Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Adjudging efficacy of geonet reinforcement on the seismic performance of brick masonry structures: an experimental study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Materials and Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 15 November 2021

This article has been updated

The original online version of this article was revised: In this article the affiliation details for Sanket Nayak were incorrectly given as ‘Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Windsor, Windsor, Canada’ but should have been ‘Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, India’.

Abstract

The severity of damage in masonry structures in earthquake-prone areas draws special attention of the research community to strengthen it so that the brittle nature of failure could be mitigated. In this context, masonry wallets and building models were strengthened by the polymer material, geonet, in the present study. The advantages of using this material are they are light weight, corrosion resistant, economical, and the elongation capacity is quite high. An effort has been made to investigate the suitability of the geonet for the strengthening purpose of the masonry structure. Conventional size and half-scale sizes of clay, and fly-ash bricks were used for the construction of the wallets. Further, scale down building models were prepared by the half-scale sizes of bricks. Wallets were tested under the in-plane and out-of-plane loading, whereas scaled-down building models were subjected to the bi-directional sinusoidal motion using a shaking table. The enhancement in shear strength, flexural strength, deformability of masonry structures due to the strengthening action are reported concisely. Further, the damage state of the building model was categorized qualitatively. It may be inferred from the experimental results that the use of geonet for strengthening purposes is quite effective in enhancing the seismic performance of masonry structures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

References

  1. Dutta SC, Mukhopadhyay PS, Saha R, Nayak S (2015) 2011 Sikkim earthquake at eastern himalayas: Lessons learnt from performance of structures. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 75:121–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dutta SC, Nayak S, Acharjee G, Panda SK, Das PK (2016) Gorkha (Nepal) earthquake of April 25, 2015: Actual damage, retrofitting measures and prediction by RVS for a few typical structures. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 89:171–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. J. Macabuag, S. Bhattacharya, A. Blakeborough, Extending the collapse time of non-engineered masonry buildings under seismic loading, In 14th WCEE: Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (2008) 4–7, Beijing, China.

  4. N. Sathiparan, M. Paola, K. Meguro, Parametric study on diagonal shear and out of plane behavior of masonry wallettes retrofitted by PP-band mesh, In 14th WCEE: Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (2008) 13–17, Beijing, China.

  5. Umair SM, Numada M, Amin MN, Meguro K (2015) Fiber reinforced polymer and polypropylene composite retrofitting technique for masonry structures. Polymers 7:963–984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. S. Banerjee, S. Nayak, S. Das, Enhancing shear capacity of masonry wallet using PP-band and steel wire mesh, In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 431(7) (2018).

  7. Banerjee S, Nayak S, Das S (2020) Improving the in-plane behavior of brick masonry wallet using PP band and steel wire mesh. J Mater Civ Eng 32(6):04020132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. S. Nayak, S. Banerjee, S. Das, Augmenting out-of-plane behaviour of masonry wallet using PP-band and steel wire mesh, In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering431(7) (2018).

  9. Banerjee S, Nayak S, Das S (2019) Enhancing the flexural behaviour of masonry wallet using PP band and steel wire mesh. Constr Build Mater 194:179–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sathiparan N, Meguro K (2012) Seismic behavior of low earthquake-resistant arch-shaped roof masonry houses retrofitted by PP-band meshes. Pract Period Struct Des Constr 17(2):54–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sathiparan N, Mayorca P, Meguro K (2012) Shake table tests on one-quarter scale models of masonry houses retrofitted with PP-band mesh. Earthq Spectra 28(1):277–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sathiparan N, Sakurai K, Numada M, Meguro K (2013) Experimental investigation on the seismic performance of PP-band strengthening stone masonry houses. Bull Earthq Eng 11(6):2177–2196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sathiparan N, Sakurai K, Numada M, Meguro K (2014) Seismic evaluation of earthquake resistance and retrofitting measures for two story masonry houses. Bull Earthq Eng 12(4):1805–1826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sathiparan N, Meguro K (2015) Strengthening of adobe houses with arch roofs using tie-bars and polypropylene band mesh. Constr Build Mater 82:360–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nayak S, Dutta SC (2016) Improving seismic performance of masonry structures with openings by polypropylene bands and L-shaped reinforcing bars. J Perform Constr Facil 30(2):04015003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nayak S, Dutta SC (2016) Failure of masonry structures in earthquake: A few simple cost effective techniques as possible solutions. Eng Struct 106:53–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Saleem MU, Numada M, Amin MN, Meguro K (2016) Seismic response of PP-band and FRP retrofitted house models under shake table testing. Constr Build Mater 111:298–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Heydariha JZ, Ghaednia H, Nayak S, Das S, Bhattacharya S, Dutta SC (2019) Experimental and field performance of PP band–retrofitted masonry: evaluation of seismic behaviour. J Perform Constr Facil 33(1):04018086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Banerjee S, Nayak S, Das S (2020) Augmenting the seismic performance of masonry models using polypropylene band and steel wire mesh through shaking table testing. Structures 26:340–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Reinhorn AM, Prawel SP, Jia ZH (1985) Experimental study of ferrocement as a seismic retrofit material for masonry walls. Journal of ferrocement 15(3):247–260

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kadam SB, Singh Y, Li B (2014) Strengthening of unreinforced masonry using welded wire mesh and micro-concrete - Behaviour under in-plane action. Constr Build Mater 54:247–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yardim Y, Lalaj O (2016) Shear strengthening of unreinforced masonry wall with different fiber reinforced mortar jacketing. Constr Build Mater 102:149–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. E. Mustafaraj,Y. Yardim, Usage of ferrocement jacketing for strengthening of damaged unreinforced masonry (URM) walls, In 3rd International Balkans Conference on Challenges of Civil Engineering, Tirana, Albania (2016) 153–163.

  24. Shermi C, Dubey RN (2018) In-plane behaviour of unreinforced masonry panel strengthened with welded wire mesh and mortar. Constr Build Mater 178:195–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. A. Chourasia,S. Singhal, J. Parashar, Experimental investigation of seismic strengthening technique for confined masonry buildings, Journal of Building Engineering 25 (2019) 100834.

  26. E. Mustafaraj, Y. Yardim, Retrofitting damaged unreinforced masonry using external shear strengthening techniques, Journal of Building Engineering 26 (2019) 100913.

  27. Shermi C, Dubey RN (2017) Study on out-of-plane behaviour of unreinforced masonry strengthened with welded wire mesh and mortar. Constr Build Mater 143:104–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. S. B. Kadam, Y. Singh, B. Li, Out-of-plane behaviour of unreinforced masonry strengthened using ferrocement overlay, Materials and structures48(10) (2015) 3187–203.

  29. Padalu PK, Singh Y, Das S (2018) Experimental investigation of out-of-plane behaviour of URM wallettes strengthened using welded wire mesh. Constr Build Mater 190:1133–1153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. R. Tetley, G. Madabhushi, Vulnerability of adobe buildings under earthquake loading, In Proceedings of the International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (2007) 25–28. Greece.

  31. Ashraf M, Khan AN, Naseer A, Ali Q, Alam B (2012) Seismic behavior of unreinforced and confined brick masonry walls before and after ferrocement overlay retrofitting. International Journal of Architectural Heritage 6(6):665–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Chourasia A, Bhattacharyya SK, Bhandari NM, Bhargava P (2016) Seismic performance of different masonry buildings: Full-scale experimental study. J Perform Constr Facil 30(5):04016006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Chellappa S, Dubey RN (2018) Performance evaluation of a reinforced masonry model and an unreinforced masonry model using a shake table testing facility. J Perform Constr Facil 32(1):04017121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. S. Banerjee, S. Nayak, S. Das, Shear and flexural behaviour of unreinforced masonry wallets with steel wire mesh, Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020c) 101254.

