Diagonal compression tests on masonry wallets coated with mortars reinforced with glass fibers

  • Arturo Bustos-GarcíaEmail author
  • Esther Moreno-Fernández
  • Robertas Zavalis
  • Juozas Valivonis
Original Article


Low shear strength of historical masonry constructions is a matter of great concern, especially when these buildings are located in areas of high seismic risk. In recent years this issue has led to many investigations on the development of innovative reinforcement techniques. The application of cement mortar, commonly used in this type of reinforcements, involves a number of material incompatibility problems that could be overcome with the use of lime-based binder mortars. The present article presents the results of an experimental study on solid mock brick wallets reinforced with thin layers of mortar mixed with glass fibers; Diagonal compression tests have been carried out to determine the behaviour of the reinforced masonries, evaluated both in terms of shear strength and deformation capacity. Test results verify that the coating of mortar mixed with fibers is practically as effective as cement mortar regarding shear strength, while they improve deformation capacity.


Cement mortar Mixed mortar Coating Glass fibers Ductility Historical masonry Diagonal compression 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    ElGawady M, Lestuzzi P, Badoux M (2004) A review of conventional seismic retrofitting techniques for URM. In: 13th international brick and block masonry conference, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Valluzzi MR, Tinazzi D, Modena C (2002) Shear behavior of masonry panels strengthened by FRP laminates. Constr Build Mater 16(7):409–416. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Foster PB, Gergely J, Young DT, McGinley WM, Corzo A (2005) FRP repair methods for FRP repair methods for unreinforced masonry buildings subject to cyclic loading. Spec Publ 230:289–306Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Triantafillou TC (1998) Strengthening of masonry structures using epoxy-bonded FRP laminates. J Compos Constr 2(2):96–104. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Taghdi M, Bruneau M, Saatcioglu M (2000) Seismic retrofitting of low-rise masonry and concrete walls using steel strips. J Struct Eng 126(9):1017–1025. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rosenboom O, Kowalsky M (2003) Investigation of alternative details for seismic design of post-tensioned clay masonry walls. In: Proceedings of the 9th NAMC, Clemson, SC, USA, pp 475–485Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Valluzzi MR, Binda L, Modena C (2005) Mechanical behaviour of historic masonry structures strengthened by bed joints structural repointing. Constr Build Mater 19(1):63–73. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chuxian S, Guiqiu L, Wenchao W (1997) The design of brick masonry structure with concrete column. In: Proceedings of the 11th IB2MaC, Shanghai, China, pp 14–16Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kahn L (1984) Shotcrete retrofit for unreinforced brick masonry. In: 8th WCEE, vol 583, p 590Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hutchison D, Yong P, McKenzie G (1984) Laboratory testing of a variety of strengthening solutions for brick masonry wall panels. In: 8th WCEE, San Francisco, USA, pp 575–582Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    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. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Witzany J, Zigler R, Kroftová K (2016) Strengthening of compressed brick masonry walls with carbon composites. Constr Build Mater 112:1066–1079. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    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. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Messali F, Metelli G, Plizzari G (2017) Experimental results on the retrofitting of hollow brick masonry walls with reinforced high performance mortar coatings. Constr Build Mater 141:619–630. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sevil T, Baran M, Bilir T, Canbay E (2011) Use of steel fiber reinforced mortar for seismic strengthening. Constr Build Mater 25(2):892–899. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Facconi L, Conforti A, Minelli F, Plizzari GA (2015) Improving shear strength of unreinforced masonry walls by nano-reinforced fibrous mortar coating. Mater Struct 48(8):2557–2574. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Arandigoyen M, Bernal JP, López MB, Alvarez JI (2005) Lime-pastes with different kneading water: pore structure and capillary porosity. Appl Surf Sci 252(5):1449–1459. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    RILEM TC 167-COM (2005) Introduction to requirements for and functions and properties of repair mortars. Prepared by Van Balen K, Papayianni I, Van Hees R, Binda L, Waldum A. Materials and Structures 38:781–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lanas J, Alvarez-Galindo JI (2003) Masonry repair lime-based mortars: factors affecting the mechanical behavior. Cem Concr Res 33(11):1867–1876. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lanas J, Bernal JP, Bello MA, Galindo JA (2004) Mechanical properties of natural hydraulic lime-based mortars. Cem Concr Res 34(12):2191–2201. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Seabra MP, Labrincha JA, Ferreira VM (2007) Rheological behaviour of hydraulic lime-based mortars. J Eur Ceram Soc 27(2–3):1735–1741. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Arizzi A, Viles H, Cultrone G (2012) Experimental testing of the durability of lime-based mortars used for rendering historic buildings. Constr Build Mater 28(1):807–818. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maravelaki-Kalaitzaki P, Bakolas A, Karatasios I, Kilikoglou V (2005) Hydraulic lime mortars for the restoration of historic masonry in crete. Cem Concr Res 35(8):1577–1586. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Silva BA, Pinto AF, Gomes A (2014) Influence of natural hydraulic lime content on the properties of aerial lime-based mortars. Constr Build Mater 72:208–218. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Arandigoyen M, Alvarez JI (2007) Pore structure and mechanical properties of cement–lime mortars. Cem Concr Res 37(5):767–775. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Silva BA, Pinto AF, Gomes A (2015) Natural hydraulic lime versus cement for blended lime mortars for restoration works. Constr Build Mater 94:346–360. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Giuriani E, Marini A (2008) Wooden roof box structure for the anti-seismic strengthening of historic buildings. Int J Archit Herit 2(3):226–246. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gattesco N, Macorini L (2014) In-plane stiffening techniques with nail plates or CFRP strips for timber floors in historical masonry buildings. Constr Build Mater 58:64–76. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    EN 1996-1-1 (2012) Eurocode 6—design of masonry structures—Part 1-1: general rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures. European standardGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    EN 1052-3 (2007) Methods of test for masonry. Part 3: determination of initial shear strength. European standardGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    EC8, Eurocode EN (1998) European Union norm on construction. Design of structures for earthquake resistanceGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    ASTM E519-2010 (2010) Standard test method for diagonal tension (shear) in masonry assemblages. American Society for Testing MaterialGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    RILEM LUMB6 (1994) Diagonal tensile strength tests of small wall specimens (1991). Rilem recommendations for the testing and use of constructions materials. RILEM, pp 488–489Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Alecci V, Fagone M, Rotunno T, De Stefano M (2013) Shear strength of brick masonry walls assembled with different types of mortar. Constr Build Mater 40:1038–1045. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Calderini C, Cattari S, Lagomarsino S (2010) The use of the diagonal compression test to identify the shear mechanical parameters of masonry. Constr Build Mater 24(5):677–685. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Corradi M, Tedeschi C, Binda L, Borri A (2008) Experimental evaluation of shear and compression strength of masonry wall before and after reinforcement: deep repointing. Constr Build Mater 22(4):463–472. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mahmood H, Ingham JM (2011) Diagonal compression testing of FRP-retrofitted unreinforced clay brick masonry wallettes. J Compos Constr 15(5):810–820. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Brignola A, Frumento S, Lagomarsino S, Podesta S (2008) Identification of shear parameters of masonry panels through the in situ diagonal compression test. Int J Archit Herit 3(1):52–73. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Borri A, Castori G, Corradi M (2015) Determination of shear strength of masonry panels through different tests. Int J Archit Herit 9(8):913–927. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    EN 1015 (2007) Methods of test for mortar for masonry—Part 11: determination of flexural and compressive strength of hardened mortar. European standardGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    EN 772-11 (2011) Methods of test for masonry units—Part 11: determination of water absorption of aggregate concrete, autoclaved aerated concrete, manufactured stone and natural stone masonry units due to capillary action and the initial rate of water absorption of clay masonry units. European standardGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    EN 772-1 (2011) Methods of test for masonry units—Part 1: determination of compressive strength. European standardGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    EN 197-1 (2011) Cement—Part 1: composition, specifications and conformity criteria for common cements. European standardGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    EN 459-1 (2016) Building lime—Part 1: definitions, specifications and conformity criteria. European standardGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    EN 1015-12 (2000) Methods of test for mortar for masonry—Part 12: determination of adhesive strength of hardened rendering and plastering mortars on substrates. European standardGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    RILEM, 50-FMC (1986) Committee fracture mechanics of concrete, determination of the fracture energy of mortar and concrete by means of three-point bend test on notched beams. Mater Struct 18:285–290Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    García-Cuadrado J, Rodríguez A, Cuesta II, Calderón V, Gutiérrez-González S (2017) Study and analysis by means of surface response to fracture behavior in lime-cement mortars fabricated with steelmaking slags. Constr Build Mater 138:204–213. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    EN 1052-1 (1999) Methods of test for masonry—Part 1: determination of compressive strength. European standardGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    EN 1052-3 (2007) Methods of test for masonry—Part 3: determination of initial shear strength. European standardGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Malyszko L (2004) In-plane shear and tensile strength tests of small brickwork specimens. In: Proceedings of structural analysis of historical constructions, pp 291–298Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Turnšek V, Čačovič F (1971) Some experimental results on the strength of brick masonry walls. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international Brick Masonry conference, pp 149–156Google Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Construction Technology, School of ConstructionUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Department of Construction and Architectural Technology, Technical School of ArchitectureUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain
  3. 3.Department of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry StructuresVilnius Gediminas Technical UniversityVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations