θy,
and the length of the plastic hinge Lp may be calculated as follows:
LV ⎛ H⎞ db fy
θy = ϕy ⋅ + 0.0013 ⋅ ⎜1 + 1.5 ⋅ ⎟ + 0.13 ⋅ ϕy (2.24)
3 ⎝ LV ⎠ fc
db fy
Lpl = 0.1⋅ L V + 0.17 ⋅ H + 0.24 ⋅ (2.25)
fc
where:
db is the average diameter of the longitudinal bars;
fy is the yield tension of the longitudinal bars;
fc is the concrete’s compression strength.
16
2.3.3.1 Examples
Example 1. Confining a rectangular pillar: capacity for rotation with respect to the chord.
Once again considering the pillar in the previous example, in the case of confinement with two layers of
XMesh GOLD we have:
db fy 0.016 ⋅ 374
L pl = 0.1⋅ L V + 0.17 ⋅ H + 0.24 ⋅ = 0.1⋅ 1.5 + 0.17 ⋅ 0.4 + 0.24 = 0.60 m
fc 14.4
LV ⎛ H ⎞ db fy
θy = ϕy ⋅ + 0.0013 ⋅ ⎜1 + 1.5 ⋅ ⎟ + 0.13 ⋅ ϕ y =
3 ⎝ LV ⎠ fc
0.016 ⋅ 374
+ 0.0013 ⋅ ⎛⎜1 + 1.5 ⋅
1.5 0.4 ⎞
= 0.0093 ⋅ ⎟ + 0.13 ⋅ 0.0093 ⋅ = 8.36 ⋅ 10 − 3 = 0.48°
3 ⎝ 1 .5 ⎠ 14.4
where bending and bending moment upon yielding of the tense steel bars are:
1 My = 97.29 kNm
ϕ y = 0.0093
m
and considering the shear span Lv to be 1.5 m.
Rotation capacity with respect to the chord will therefore be:
⎡ ⎛ L pl ⎞ ⎤
⋅ ⎢θ y + (ϕu − ϕ y ) ⋅ ⎜⎜1 −
1
θu = ⎟⎟ ⋅ L pl ⎥ =
γ el
⎣ ⎝ 2LV ⎠ ⎦
1 ⎡
⋅ 8.36 ⋅ 10 − 3 + (0.062 − 0.0093 ) ⋅ ⎛⎜1 −
0 .6 ⎞ ⎤
= ⎟ ⋅ 0.6⎥ = 0.022 = 1.28°
1.5 ⎢⎣ ⎝ 2 ⋅ 1.5 ⎠ ⎦
if we consider γel = 1.5.
The same quantities for the unconfined section are:
db fy 0.016 ⋅ 374
L pl = 0.1⋅ L V + 0.17 ⋅ H + 0.24 ⋅ = 0.1⋅ 1.5 + 0.17 ⋅ 0.4 + 0.24 = 0.64 m
fc 11.3
LV ⎛ H ⎞ db fy
θy = ϕy ⋅ + 0.0013 ⋅ ⎜1 + 1.5 ⋅ ⎟ + 0.13 ⋅ ϕ y =
3 ⎝ LV ⎠ fc
+ 0.0013 ⋅ ⎛⎜1 + 1.5 ⋅

1 .5 0 .4 ⎞
= 0.0095 ⋅ ⎟+
3 ⎝ 1 .5 ⎠
0.016 ⋅ 374
+ 0.13 ⋅ 0.0095 ⋅ = 8.77 ⋅ 10 − 3 = 0.50°
11.3
⎡ ⎛ L pl ⎞ ⎤
⋅ ⎢θ y + (ϕu − ϕ y ) ⋅ ⎜⎜1 −
1
θu = ⎟⎟ ⋅ L pl ⎥ =
γ el⎣ ⎝ 2 L V ⎠ ⎦
1 ⎡
⋅ ⎢8.77 ⋅ 10 − 3 + (0.027 − 0.0095 ) ⋅ ⎛⎜1 −
0.64 ⎞ ⎤
= ⎟ ⋅ 0.64⎥ = 0.012 = 0.67°
1 .5 ⎣ ⎝ 2 ⋅ 1 .5 ⎠ ⎦
where bending and bending moment upon yielding of the tense steel bars are:
1 My = 96.72 kNm
ϕ y = 0.0095
m
If we repeat the same calculations with 1 to 4 layers of reinforcement, we will obtain the results shown in
table 2.3 and the moment-rotation diagrams shown in figure 2.15.
17
Moment, M(k Nm)

120 3 4 layers
H Unconfined 1 2
100
B
H rc Conf ined
80
60 B
ϕy θy θR
Yield
Lpl My
-1 θu/θu0 B = 300 mm
(m) (m ) (°) (kNm) (°) 40
H = 400 mm
Unreinf. 0.64 0.0095 0.50 96.72 0.67 -- NS d = 350 kN rc = 30 mm
20
1 layer 0.62 0.0093 0.49 97.14 1.09 1.61
2 layers 0.60 0.0093 0.48 97.29 1.28 1.91 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1. 2 1.4 1.6
3 layers 0.58 0.0092 0.47 97.40 1.43 2.10
Rotation with respect to t he cord, θ (°)
4 layers 0.57 0.0092 0.47 97.47 1.56 2.30
Table 4. Rotation capacity with respect to the chord. θu0: Figure 2.15. Diagrams illustrating moment-rotation with
rotation capacity with respect to the chord without respect to the chord with different degrees of confinement
reinforcement.
18
3. MASONRY STRUCTURES
3.1 Aims of reinforcement with FRCM
Reinforcement of masonry structures in seismic zones with FRCM composite materials is particularly
effective for the following purposes:
i) Increasing tensile strength in plane and out of plane of masonry panels (vertical wall elements and
horizontal belts).
ii) Increasing shear strength in plane of masonry panels (vertical wall elements and horizontal belts).
iii) Inhibition of local collapse mechanisms.
iv) Modification of the form of local collapse mechanisms, with a consequent increase in horizontal
acceleration of their activation.
3.2 Vault reinforcement
Reinforcement of the intrados or extrados of a masonry vault subject to seismic forces with FRCM
composite materials may result, depending on the geometry of the reinforcement, in modification or
prevention of the collapse mechanism of the unreinforced vault. In the first case, the reinforced structure will
still collapse due to the mechanism, with acceleration of activation greater than that of the unreinforced
structure; in the second case, the structure will collapse because it has reached the limit on the strength of
the materials.

If reinforcement is installed in such a way that the reinforced structure will still collapse due to the
mechanism, the extent of reinforcement may be designed to ensure that the spectral acceleration of
activation of the new mechanism exceeds demand, expressed in terms of spectral acceleration, which may
be calculated on the basis of the site, the soil properties and the geometry of the structure, according to the
indications contained in point C8A.4 of [3]. The reinforcement section (number of layers) may later be
designed by assessing the stress caused by normal force and the flexing moment associated with the
acceleration of activation of the new collapse mechanism.
In the case of reinforcement installed in such a way as to impede all the collapse mechanisms, the
reinforcement section (number of layers) may be designed on the basis of the stress caused by the normal
force and bending moment associated with the seismic action taken into account in the project.
In both cases, on the basis of the indications contained in [1] the moment of resistance of a reinforced
masonry section may be assessed by considering a constitutive relation for the masonry consisting of an
initial linear elastic branch, up to a calculated compression strength of fmd, followed by a section subject to
constant tension up to the point of deformation εmu = 3.5‰ and reinforcement of a linear elastic constitutive
relation up to the substrate’s delamination dilation (or, if smaller, the reinforcement’s calculated tensile
strength). Alternatively, we may simply use a “stress-block” approach.
3.2.1.1 Examples
Example 1. Reinforcement of the extrados of a barrel vault
Let us consider the vault-pier system shown in figure 3.1. fmk = 3 MPa is the compression strength of the
masonry. The calculation is performed with reference to unitary depth. The structure is subject not only to its
own weight and the weight of the support, but to the load pd distributed on the extrados of the support and
situated in a seismic zone.
We initially calculate the acceleration of activation of the collapse mechanism in the unreinforced structure
and then determine the size of reinforcement with FRCM Ruredil XMesh C10/M25 to increase it.
19
pd
y sv
Re
Density γrin
Density γm
x
Re = 2.25 m
Ri = 2.00 m
Hi = 3.00 m
sp = 1.00 m
Hi sv = Re – Ri = 0.25 m
pd = 3 kN/m2
γm = 1800 kg/m3
γrin = 1600 kg/m3
sp 2Ri sp
Figure 3.1. Vault-pier system.
Unreinforced structure
Horizontal collapse multiplier
Acting on the basis of the hypothesis that the masonry has infinite compression strength, with reference to
figures 3.2 and 3.3, consider a collapse mechanism identified by the presence of 4 hinges. The structure
thus remains subdivided into 3 free quoins to be rotated with respect to their centres of rotation. Vertical
loads are considered to be applied to each of the 3 quoins (associated with their own weight, with support
and with the uniformly distributed load) and a system of horizontal forces proportionate to the vertical loads
through the unknown multiplier λ. The structure is in a condition of balance for as long as λ is small enough;
it is not in balance if λ is sufficiently large. We are looking for the critical multiplier λ = λc over which the
structure no longer meets the condition of balance.
pd
Seismic
action
γ4
γ3
γ2
γ1 x
Figure 3.2. Collapse mechanism.
The system may achieve balance through the Principle of Virtual Work; the system is in equilibrium for as
long as:
3 3 3 ⎛ 3 3 3 ⎞
∑ Piηi + ∑ Priηri + ∑ Pdiηdi + λ⎜⎜ ∑ Piδi + ∑ Priδri + ∑ Pdiδ di ⎟⎟ ≤ 0 (3.1)
i =1 i =1 i =1 ⎝ i =1 i =1 i =1 ⎠
that is, as long as:
20
3 3 3
∑ Piηi + ∑ Priηri + ∑ Pdi ηdi
λ ≤ − i =1 i =1 i =1
(3.2)
3 3 3
∑ Piδi + ∑ Priδri + ∑ Pdi δ di
i =1 i =1 i =1
the critical multiplier for the mechanism taken into consideration is therefore:
3 3 3
∑ Piηi + ∑ Priηri + ∑ Pdiηdi
λ c = − i =1 i =1 i =1
(3.3)
3 3 3
∑ Piδi + ∑ Priδri + ∑ Pdiδ di
i =1 i =1 i =1
where (figure 3.3):

Pi is the weight of the i-th block (i = 1, 2, 3);
Pri is the weight of the support on the i-th block (i = 1, 2, 3);
Pdi is the result of the load uniformly distributed on the i-th block (i = 1, 2, 3);
ηi is the vertical virtual shift in the application point of Pi (i = 1, 2, 3);
ηri is the vertical virtual shift in the application point of Pri (i = 1, 2, 3);
ηdi is the vertical virtual shift in the application point of Pdi (i = 1, 2, 3);
δi is the horizontal virtual shift in the application point of Pi (i = 1, 2, 3);
δri is the horizontal virtual shift in the application point of Pri (i = 1, 2, 3);
δdi is the horizontal virtual shift in the application point of Pdi (i = 1, 2, 3).
In view of the mechanism shown in figures 3.2 and 3.3 for the hinges in the sections identified by:
γ 1 = 20.2° γ 2 = 76.6° γ 3 = 139 .3° γ 4 = 180° (3.4)
the hinges are located at the coordinates:
x1 = −R i cos γ 1 = −1.88 m x 3 = −R i cos γ 3 = 1.52 m
y1 = R i sinγ1 = 0.69 m y 3 = R i sinγ 3 = 1.30 m
(3.5)
x 2 = −R e cos γ 2 = −0.52 m x 4 = −R e cos γ 4 = 2.25 m
y 2 = R e sinγ 2 = 2.19 m y 4 = R e sinγ 4 = 0 m
the weights of the three arch quoins and the coordinates of their application points are given by:
γ −γ
Pi = γ m i +1 i ⋅ R 2e − Ri2
2
( ) (3.6)
4 R 3e − R i3 γ − γi γ + γi
x gi = − ⋅ ⋅ sin i +1 ⋅ cos i +1
3 ⋅ ( γ i +1 − γ i ) R e − R i
2 2 2 2
(3.7)
4 R 3e − R i3
γ − γi γ + γi
y gi = ⋅ ⋅ sin i +1 ⋅ sin i +1
3 ⋅ (γ i +1 − γ i ) R 2e − R i2 2 2
and are equal to:
21
y
(X2, Y2 )
H orizon tal virtual shifts
ϕ2
P d1 P d2 P d3
(xr 2, yr 2) δ d2
λPd1 (x2, y 2) λP d2 λPd3 δd1
(xd1, yd 1) ( xd2 , yd2 ) (xd3, yd 3) δ d3
(xg2, yg2) λP r2 δ r2
λP r1 (xr3, yr3)
δ2 2
λP 2 λPr3 δr1 δr3
P r1 λP 1 γ4
(xr1 , yr1 )
2 δ1
1 P2
γ3 P r2 3
(x3 , y3)
P1 Pr3 ϕ1 1
(x g1, yg1 )
δ3 3
γ2 λP3
(x1, y1 )
ϕ3
(xg3, y g3)
P3
γ1 (x4, y4) x
3
V irtual vertic al shi fts
ϕ3 ηr3
ηr2
ηr1 η2 η2
η1 η ηd2 ηd3
d1 ϕ2
ϕ1
1 2
Figure 3.3. System of acting forces and virtual shifts.
kN kN kN
P1 = 9.22 P2 = 10.27 P3 = 6.66
m m m
x g1 = −1.36 m x g2 = 0.62 m x g3 = 1.95 m (3.8)
y g1 = 1.53 m y g2 = 1.62 m y g3 = 0.72 m
the weight of the support on the three arch quoins and the coordinates of their application points are given by
γ i+1 γ i+1
Pri = γ rin ⋅ R 2e ⋅ ∫ (sinγ − sin2 γ )dγ y ri =
γ rinR 3e
2 ⋅ Pri
⋅ ∫ (sinγ − sin3 γ )dγ
γi γi
γ i+1
(3.9)
γ rinR 3e
x ri = −
Pri
⋅ ∫ sinγ cos γ ⋅ (1 + sinγ )dγ
γi
and are equal to:

kN kN kN
Pr1 = 13.11 Pr 2 = 6.58 Pr 3 = 10.63
m m m
x r1 = −1.64 m xr 2 = 1.25 m xr3 = 2.02 m
(3.10)
y r1 = 1.85 m yr2 = 2.03 m yr3 = 1.58 m
the results of the load distributed on the three arch quoins and the coordinates of their application points may
be calculated as follows:
Pdi = −p dR e ⋅ (cos γ i +1 − cos γ i )
Re (3.11)
x di = − (cos γ i +1 + cos γ i )
2
y ri = R e
22
and are equal to:

kN kN kN
Pd1 = 4.76 Pd2 = 6.69 Pd3 = 1.63
m m m
x d1 = −1.32 m x d2 = 0.59 m x d3 = 1.98 m
(3.12)
y d1 = 2.25 m y d2 = 2.25 m y d3 = 2.25 m
the centre of rotation of the second block has the following coordinates (figure 3.3):
(x 4 − x 3 )[x1(y 2 − y1 ) + (y 3 − y1 )(x 2 − x1 )] − x 3 (y 4 − y 3 )(x 2 − x1 )
X2 = = 0.43 m
(y 2 − y1 )(x 4 − x 3 ) − (y 4 − y 3 )(x 2 − x1 )
(3.13)
y − y1
Y2 = y1 + 2 ⋅ ( X 2 − x1 ) = 3.24 m
x 2 − x1
If we arbitrarily determine the rotation ϕ1 of the first block, the rotation of the second and third block will be
(figure 3.3):
x 2 − x1 x 2 − x1 x 3 − x 2ass
ϕ 2 = −ϕ1 ⋅ = −1.42 ϕ1 ϕ3 = ϕ1 ⋅ ⋅ = 2.11 ϕ1 (3.14)
X2 − x 2 X2 − x 2 x 4 − x3
the shifts in the application points of forces are:

η1 = ϕ1 ⋅ (x g1 − x1 ) = 0.52 ⋅ ϕ1 δ1 = ϕ1 ⋅ (y g1 − y1 ) = 0.84 ⋅ ϕ1
η2 = ϕ2 ⋅ (x g2 − X 2 ) = −0.28 ⋅ ϕ1 δ 2 = ϕ2 ⋅ (y g2 − y 2ass ) = 1.87 ⋅ ϕ1
η3 = ϕ3 ⋅ (x g3 − x 4 ) = −0.63 ⋅ ϕ1 δ3 = ϕ3 ⋅ (y g3 − y 4 ) = 1.53 ⋅ ϕ1
ηr1 = ϕ1 ⋅ ( x rin1 − x1 ) = 0.24 ⋅ ϕ1 δr1 = ϕ1 ⋅ (y rin1 − y1 ) = 1.16 ⋅ ϕ1
ηr 2 = φ 2 ⋅ ( x rin2 − x 2ass ) = −1.18 ⋅ φ1 δr 2 = ϕ 2 ⋅ (y rin2 − y 2ass ) = 1.72 ⋅ ϕ1 (3.15)
ηr 3 = ϕ3 ⋅ (x rin3 − x 4 ) = −0.49 ⋅ ϕ1 δr 3 = ϕ3 ⋅ ( y rin3 − y 4 ) = 3.34 ⋅ ϕ1
ηd1 = ϕ1 ⋅ (x d1 − x1 ) = 0.56 ⋅ ϕ1 δ d1 = ϕ1 ⋅ (y d1 − y1 ) = 1.56 ⋅ ϕ1
ηd2 = ϕ 2 ⋅ (x d2 − x 2ass ) = −0.23 ⋅ ϕ1 δ d2 = ϕ2 ⋅ (y d2 − y 2ass ) = 1.41 ⋅ ϕ1
ηd3 = ϕ3 ⋅ (x d3 − x 4 ) = −0.58 ⋅ ϕ1 δ d3 = ϕ3 ⋅ (y d3 − y 4 ) = 4.76 ⋅ ϕ1
If we apply (3.3) we therefore have the multiplier:

λ c = 0.096 (3.16)
This multiplier is dependent on the mechanism considered, and therefore the position of the hinges. In other
words, if we change the position of the hinges (3.4) and repeat the procedure, we will get a different
multiplier from the value (3.16). The structure’s actual collapse multiplier is the smallest of all those
corresponding to the kinetically admissible collapse mechanisms. It is therefore necessary to repeat the
procedure described to obtain positions γ1, γ2, γ3, γ4 of the hinges determining the minimum collapse
multiplier. This repetition has already been performed, so that the one represented by the hinges (3.4) is the
effective collapse mechanism and the one expressed by (3.16) is the structure’s effective collapse multiplier.
Location of pressure points
To confirm this, we may determine the location of pressure centres on the sections of the structure and
check that it is always in the thickness or, in hinge sections, on the edge.
Constraining reactions in the extreme hinges (γ1 e γ4) can be determined using the system of equilibrium
equations (figure 3.4):
23
⎧R vs ⋅ (x 2 − x1 ) − Hs ⋅ (y 2 − y1 ) = P1 ⋅ (x 2 − x g1 ) + Pr1 ⋅ ( x 2 − x r1 ) +
⎪
⎪ + Pd1 ⋅ (x 2 − y d1 ) + λ c ⋅ [P1 ⋅ (y 2 − y g1 ) + Pr1 ⋅ (y 2 − y r1 ) + Pd1 ⋅ (y 2 − y d1 )]
⎪R ⋅ ( x − x ) − H ⋅ (y − y ) = P ⋅ (x − x ) + P ⋅ (x − x ) +
⎪ vd 4 2 d 2 4 2 g2 2 3 g3 2
⎪ + Pr 2 ⋅ ( xr 2 − x 2 ) + Pr 3 ⋅ ( x r 3 − x 2 ) + Pd2 ⋅ (x d2 − x 2 ) +
⎪
⎪ + Pd3 ⋅ ( x d3 − x 2 ) + λ c ⋅ [P2 ⋅ (y g2 − y 2 ) + Pr 2 ⋅ ( y r 2 − y 2 ) +
⎨ (3.17)
⎪ + Pd2 ⋅ ( y d2 − y 2 ) + P3 ⋅ (y g3 − y 2 ) + Pr 3 ⋅ (y r 3 − y 2 ) + Pd3 ⋅ ( y d3 − y 2 )]
⎪ 3
⎪R + R = (P + P + P )
⎪ vs vd ∑ i ri di
i =1
⎪
⎪ 3
⎪Hs − H d = − λ c ⋅ ∑ (Pi + Pri + Pdi )
⎩ i =1
and are equal to:

kN kN kN kN
R vs = 29.72 R vd = 39.84 Hs = 8.78 Hd = 15.45 (3.18)
m m m m
Pd1 Pd2 Pd3

(xr2, yr2)
(xd1, yd1) λcPd1 (x2, y2) (xd2, yd2) λcPd2 (xd3, yd3) λcPd3
(xg2, yg2) λcPr2
λcPr1 (xr3, yr3)
λcPr3
Pr1 λc P 1 λc P 2
(xr1, yr1)
P2
y
(x3, y3)
P1 Pr2 Pr3
(xg1, yg1)
Hs
λcP3
(xg3, yg3)
(x1, y1)
P3
Rvs x (x4, y4)
Hd
Rvd
Figure 3.4. Reactions in the extreme hinges.
Bending moment in relation to the extrados of a generic section identified by γ is:

M( γ ) = R vs ⋅ (x e ( γ ) − x1 ) − Hs ⋅ ( y e ( γ ) − y1 ) +
⎡ ⎛ x g ( γ ) ⋅ P( γ ) − x g ( γ1 ) ⋅ P( γ1 ) ⎞⎤
− ⎢(P( γ ) − P( γ1 )) ⋅ ⎜⎜ x e ( γ ) − ⎟⎟⎥ +
⎣ ⎝ P( γ ) − P( γ1 ) ⎠⎦
⎡ ⎛ x ( γ ) ⋅ Pr ( γ ) − x r ( γ1 ) ⋅ Pr ( γ1 ) ⎞⎤
− ⎢(Pr ( γ ) − Pr ( γ1 )) ⋅ ⎜ x e ( γ ) − r ⎟⎥ +
⎣ ⎝ Pr ( γ ) − Pr (γ1 ) ⎠⎦
⎡ ⎛ x d (γ ) ⋅ Pd ( γ ) − x d ( γ1 ) ⋅ Pd ( γ1 ) ⎞⎤
− ⎢(Pd (γ ) − Pd (γ1 )) ⋅ ⎜ x e ( γ ) − ⎟⎥ + (3.19)
⎣ ⎝ Pd (γ ) − Pd ( γ1 ) ⎠⎦
⎧⎡ ⎛ y g ( γ ) ⋅ P( γ ) − y g ( γ1 ) ⋅ P( γ1 ) ⎞⎤
− λ c ⋅ ⎨⎢(P( γ ) − P(γ1 )) ⋅ ⎜⎜ y e ( γ ) − ⎟⎟⎥ +
⎩⎣ ⎝ P(γ ) − P( γ1 ) ⎠⎦
⎡ ⎛ y ( γ ) ⋅ Pr (γ ) − y r (γ1 ) ⋅ Pr ( γ1 ) ⎞⎤
+ ⎢(Pr ( γ ) − Pr (γ1 )) ⋅ ⎜ y e ( γ ) − r ⎟⎥ +
⎣ ⎝ Pr (γ ) − Pr (γ1 ) ⎠⎦
+ [(Pd (γ ) − Pd (γ1 )) ⋅ ( y e (γ ) − y d )]
where yd = yd1 = yd2 = yd3. Normal force, considered positive if it is compression force, in the generic section
identified by γ is:
N(γ ) = [R vs − (P(γ ) + Pr (γ ) + Pd (γ ) − P( γ1 ) − Pr ( γ1 ) − Pd (γ1 ))] ⋅ cos ψ (γ )
(3.20)
+ [Hs + λ c ⋅ (P(γ ) + Pr (γ ) + Pd (γ ) − P(γ1 ) − Pr (γ1 ) − Pd ( γ1 ))] ⋅ sin ψ( γ )
The functions of γ that appear in (3.19) and (3.20) are (figure 3.5):
24
xe(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the abscissa of the extrados of the section identified
by γ;
ye(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the ordinate of the extrados of the section identified
by γ;
P(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the weight of the structure between the initial section
and the section identified by γ;
Pr(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the weight of the support between the initial section
and the section identified by γ;
Pd(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the result of the load distributed between the initial
section and the section identified by γ;
xg(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the abscissa of the point of application of P(γ);
yg(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the ordinate of the point of application of P(γ);
xr(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the abscissa of the point of application of Pr(γ);
yr(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the ordinate of the point of application of Pr(γ);
xd(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the abscissa of the point of application of d(γ);
ψ(γ) : function associating the angle γ with the inclination of the section identified by γ;
and may be expressed as:
⎧− (Ri + s p ) if γ ini ≤ γ < 0 ⎧ Ri tan γ if γ ini ≤ γ < 0

⎪ ⎪
xe (γ ) = ⎨− Re cos γ if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π ye (γ ) = ⎨ Re sin γ if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π (3.21)
⎪R + s if π < γ ≤ π − γ in ⎪− R tan γ if π < γ ≤ π − γ
⎩ i p ⎩ i
⎧( ye (γ ) + H i ) ⋅ s p if γ ini ≤ γ < 0
⎪
γ
⎪
P(γ ) = γ m ⋅ ⎨H i s p + ⋅ Re2 − Ri2
2
( ) if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π (3.22)
⎪
⎪⎩H i s p + Pv − ye (γ ) ⋅ s p if π < γ ≤ π − γ ini
⎧0 if γ ini ≤ γ < 0
⎪
Pd (γ ) = pd ⋅ ⎨ xe (γ ) + Re if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π
γ
Pr (γ ) = γ rin ⋅ R e ⋅ ∫ hr (γ ) ⋅ sinγdγ
γ ini ⎪2 R if π < γ ≤ π − γ
⎩ e
⎧
⎪ x gp if γ ini ≤ γ < 0
⎪
⎪ 1 ⎡ R 3 − Ri3 γ γ⎤
x g (γ ) = ⎨ ⋅ ⎢ Pp x gp − ⋅ (P(γ ) − Pp )⋅ e2
4
⋅ sin cos ⎥ if 0 ≤ γ ≤
⎪ P(γ ) ⎣ 3γ Re − Ri 2
2 2⎦
⎪ 1
⎪ [
⋅ Pp x gp + γ m ⋅ ye (γ ) ⋅ s p x gp ] if π < γ ≤ π
⎩ P(γ )
(3.23)
⎧ y (γ ) − H
⎪ e i
if γ ini ≤ γ <
⎪ 2
⎪ 1 ⎡ R 3 − Ri3 γ⎤
⋅ ⎢ Pp y gp + ⋅ (P(γ ) − Pp )⋅ e2
⎪
y g (γ ) = ⎨
4
⋅ sin 2 ⎥ if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π
⎪ P(γ ) ⎣ 3γ Re − Ri 2
2⎦
⎪ 1 ⎡ s ⎤
⎪ ⋅ ⎢ Pp y gp + Pv y gv − γ m ye2 (γ ) p ⎥ if π < γ ≤ π
⎪⎩ P(γ ) ⎣ 2⎦
25
⎧− Re if γ ini ≤ γ < 0
⎪
⎪γ ⋅ R γ
xr (γ ) = ⎨ rin e ⋅ ∫ hr (γ ) ⋅ xe (γ ) ⋅ sin γ if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π
⎪ Pr (γ )
0
⎪⎩0 if π < γ ≤ π − γ ini

⎧ Re
⎪2 if γ ini ≤ γ < 0 (3.24)
⎪
⎪γ ⋅ R γ ⎛ h (γ ) ⎞
yr (γ ) = ⎨ rin e ⋅ ∫ hr (γ ) ⋅ ⎜ ye (γ ) + r ⎟ ⋅ sin γ if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π
⎪ Pr (γ ) ⎝ 2 ⎠
0
⎪ y gr if π < γ ≤ π −
⎪
⎩
⎧− Re if γ ini ≤ γ < 0 ⎧0 if γ ini ≤ γ < 0

⎪ ⎪
⎪
xd (γ ) = ⎨− Re
cos γ + 1
if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π ψ (γ ) = ⎨γ if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π
(3.25)
⎪ 2 ⎪π if π < γ ≤ π −
⎩
⎪⎩0 if π < γ ≤ π − γ ini
where hr(γ) is the height of the support on the section identified by γ (figure 3.5):
⎧0 if γ ini ≤ γ < 0
⎪
hr (γ ) = ⎨ Re − ye (γ ) if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π (3.26)
⎪0 if π < γ ≤ π − γ ini
⎩
γini is the value of γ corresponding to the base section of the left pier:
⎛H ⎞
γ ini = −a tan⎜ i ⎟ = −56.31° (3.27)
⎝ Ri ⎠
Pd(γ)
pd
hrin(γ)
(xd(γ), yd(γ))
Pr(γ)
y
(xr(γ), yr(γ))
γ x
γini
(x(γ), y(γ))
P(γ)
Figure 3.5. Functions of γ.
Pp and xgp represent the weight of each pier and the abscissa of the centre of gravity of the left pier,
respectively:
26
kN ⎛ sp ⎞
Pp = γ m spHi = 52.96 x gp = −⎜⎜ R i + ⎟ = −2 . 5 m
2 ⎟⎠
(3.28)
m ⎝
Pv and ygv represent the weight of the vault and the ordinate of its centre of gravity:
Pv = γ m
2
(
π 2
)
R e − Ri2 = 29.46
kN
m
y gv =
4 R 3e − Ri3
⋅
3π R 2e − Ri2
= 1.35 m (3.29)
Ptr and ygr represent the total weight of the support and the ordinate of the centre of gravity of its volume:
γ R 2 ⋅ (4 − π ) kN γ R3
y gr = rin e = 1.75 m
Ptr = rin e = 34.09 (3.30)
2 m 3Ptr
The distance from the centre of pressure of the extrados in the section γ is:
M(γ )
u(γ ) = (3.31)
N(γ )
while the location of pressure centres on the structure’s plane is given by the parametric equations:
x p (γ ) = x e ( γ ) − u(γ ) cos(ψ( γ )) y e (γ ) + u( γ ) ⋅ sin(ψ(γ )) (3.32)
The location of the pressure centres expressed by (3.32) is traced in figure 3.6.
y (m)
1.0
x (m)
-1.0 γ 1.0
λcPi
-1.0
Pi
u(γ)
γ1 = 20.2°
(xp(γ), yp(γ))
γ2 = 76.6°
γ3 = 139.3°
λc = 0.096 γ4 = 180.00°
Figure 3.6. Location of pressure centres.
Acceleration of activation of the mechanism

On the basis of the set-up in point C8A.4 of [3], the mass participating in the collapse mechanism shown in
figure 3.3 is the product of:
2
⎛ 3 3 3 ⎞
⎜ ∑ Pi ⋅ δi + ∑ Pri ⋅ δri + ∑ Pdi ⋅ δ di ⎟
⎜ ⎟
M * = ⎝ i =1 i =1 i =1 ⎠ = 55.59 kN (3.33)
⎛ 3 3 3 ⎞ g m
g⎜ ∑ Pi ⋅ δi2 + ∑ Pri ⋅ δri2 + ∑ Pdi ⋅ δ 2di ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ i =1 i =1 i =1 ⎠
where the weights Pi, Pri and Pdi (i = 1, 2, 3) and the corresponding horizontal shifts are given by (3.8) –
(3.15).
The fraction of mass participating is therefore:
gM*
e* = = 0.8 (3.34)
Ptot
where Ptot is the total weight of the masses involved in the mechanism:
27
3 3 3
Ptot = ∑ Pi + ∑ Pri + ∑ Pdi = 69.56
kN
(3.35)
i =1 i =1 i =1
m
Lastly, spectral acceleration of activation of the mechanism shown in figure 3.3 is:
λc g
a0* = = 0.09 g (3.36)
*
e ⋅ FC
where the confidence factor FC is assumed to be 1.35.
Reinforced structure
We intend to reinforce the structure so as to change its collapse mechanism and increase the corresponding
horizontal multiplier. Note that the collapse mechanism in the unreinforced structure (figure 3.3) does not
involve the piers, which are capable of supplying the vault with the necessary horizontal reaction (thrust)
without overturning.
Let us consider the reinforcement device shown in figure 3.7, in which Ruredil XMesh/M25 composite
material is applied all over the extrados of the vault. This ensures that there cannot be intrados hinges in the
sections of the vault, but only in those of the piers, which will therefore be involve din the new collapse
mechanism. The collapse multiplier of the reinforced structure may therefore still be determined using (3.3)
in which the quantities (weights and shifts) are consistent with a new collapse mechanism in which the
intrados hinges may only be located in the section of the piers, while the extrados hinges, which are not
impeded by the reinforcement, may be placed in any position.
pd
Reinforcement
with FRCM
Specific weight γrin
y XMesh C10/M25
s
Re
Specific weight γm
x
Re = 2.25 m
Ri = 2.00 m
Hi = 3.00 m
sp = 1.00 m
Hi s = Re – Ri = 0.25 m
2
pd = 3 kN/m
γm = 1800 kg/m3
3
γrin = 1600 kg/m
sp 2Ri sp
Figure 3.7. Location of FRCM reinforcement.
Horizontal collapse mechanism

Let us then consider the collapse mechanism shown in figures 3.8 and 3.9, with the hinges in the sections:
γ 1 = 0° γ 2 = 56.67° γ 3 = 180 ° γ 4 = π − γ ini = 236 .31° (3.37)
28
pd
Seismic
action
γ4
γ3
γ2 x
γ1
Figure 3.8. Collapse mechanism of the structure with FRCM reinforcement.
In relation to this mechanism, the hinges are located at the coordinates (figure 3.9):
x1 = −R i = −2.00 m x 3 = R i = 2.00 m
y1 = 0 y3 = 0
(3.38)
x 2 = −R e cos γ 2 = −1.24 m x 4 = Ri + sp = 3.00 m
y 2 = R e sin γ 2 = 1.88 m y 4 = −Hi = −3.00 m
the weights and centres of gravity of the first two quoins are also determined according to (3.6), while the
weight and centre of gravity of the third block are relative to the right pier only:
kN kN kN
P1 = 9.28 P2 = 20.18 P3 = γ mHisp = 52.96
m m m
sp
x g1 = −1.80 m x g2 = 0.83 m x g3 = Ri + = 2.50 m (3.39)
2
Hi
y g1 = 0.97 m y g2 = 1.53 m y g3 = − = −1.50 m
2
the weights of the support on the first two quoins are also determined by (3.9), while the weight of the
support on the third block is null:
kN kN
Pr1 = 14.74 Pr 2 = 19.35 Pr 3 = 0
m m
x r1 = −1.86 m xr 2 = 1.43 m
(3.40)
y r1 = 1.69 m yr 2 = 1.79 m
the results of the load distributed on the first two quoins and the coordinates of their points of application are
also determined by (3.11), while the load distributed on the third block is null:
kN kN
Pd1 = 3.04 Pd2 = 10.46 Pd3 = 0
m m
x d1 = −1.74 m x d2 = 0.51 m
(3.41)
y d1 = 2.25 m y d2 = 2.25 m
the centre of rotation of the second is also determined according to (3.13):

X 2 = 0.20 m Y2 = 5.41 m (3.42)
29
(X2 , Y2)
ϕ2
Ho rizon ta l vi rtu al sh ifts

P d1 Pd2
δd2
(xd1, yd1) λPd1 (xd2, yd2) λPd2 (xr 2, yr 2)
δd1
(x2, y 2) λP r2
λP r1 δr2
2 δ r1
P r1 (xg2, yg2) δ2
(xr1, y r1)
λP 2
1
γ4 P2 2
γ3
P r2 δ1
λP 1
(xg 1, yg 1)
ϕ1
1
P1 γ2
x
γ1
(x1 , y1)
(x3, y 3)
3
(xg3, y g3)
3 δ2
λP 3
P3
ϕ3
Vertic al vi rtu al sh ifts

(x4, y4)
η1 ϕ3
ηr1 ϕ1 ϕ2 ηd2 η2 ηr2 η3
ηd1
1
Figure 3.9. System of acting forces and virtual shifts of the FRCM reinforced structure.
Having arbitrarily determined the rotation ϕ1 of the first block, the rotations of the second and third block can
also be determined with (3.14):
ϕ2 = −0.53 ϕ1 ϕ3 = 096 ϕ1 (3.43)
the shifts in the points of application of forces, once again determined according to (3.15), are therefore:
η1 = 0.20 ⋅ ϕ1 η2 = −0.34 ⋅ ϕ1 η3 = −0.48 ⋅ ϕ1
ηr1 = 0.13 ⋅ ϕ1 ηr 2 = −0.66 ⋅ ϕ1
ηd1 = 0.26 ⋅ ϕ1 ηd2 = −0.17 ⋅ ϕ1
(3.44)
δ1 = 0.97 ⋅ ϕ1 δ 2 = 2.07 ⋅ ϕ1 δ 3 = 1.44 ⋅ ϕ1
δr1 = 1.69 ⋅ ϕ1 δr 2 = 1.93 ⋅ ϕ1
δ d1 = 2.25 ⋅ ϕ1 δ d2 = 1.68 ⋅ ϕ1
If we apply (3.3) we therefore obtain the multiplier:

λ c = 0.197 (3.45)
which is about double the one for the unreinforced structure (the mechanism in figure 3.2).
Here too, the multiplier depends on the mechanism taken into consideration, and therefore the position of the
hinges. If we change the position of the hinges (3.37), always complying with the restrictions imposed by the
reinforcement, and repeating the procedure described, we will find a different multiplier from the value of
(3.45). The effective collapse multiplier of the reinforced structure may be found by minimising the collapse
30
multiplier with respect to the positions of the hinges γ1, γ2, γ3, γ4, always in compliance with the restrictions
created by the reinforcement. This operation was performed before, and so the one represented by the
hinges (3.37) is the effective collapse mechanism of the reinforced structure and the one expressed by
(3.45) is the effective collapse multiplier.
Location of pressure centres
To confirm this, we may determine the location of centres of pressure on the sections of the structure and
check that it:
i) always lies in the thickness in unreinforced sections or on the edge of hinge sections;
ii) lies in the thickness or intrados of sections with a reinforced extrados; in the latter case, tensile in the
reinforcement can guarantee equilibrium.
The constraining reactions (figure 3.10) in the end hinges (γ1 e γ4) can also be determined using the
system (3.17) and entering the quantities for the collapse mechanism in it (3.37), equal to:
kN kN kN kN
R vs = 32.13 R vd = 97.88 Hs = 3.39 Hd = 29.02 (3.46)
m m m m
Pd1 Pd2
(xd1, yd1) λPd1 (xd2, yd2) λPd2

(xr2, yr2)
(x2, y2)
λPr1 λPr2
Pr1 (xg2, yg2)

(xr1, yr1)
λP2
y
1 P2
Pr2
λP1
(xg1, yg1)
P1
Hs x
(x1, y1)
(x3, y3)
Rvs
(xg3, yg3)
λP3
P3
Hd
(x4, y4)
Rvd
Figure 3.10. Reactions in the end hinges of a structure reinforced with FRCM.
Bending moment in relation to the extrados and normal force in the generic section identified by γ are also
expressed by (3.19) and (3.20), with the parameters corresponding to the new collapse mechanism. The
resulting location of the pressure centres, once again expressed by (3.31) and (3.32), is shown in figure
3.11.
31
y (m)
1.0
x (m)
-1.0 1.0
λcPi
-1.0
u(γ)
Pi
γ1 = 0°
(xp(γ), yp(γ))
γ2 = 56.7°
γ3 = 180°
λc = 0.096
γ4 = 236.3°
Figure 3.11.

Following the set-up of point C8A.4 in [3] for the reinforced section too, the mass participating in the collapse
mechanism in figure 3.9 is calculated as follows:
2
⎛3 2 2 ⎞
⎜ ∑ Pi ⋅ δi + ∑ Pri ⋅ δri + ∑ Pdi ⋅ δ di ⎟
⎜ ⎟
M* = ⎝ i =1 i =1 i =1 ⎠ = 125.40 kN (3.47)
⎛ 3 2 2 ⎞ g m
g⎜⎜ ∑ Pi ⋅ δi2 + ∑ Pri ⋅ δri2 + ∑ Pdi ⋅ δ 2di ⎟⎟
⎝ i =1 i =1 i =1 ⎠
where weights Pi, Pri e Pdi (i = 1, 2, 3) and the corresponding horizontal shifts are the product of (3.39) -
(3.44).
The fraction of the mass participating is therefore:
gM*
e* = = 0.97 (3.48)
Ptot
where Ptot is the total weight of the masses involved in the mechanism shown in figure 3.9:
3 2 2
kN
Ptot = ∑ Pi + ∑ Pri + ∑ Pdi = 130.01 (3.49)
i =1 i =1 i =1 m
Spectral acceleration of activation of the mechanism in the figure is therefore:

λc g
a0* = = 0.151 g (3.50)
*
e ⋅ FC
where the confidence factor FC is once more assumed to be 1.35. This acceleration of activation is 67%
greater than that of the unreinforced structure. Note that, in order to increase the horizontal collapse
multiplier even more, and therefore spectral acceleration of activation of the mechanism, it would be
necessary to intervene by reinforcing the intrados of the vault or the piers as well.
At this point we may express an opinion as to the suitability of acceleration of activation of the mechanism
by comparing this acceleration with demand, which basically depends on the site on which the construction
stands, as described in point C8A.4 of [3].
Stress (moment and normal force)
The bending moment and normal force described in (3.19) and (3.20) appear in figures 3.12 and 3.13. Figure
3.12 also shows bending moment MSd(γ), calculated with respect to the centre of gravity of the sections
produced by:
32
⎧s p if γ ini ≤ γ < 0
s( γ ) ⎪
MSd ( γ ) = M(γ ) + N(γ ) with s (γ ) = ⎨sv if 0 ≤ γ ≤ π (3.51)
2
⎪s if π < γ ≤ π − γ ini
⎩ p
In each of the reinforced sections, the section of the reinforcement must be determined in relation to this
stress. For example, consider the following when checking:
i) the section in which the eccentricity of normal force is greatest (in the modulus);
ii) the section in which moment MSd(γ) is greatest (in the modulus).
If we study the location of the pressure centres (3.31) we may decide that the section in which normal force
acts with maximum eccentricity will be identified by (figure 3,12):
γ v1 = 121° (3.52)
the corresponding stress is:
kNm kN
MSd1 = MSD (γ v1 ) = 11.56 NSd1 = N( γ v1 ) = 19.81 (3.53)
m m
If we examine the moment diagram (3.51) we may determine that the section with maximum bending
moment is identified by (figure 3.12):
γ v 2 = 154° (3.54)
the corresponding stresses are:
kNm kN
MSd2 = MSD (γ v 2 ) = 15.69 NSd2 = N(γ v 2 ) = 38.32 (3.55)
m m
y (m)
γv2
ye (γ) (m) ye (γ) (m)
γv1
(kNm/m)
(kNm/m)
-60 -40 -20 60 40 20 -20 -40 -60

Moment
Moment
x (m)
γ 0
0
M(γ)
MsD(γ)
-1 -1
M(γ)
λ cP i
Ms D(γ)
-2 -2
Pi -30
-3 MSd2 -3
-20
M(γ) -10
MS d1 xe (γ) (m)
γ1 = 0°
-2.0 -1.0 1.0 2.0 γ2 = 56.7°
10 γ3 = 180°
MSd (γ) λc = 0.096
20 γ4 = 236.3°
Moment
(kNm/m)
Figure 3.12. Bending moment.
33
y (m)
γv2
ye (γ) (m) ye (γ) (m)
γv1
Normal force
N ormal force
(kN/m)
40 80 x (m) 40 80
0 0
(kN/m)
γ
-1 -1
N(γ)
N(γ)
-2 Normal force -2
(kN/m)
-3 -3
50
NSd2
γ1 = 0°
λc Pi N(γ) 25 γ2 = 56.7°
NSd1 xe(γ) (m) γ3 = 180°
Pi λc = 0.096
-2.0 -1.0 0 1.0 2.0 γ4 = 236.3°
Figure 3.13. Normal force.
Reinforcement section
Supposing we reinforce the vault extrados as shown in figure 3.7, with two layers of FRCM Ruredil XMesh
C10/M25. The reinforcement section is therefore:
mm 2
A f = 2 ⋅ t1f = 2 ⋅ 0.047 ⋅ 1000 = 94 (3.56)
m
where t1f = 0.047 mm is the nominal thickness of the individual layer of reinforcement.
Taking into account the phenomenon of delamination, we consider a calculated dilation of the
reinforcement of εfd = 3‰. We then determine the section of the vault reinforced against stresses (3.53) and
(3.55).
If we adopt the “stress-block” approach , and supposing the section to have broken when the
reinforcement’s ultimate dilation point was reached (figure 3.14), for section γv1 we will have:
αβ ⋅ fmd x s kNm
MRd1 = ⋅ (s − β x ) + E f ε fd = 16.39 (3.57)
2 2 m
where x is the distance of the neutral axis from the compressed edge:
A f E f ε fd + NSd1
x= = 85.8 mm (3.58)
αβ fmd
and as α and β are defined in figure 3.14, Ef = 240000 MPa the modulus of elasticity of the reinforcement
fibers is:
f
fmd = mk = 1.5 MPa (3.59)
γM
the calculated compression strength of the masonry, assessed taking into account a partial safety coefficient
of γM = 2.
with a maximum masonry deformation of:
x
ε m = ε fd ⋅ = 1.57 ‰ (3.60)
s−x
less than εmu = 3.5‰, we may confirm the assumption of breakage on the reinforced side.
34
εu
Quoin εm αfm d α = 0.85
βx/2 β = 0.8
βx ffd = Ef ⋅εf d
x Ef = 240000 MPa
Rc
εfd = 3‰
ffd = 720 MPa
NSd s εmu = 3.5‰
εfd/(s-x) f fd /(s-x)
MRd
Rt
εfd ffd
Deformations Tensions
Figure 3.14. Tension status of the section.
In relation to section γv2, we will have:

αβ ⋅ fmd x s kNm
MRd2 = ⋅ (s − β x ) + E f ε fd = 17.30 (3.61)
2 2 m
where the distance x of the neutral axis from the compressed edge is:
A f E f ε fd + NSd2
x= = 103.9 mm (3.62)
αβ fmd
In this case, the maximum deformation of the masonry is:

x
ε m = ε fd ⋅ = 2.13 ‰ (3.63)
s−x
which is once again less than εmu = 3.5‰.
Figure 3.15 illustrates verification of all the reinforced sections of the vault. It shows on the plane (N, M)
the dominion of resistance of the reinforced section and the location of points (NSd(γ), MSd(γ)), with γ between
0 and π.
Normal forc e (kN/m)

15
Vault stress (NSd (γ), MRd (γ))
10
(NRd, MRd )
5 Moment
γ2
(kNm/m)
0
γ1 = 0
γ3 = π
-5
-10
γv1
Unreinforced section
-15 (NRd , MRd ) γv2 i f t section
Reinforced
-20
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Figure 3.15. Domain of resistance and location of stresses on the vault.
Shear
In relation to the reinforced structure, under the mechanism condition shear of the generic section identified
by γ will be:
V (γ ) = [R vs − (P(γ ) + Pr (γ ) + Pd (γ ) − P( γ1 ) − Pr ( γ1 ) − Pd ( γ1 ))] ⋅ sin ψ(γ )
(3.64)
− [Hs + λ c ⋅ (P(γ ) + Pr (γ ) + Pd (γ ) − P( γ1 ) − Pr ( γ1 ) − Pd ( γ1 ))] ⋅ cos ψ (γ )
35
Considering the contribution of both friction and cohesion to shear strength, the shear strength of the
generic section identified may be estimated as:
1 ⎡ μ ⎤
VRd (γ ) = ⎢0.9 ⋅ s( γ ) ⋅ fvd0 + k ⋅ R c (γ )⎥ (3.65)
γ Rd ⎣ γM ⎦
where:
γRd is the partial model coefficient, assumed to be 1.2;
s(γ) is the thickness of the structure in section γ (the second of (3.51));
fvd0 is the calculated shear strength of the masonry in the absence of normal force;
μk is the characteristic value of the masonry friction coefficient;
γM is the partial safety coefficient of the masonry (γM = 2);
Rc(γ) is the result of compression of the masonry, which may be estimated as approximately:
⎧ N (γ ) if − s (γ ) ≤ u (γ ) ≤(centre of pressure in the section)

⎪
Rc (γ ) = ⎨ u (γ )
⎪ N (γ ) if u (γ ) < − s (γ ) (centre of pressure outside the section) (3.66)
⎩ s(γ )
Shear strength (3.65) must be greater than the shear stress acting in each section (3.64). Comparison of
shear stress and shear strength (3.65) obtained by assuming fvd0 = 0.06 MPa and μk = 0.4 is shown in figure
3.16.
y (m)
ye(γ) (m) y e(γ) (m)

γ
-60 -20 20 60 -60 -20 20 60
(kN/m)
x (m)
Taglio
-1 -1
-VRd(γ)
V Rd(γ)
V(γ)
-2 -2
-VRd(γ)
V Rd (γ)
V(γ)
Shearing
(kN/m)
-3 -3
γ1 = 0°
λc Pi V Rd (γ) 20
γ2 = 56.7°
10 γ3 = 180°
-1.0 1.0 2.0 xe (γ) (m) λc = 0.096
Pi γ4 = 236.3°
-2.0
10 V Sd(γ)
-V Rd (γ)
-20
Figure 3.16.
36
4. PARTITION WALLS
4.1 Aims and criteria of reinforcement with FRCM
Masonry partition walls subject to seismic action may display the typical local mechanisms of collapse
shown in the diagram in figure 4.1.
In the context of analysis of the local collapse mechanisms identified in point C8A.4 of [3], spectral
acceleration of activation of a collapse mechanism is:
α0g
a0* = (4.1)
e * ⋅ FC
where e* is the participating fraction of the mass, calculated as follows:
2
1 ⎛ n ⎞
gM* M* = ⋅ ⎜⎜ ∑ Pi ⋅ δ xi ⎟⎟
e =
* n (4.2)
Ptot g∑ Pi ⋅ δ 2xi ⎝ i =1 ⎠
i =1
where M* is the mass participating in the mechanism:
ht
t (a) (b)
Figure 4.1. Out-of-plane collapse mechanisms in wall partitions.
In (4.1)-(4.3):
α0 is the horizontal multiplier of activation of the mechanism (figure 15), to be determined by imposing the
maximum equilibrium conditions on the system;
g is the acceleration of gravity;
FC is the Confidence Factor, assumed to be 1.35 if the masonry’s compression strength is considered to
be infinite;
Ptot is the total weight of the masses involved in the mechanism;
Pi is the weight of the i-th mass involved in the mechanism, i = 1, 2,…,n;
δxi is the virtual horizontal shift in the point of application of the weight Pi, i = 1, 2,…,n.
In the case of the collapse mechanisms shown in figure 4.1, the system’s equilibrium supplies the
multipliers:
t
α0 = for the mechanism in figure 4.1 (a);
ht
t (4.3)
α0 = 4 for the mechanism in figure 4.1 (b);
ht
If the blocks making up the mechanism are not resting on the ground, verification of the Limit State for the
Safeguarding of Life is satisfied if the spectral acceleration of activation a 0* satisfies:
a0* ≥ aD
* (4.4)
where:
37
*
aD =
( ) ()
Se T1 ⋅ ψ Z ⋅ γ
(4.5)
q
with:
Se(T1): ordinate of the spectrum of elastic response in relation to the probability of exceeding the reference
period VR, corresponding to period T1, by 10%;
T1: first natural period of the entire structure;
and as:
()
ψZ =
Z
H
γ=
3N
2N + 1
(4.6)
where:
Z: is height, with respect to the foundation of the centre of gravity of the constraints between the blocks
involved in the mechanism;
H: is the structure’s height above the foundation;
N: is the number of floors in the building.
If condition (5) is not met, it is possible to intervene with FRCM and connectors to reinforce the partition wall.
4.1.1 Design of reinforcement

*
To prevent the mechanism illustrated in figure 4.1 (a) with a spectral acceleration of aD , we need a
reaction binding the upper end of the partition wall equal to:
a* ⋅ p h
R= D ⋅ t (4.7)
g 2
*
To prevent the mechanism illustrated in figure 4.1 (b) with a spectral acceleration of aD we must arrange
the composite reinforcement on the surface of the partition wall, designed in order to make sure that the mid-
section has a calculated moment of resistance of more than:
*
aD ⋅ p h2t
MSd = ⋅ (4.8)
g 8
The moment of resistance of the reinforced section may be estimated as:

MRd = 0.9 ⋅ t ⋅ E f A f ⋅ ε fd (4.9)
where t is the thickness of the partition wall, Ef the modulus of elasticity, Af the area of the section and εfd the
calculated dilatation of the reinforcement (linked with the phenomenon of delamination). Comparison of (4.8)
with (4.9) gives us the necessary reinforcement section:
MSd
Af ≥ (4.10)
0.9 ⋅ t ⋅ E f ⋅ ε fd
38
ht
t (a) Connectors (b) Reinforcement
Figure 4.2. Reinforcement with FRCM to prevent out-of-plane collapse mechanisms.
We may conduct a more detailed investigation on the basis of the guidelines [1]. The moment of
resistance of the reinforced section may be estimated taking into consideration a “stress-block” approach for
the masonry with a compression tension of 0.85 fmd extended over the section with a depth of 0.8 x, where
fmd is the masonry’s calculated compression strength and x is the distance of the neutral axis from the
compressed edge (figure 4.3).
View
1
? 0.85fmd
εm
0.8x
x Rm(x)
bf
if t
t
Rf (x)
Af Reinforcements Af
L= 1
Section
Figure 4.3. Tensions on the section.
In the absence of normal force, the calculated moment of resistance is therefore:

(
MRd = ε f ⋅ E f A f ⋅ t − 0.4 ⋅ x ) (4.11)
where x is the distance of the neutral axis from the compressed edge, calculated as follows:
ε
( )
0.8 ⋅ 0.85 ⋅ fmd ⋅ x = mu ⋅ t − x ⋅ E f A f
x
in the case of breakage when the masonry
reaches its ultimate deformation point
in the case of breakage when the (4.12)
0.8 ⋅ 0.85 ⋅ fmd ⋅ x = ε fd ⋅ E f A f reinforcement reaches its calculated
ultimate dilation
4.1.1.1 Examples
Example 1. Reinforcement of a partition wall against out-of-plane seismic action.
Let us consider the partition wall shown in figure 4.4, consisting of masonry with a calculated compression
strength of fmd = 0.5 MPa. We determine the acceleration of activation of the mechanisms in figure 4.2 and
determine the amount of reinforcement with FRCM Ruredil XmeshC10/M25 required to increase it. We
consider the response spectrum for the Limit State for the Safeguarding of Life shown in figure 4.4.
39
t = 100 mm
ht = 3.00 m
fmd = 0.5 MPa
Se(T), g
agsηFo = 0.72 g
ht 0.6
ag = 0.25g
η=1
0.4 S = ST⋅SS = 1.15
Fo = 2.5
0.2
T(s)
0
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 4.4. Partition wall subject to seismic actions at right angles to the
plane.
The system’s equilibrium in relation to the collapse mechanism illustrated in figure 4.2 (a) provides us with
the horizontal multiplier of activation:
t
α0 = = 0.033
ht
and therefore the mechanism’s spectral acceleration:

α0g 0.033g
a0* = = = 0.025 g
*
e ⋅ FC 1 ⋅ 1.35
as, for the mechanism under consideration, e* = 1, and taking into account a confidence factor of FC = 1.35,
as required by [3].
*
Demand, represented by aD , is:
*
aD =
( ) ()
S e T1 ⋅ ψ Z ⋅ γ 0.72 ⋅ 0.83 ⋅ 1.33
= g = 0.4 g
q 2
taking into consideration the maximum ordinate of the spectrum and Z = 10 m, H = 12 m and N = 4 in (7).
The strength of the connectors required to prevent this mechanism is:
*
aD ⋅ p ht 3 kN
R= ⋅ = 0.4 ⋅ 1.1 ⋅ = 0.66
g 2 2 m
Considering application of Ruredil XJoint connectors with a diameter of φc = 12 mm, with an estimated fiber
section of:
1 πφc2
A fc = ⋅ = 37.7 mm 2
3 4
and a calculated connector dilation of εfcon = 1‰, strength will be:
A fc ⋅ ε fcon ⋅ E f kN
Fconn = =9
iconn m
The system’s equilibrium in relation to the collapse mechanism illustrated in figure 4.2 (b) gives us the
horizontal activation multiplier:
t
α0 = 4 = 0.13
ht
and therefore a spectral acceleration of mechanism activation of:
40
α 0g 0.13 ⋅ g
a0* = = = 0.096 g
*
e ⋅ FC 1 ⋅ 1.35
as, for the mechanism taken into consideration, e* = 1 and we have considered FC = 1.35.
*
Demand, represented by aD , is once again:
* S e (T1 ) ⋅ ψ(Z ) ⋅ γ 0.72 ⋅ 0.83 ⋅ 1.33

aD = = g = 0.4 g
q 2
The moment of resistance required to meet this demand is:
a * ⋅ p h2t 0 .4 ⋅ g ⋅ 1 .1 3 2 kNm
MSd = D ⋅ = ⋅ = 0.495
g 8 g 8 m
Considering that Ruredil XMesh C10/M25 reinforcement has a calculated reinforcement dilation of εfd = 3‰,
the reinforcement section required is approximately:
MSd mm 2
A f min = = 7.76
0.9 ⋅ t ⋅ E f ⋅ ε fd m
If we apply vertical strips 330 mm wide with a centre-to-centre distance of 1 m (figure 4.5), the reinforcement
section will be:
330 mm 2
A f = 0.047 = 15.51
1000 m
500 mm
ht ht
t Reinforcement bf if
Figure 4.5. Reinforcement configuration of a partition wall with FRCM.
With this reinforcement configuration, supposing that breakage is on the tensile side (reaching εfd in the
fibers), the distance of the neutral axis from the compressed edge will be:
ε fd ⋅ E f A f 3 ⋅ 240000 15.51
x= = ⋅ = 32.8 mm
0.8 ⋅ 0.85 ⋅ fmd 1000 ⋅ 0.8 ⋅ 0.85 ⋅ 0.5 1000
and the maximum deformation of the masonry will be:

x
εm = ε f ⋅ = 1.47 ‰
t−x
This value confirms the assumption of breakage in the tensile area.
Finally, the section’s calculated moment of resistance will be:
3 kNm
MRd = ε fd ⋅ E f A f ⋅ (t − 0.4 ⋅ x ) = ⋅ 240 ⋅ 15.51 ⋅ (0.1 − 0.4 ⋅ 0.0328 ) = 0.97
1000 m
For better division of stresses, the diagram in figure 4.5 also considers a horizontal reinforcement 500 mm
wide.
41
References
[1] CNR DT200/2004 Instructions for the Design, Execution and Control of Static
Consolidation Work using Fiber Reinforced Composites, 2004.
[2] January 14 2008 Ministerial Decree. Technical regulations for construction.
[3] February 2 2009 memorandum no. 617. Instructions for application of the technical
standards for constructions contained in the January 14 2008 ministerial decree.
Basic bibliography
Compositi a matrice cementizia per il rinforzo di volte in muratura [F. Focacci, G. Mantegazza, Study
day on “Monumental restoration in the Egadi Islands”, Palazzo Florio, Favignana, October 12 2007
FRCM vs. FRP composite to strengthen RC beams: a comparative analysis [a. Di Tommaso, F.
Focacci, G. Mantegazza, A. Gatti, FRPRCS-8 University of Patras, Patras, Greece, July 16-18, 2007]
How durable is FRP-plated concrete under moisture? [O. Buyukozturk, FRPRCS-8 University of Patras,
Patras, Greece, Kuly 16-18, 2007]
Externally bonded FRP reinforcement for RC structures [FIB Bulletins n. 14]
FRP reinforcement in RC structures [FIB Bulletins n. 40]
Guide for the Design and Construction of Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete
Structures. [ACI 440.2R]
Istruzioni per la progettazione di interventi di consolidamento statico mediante l’utilizzo di compositi

fibrorinforzati a matrice cementizia FRCM
(Instructions for planning static consolidation projects using fiber reinforced cementitious matrix
compounds)
42

FRCM Sisma

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

FRCM Sisma

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ruredil

Technical notebook – Buildings Seismic Retrofit with FRCM Di.Te.R

Buildings seismic retrofit with FRCM – Fiber Reinforced

2. REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES

corresponding to an end delamination dilatation of:

Figure 1.1. Delamination of an extremity.

Intermediate delamination dilation may be estimated as:

where kcr is a coefficient to be calibrated by comparison with experimental evidence.

Figure 1.2. Delamination forces and dilations.

2. REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES

2.2.1 Design of the reinforcement

Reinforc ement Reinforc ement

The contribution associated with fiber reinforcement is created by:

where (figure 2.3):

β is the inclination of the reinforcement fibers in relation to the element’s axis.

Figure 2.3. Calculation diagram for reinforcement of shear strength.

and determining calculated dilation of the reinforcement of shear strength as:

Figure 2.4. Pillar: section and materials.

Reinfor. Reinfor. -100

Figure 2.5. Reinforcement configuration.

2 k (n)Gfd 2 0.8 ⋅ 0.156 G fd =

where k(2) = 0.8, γRd = 1.2, Gf = 211 J/m2, γg = 1.35.

2.3 Confining pillars

Figure 2.6. Confinement of the ends of a

2.3.1 Local effect: confinement of concrete

Figure 2.7. Confinement of pillars.

The geometric reinforcement percentage is:

Compression strength, fccd Ultimate deformation εccu

Figure 2.10. Constitutive relation in concrete with different degrees of confining.

2.3.2 Sectional effect: moment and bending

The ultimate bending of the confined section is:

The results of tensile stress and compression are:

εc = εcu σc = fcd fck = 20 MPa

Lv1, Lv2: Shear spans.

Figure 2.14. Rotation with respect to the chord.

+ 0.0013 ⋅ ⎛⎜1 + 1.5 ⋅

Moment, M(k Nm)

3.2.1 Reinforcement design

Figure 3.1. Vault-pier system.

Figure 3.2. Collapse mechanism.

where (figure 3.3):

and are equal to:

Figure 3.3. System of acting forces and virtual shifts.

and are equal to:

and are equal to:

the shifts in the application points of forces are:

If we apply (3.3) we therefore have the multiplier:

and are equal to:

Pd1 Pd2 Pd3

Figure 3.4. Reactions in the extreme hinges.

Bending moment in relation to the extrados of a generic section identified by γ is:

⎧− (Ri + s p ) if γ ini ≤ γ < 0 ⎧ Ri tan γ if γ ini ≤ γ < 0

⎪⎩0 if π < γ ≤ π − γ ini

⎧− Re if γ ini ≤ γ < 0 ⎧0 if γ ini ≤ γ < 0

Figure 3.5. Functions of γ.

Figure 3.6. Location of pressure centres.

Acceleration of activation of the mechanism

Figure 3.7. Location of FRCM reinforcement.

Horizontal collapse mechanism

Figure 3.8. Collapse mechanism of the structure with FRCM reinforcement.

the centre of rotation of the second is also determined according to (3.13):

Ho rizon ta l vi rtu al sh ifts

Vertic al vi rtu al sh ifts