  35. Prota A, Marcari G, Fabbrocino G, Manfredi G, Aldea C (2006) Experimental in-plane behavior of tuff masonry strengthened with cementitious matrix–grid composites. J Compos Constr 10(3):223–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Papanicolaou CG, Triantafillou TC, Karlos K, Papathanasiou M (2007) Textile-reinforced mortar (TRM) versus FRP as strengthening material of URM walls: in-plane cyclic loading. Mater Struct 40(10):1081–1097

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Faella C, Martinelli E, Nigro E, Paciello S (2010) Shear capacity of masonry walls externally strengthened by a cement-based composite material: An experimental campaign. Constr Build Mater 24(1):84–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Papanicolaou C, Triantafillou T, Lekka M (2011) Externally bonded grids as strengthening and seismic retrofitting materials of masonry panels. Constr Build Mater 25(2):504–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Parisi F, Iovinella I, Balsamo A, Augenti N, Prota A (2013) In-plane behaviour of tuff masonry strengthened with inorganic matrix–grid composites. Compos B Eng 45(1):1657–1666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Babaeidarabad S, Arboleda D, Loreto G, Nanni A (2014) Shear strengthening of un-reinforced concrete masonry walls with fabric-reinforced-cementitious-matrix. Constr Build Mater 65:243–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Gattesco N, Boem I (2015) Experimental and analytical study to evaluate the effectiveness of an in-plane reinforcement for masonry walls using GFRP meshes. Constr Build Mater 88:94–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Gattesco N, Boem I, Dudine A (2015) Diagonal compression tests on masonry walls strengthened with a GFRP mesh reinforced mortar coating. Bull Earthq Eng 13(6):1703–1726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sagar SL, Singhal V, Rai DC, Gudur P (2017) Diagonal shear and out-of-plane flexural strength of fabric-reinforced cementitious matrix–strengthened masonry wallets. J Compos Constr 21(4):04017016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Marcari G, Basili M, Vestroni F (2017) Experimental investigation of tuff masonry panels reinforced with surface bonded basalt textile-reinforced mortar. Compos B Eng 108:131–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Giaretton M, Dizhur D, Garbin E, Ingham JM, Da Porto F (2018) In-plane strengthening of clay brick and block masonry walls using textile-reinforced mortar. J Compos Constr 22(5):04018028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Shabdin M, Zargaran M, Attari NK (2018) Experimental diagonal tension (shear) test of Un-Reinforced Masonry (URM) walls strengthened with textile reinforced mortar (TRM). Constr Build Mater 164:704–715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ismail N, El-Maaddawy T, Khattak N, Najmal A (2018) In-plane shear strength improvement of hollow concrete masonry panels using a fabric-reinforced cementitious matrix. J Compos Constr 22(2):04018004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. D’Antino T, Carozzi FG, Poggi C (2019) Diagonal shear behavior of historic walls strengthened with composite reinforced mortar (CRM). Mater Struct 52(6):114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Benedetti A (2019) In Plane Behaviour of Masonry Walls Reinforced with Mortar Coatings and Fibre Meshes. International Journal of Architectural Heritage 13(7):1029–1041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Casacci S, Gentilini C, Di Tommaso A, Oliveira DV (2019) Shear strengthening of masonry wallettes resorting to structural repointing and FRCM composites. Constr Build Mater 206:19–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Del Zoppo M, Di Ludovico M, Balsamo A, Prota A (2019) Experimental in-plane shear capacity of clay brick masonry panels strengthened with FRCM and FRM composites. J Compos Constr 23(5):04019038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Türkmen ÖS, De Vries BT, Wijte SNM, Vermeltfoort AT (2020) In-plane behaviour of clay brick masonry wallettes retrofitted with single-sided fabric-reinforced cementitious matrix and deep mounted carbon fibre strips. Bull Earthq Eng 18(2):725–765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. L. Garcia-Ramonda, L. Pelá, P. Roca, G. Camata, In-plane shear behaviour by diagonal compression testing of brick masonry walls strengthened with basalt and steel textile reinforced mortars, Construction and Building Materials 240 (2020) 117905.

  54. Papanicolaou CG, Triantafillou TC, Papathanasiou M, Karlos K (2008) Textile reinforced mortar (TRM) versus FRP as strengthening material of URM walls: out-of-plane cyclic loading. Mater Struct 41(1):143–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Valluzzi MR, Modena C, De Felice G (2014) Current practice and open issues in strengthening historical buildings with composites. Mater Struct 47(12):1971–1985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Martins A, Vasconcelos G, Fangueiro R, Cunha F (2015) Experimental assessment of an innovative strengthening material for brick masonry infills. Compos B Eng 80:328–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Gattesco N, Boem I (2017) Characterization tests of GFRM coating as a strengthening technique for masonry buildings. Compos Struct 165:209–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Padalu PKVR, Singh Y, Das S (2018) Efficacy of basalt fibre reinforced cement mortar composite for out-of-plane strengthening of unreinforced masonry. Constr Build Mater 191:1172–1190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. E. Bertolesi, M. Buitrago, E. Giordano, P. A. Calderón, J. J Moragues, F. Clementi, J. M. Adam, Effectiveness of textile reinforced mortar (TRM) materials in preventing seismic-induced damage in a U-shaped masonry structure submitted to pseudo-dynamic excitations, Construction and Building Materials 248 (2020) 118532.

  60. De Santis S, Casadei P, De Canio G, de Felice G, Malena M, Mongelli M, Roselli I (2016) Seismic performance of masonry walls retrofitted with steel reinforced grout. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 45(2):229–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. M. Blondet, D. Torrealva, J. Vargas, J. Velasquez, N. Tarque, Seismic reinforcement of adobe houses using external polymer mesh, In 1st European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (2006) Geneva, Switzerland.

  62. K. Meguro, R. Soti, N. Sathiparan, M. Numada, Dynamic testing of masonary houses retrofitted by bamboo band meshes, Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Ser. A1 (Structural Engineering & Earthquake Engineering (SE/EE)) 68(4)(2012) 760–5.

  63. BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). Common burnt clay building bricks- Specification (fifth revision). IS 1077:1992 (reaffirmed, (2002) 1992. New Delhi, India

  64. BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). Burnt clay fly-ash building bricks-Specification IS 13757:1993 (reaffirmed, (2007) 1993. New Delhi, India

  65. BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). Code of practice for structural use of unreinforced masonry (third revision), IS 1905:1987 (reaffirmed, (2002) 1989. New Delhi, India

  66. BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). Earthquake resistant design and construction of buildings—Code of practice (second revision) (incorporating amendment nos. 1, 2 & 3) IS 4326 (reaffirmed 2003) edition 3.3 (2005–01). 2005a; New Delhi, India.

  67. BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). Improving earthquake resistance of low strength masonry buildings—Guidelines (incorporating amendment nos. 1, 2 & 3) IS 13828 (reaffirmed 2003) edition 1.3 (2005–02). 2005b; New Delhi, India.

  68. ASTM E519/E519M-10, Standard test method for diagonal tension (shear) in masonry assemblages, (2010) ASTM.

  69. Rilem TC. LUM B6, Diagonal tensile strength tests of small wall specimens, In RILEM Recommendations for the testing and use of constructions materials, (1994) 488–9. London.

  70. S. Banerjee, S. Nayak, S. Das, Seismic performance enhancement of masonry building models strengthened with the cost-effective materials under bi-directional excitation, Engineering Structures 242 (2021) 112516.

  71. G. Tumialan, A. Morbin, A. Nanni, C. Modena, Shear strengthening of masonry walls with FRP composites, In: Compos., Conv. Trade Show, (2001) Compos. Fabr. Assoc., Tampa, FL.

  72. Knox CL, Dizhur D, Ingham JM (2018) Experimental study on scale effects in clay brick masonry prisms and wall panels investigating compression and shear related properties. Constr Build Mater 163:706–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. ASTM E518/E518M-102010b, Standard test methods for flexural bond strength of masonry, (2010) ASTM.

  74. A. Arias, A measure of earthquake intensity, seismic design for nuclear power plants, MIT Press (1970) RJ Hansen, ed. Cambridge, MA.

  75. BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structure IS 1893 (Part 1) 2016. 2016; New Delhi, India

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research work is supported by the Ministry of Education, Government of India, through a research fellowship to the first author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, India

    Susanta Banerjee & Sanket Nayak

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Windsor, Windsor, Canada

    Sreekanta Das

Authors
  1. Susanta Banerjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sanket Nayak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sreekanta Das
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sanket Nayak.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Banerjee, S., Nayak, S. & Das, S. Adjudging efficacy of geonet reinforcement on the seismic performance of brick masonry structures: an experimental study. Mater Struct 54, 213 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-021-01805-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-021-01805-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation