Seismic retrofitting methods for unreinforced masonry buildings

- A review
Abstract
The collapse of unreinforced masonry structures, that are distributed around the earthquake
prone areas of the world, is one of the main causes of death in major earthquake disasters.
Due to improper methods and the lack of knowledge for the construction of stable earthquake
resistant masonry structures, every year casualties due to collapsing masonry houses due to
earthquakes are reported; especially that number is more high in developing countries. Hence,
there is an exigent need for devising cost effective and efficient retrofitting methods for these
vulnerable structures. Research in this area so far has results in the development of many
procedures aimed at enhancement of the performance of the unreinforced masonry structures.
Some of these techniques are expensive, disruptive to residence and cannot applied with
surrounding allowable resources. In order to promote and make aware of the retrofit of
masonry houses among the public, it is important to consider the economy of materials as
well as the construction easiness. To overcome these short come cost effective local material
are newly identified as the strengthening materials for the masonry buildings. This paper
investigates about recently developed retrofitting techniques; specifically, for preventing or
prolonging the collapse of masonry buildings under earthquakes. The findings from static and
dynamic testing of the those retrofit techniques are examined in here. It is shown that the
discussed techniques are effectively prevents brittle masonry collapse and safe the structure as
well as lives from the loss of debris.
Keywords: Unreinforced Masonry Buildings, Seismic, retrofitting, economic, mesh type,
Bamboo, FRP (Fibre-Reinforced Polymer)
1.0 Introduction
Population statics showed that more than 60% of people in the world are living in masonry
buildings that are made by piling up bricks, Sun-dried mud bricks (generally called adobe),
concrete blocks or stone. The huge portion of percentage is present in developing countries.
Most of them are non-engineering masonry constructions and generally have no
reinforcement. Majority of residential and public buildings; especially in rural areas, can
consider as masonry buildings. Masonry buildings are popular due to their low cost in
construction, construction easiness, and need of less labour skills, eco-friendly and use of
locally available materials. In the point of durability masonry buildings have a higher
probability of falling under earthquake.
Hence the existing masonry buildings usually associated to a high seismic vulnerability. when
an earthquake shakes them, they had collapsed easily. It causing injuries or even death of their
occupants. But due to economic reasons, masonry building construction is still can considered
as the best solution for poor people housing in developing countries. Due to the week
properties of the materials, geometry, foundations, connections between walls roofs- floors,
stiffness of the horizontal diaphragms or the building condition, gravity load-bearing walls,
low flexibility of the floors, high mass of the masonry walls, existing masonry buildings are
poor in seismic performance. Furthermore, non-structural elements (partition walls) and

their connection to the load-bearing walls can also be a reason for the performance of these
buildings.
Typical damage patterns of masonry buildings due to an earthquake include:
Poor connections in between the different component of the building that lead to walls
impart at corners and falling outwards of building
Out-of-plane failure of walls due to lack of cross walls
Roof collapse
Diagonal cracking in wall panels. This weakens them and leaves them vulnerable to
total collapse.
2.0 Unreinforced masonry structures
Unreinforced masonry structures buildings categorized under three different types. Those are
earthen, brick and stone masonry (cement and clay) buildings. Among those the most usual
types of earthen construction are adobe and rammed earth. Adobe bricks are made in a mould
and are commonly 8 inches or more wide and 16 to 20 inches long. Adobe buildings are
constructed in a running-bond pattern with a mortar of adobe mud between blocks (Blondet,
2003). In the rammed-earth construction method, earth is compacted into forms in a manner
same as to the placement of concrete to build unit of 4 feet high by about 6 feet long,
depending on the thickness of the wall. Joints between units are packed and compressed with
mud. Further, other two types of earthen building can be identified as mud wall buildings and
mud walls with wood elements (Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 2003). The
construction of earthen buildings called wattle and daub houses, which of mud walls with
vertical and horizontal cleaved wood trunks have been available since of ancient times
(Nandadeva, 1990). Stone has been the traditional construction material for walls, in
mountainous areas.
3.0 Behaviour of Unreinforced Masonry Structures in Earthquake
Thus the ground motion generated due to earthquake; seismic waves sways all the structures
on ground. Then according to the Newtons law, an inertia force acts on the structure which
relates with the mass (m) of the building and the accelerations (a) applied by the ground
motion. Because mass is constant when the ground acceleration increases the force acting also
increases on the structure. When the ground shakes, the building is also thrown backwards,
and due to that the roof experiences a force. This is dangerous for buildings which are created
to resist only the vertical gravity loads. Under horizontal movements of the ground, lateral
inertia forces are generated at each level of the mass of the structure (commonly at the floor
levels). These horizontal inertia forces are moved by the floor slab to the walls or columns, to
the foundations, and finally to substructure underneath. According to Saatcioglu et al. (2005),
under seismic loading, unreinforced masonry walls have two possible failure mechanisms: inplane and out-of-plane. In-plane failures are appeared by a diagonal tensile crack pattern
while out-of-plane failures are appeared by cracks that are primarily along the mortar bed
joints. In-plane failure mechanisms of unreinforced masonry wall related to earthquake
actions can considered as shear failure, sliding failure, rocking failure and toe crushing.
Partition walls, parapet walls, canopies, water tanks, projections, staircase, etc., constitute the
non-structural components in masonry buildings. These non-structural elements act like
cantilevers until they remain unrestrained. Due to cantilever characteristics they are subjected
to greater amplification as compared to ground motion. Therefore, they are prone to failure.

4.0 Strengthen of unreinforced masonry buildings

Different types of methods have been developed for the strengthening of unreinforced
masonry structure. A comprehensive review of them can be found in Lizundai et al. The
existing retrofitting techniques can be categorized in: 1) grout and epoxy injections, 2) surface
coating, 3) reinforced or post-tensioned cores, and 4) additional of structural elements. These
methods are very much useful for strengthening masonry structures. But depending on the
retrofitting work purpose, one method is more suitable than the other. The use of
strengthening materials on unreinforced masonry improves their lateral strength. However,
some referred strengthening materials are beyond the economic ability of the common people
of the developing countries.
Further, there is scarcity of technical manpower in such countries. Therefore, retrofitting
recommendations for developing countries should consider the structural demands of the
masonry buildings with regard to their strength and deformability, as well as to the availability
materials, low cost, manufacturing and delivery facilities, the practicability, and the cultural
acceptability of the retrofitting method in each region. The purpose of introducing a
retrofitting method is to prevent the sudden collapse of buildings during natural disasters to
allow people to evacuate. Further, according to Arya (2000), it can be said that, retrofitting is
referring to upgrade the disaster resistance of an existing unsafe building, or a damaged
building while repairing. Accordingly retrofitted building becomes safer for future disaster
occurrences. It may not be designed to be totally disaster-resistant. But it has to delay its
collapse and provide adequate evacuate time periods for building users in an emergency.
5. Seismic retrofitting methods
Though there are several types available it should also be considered that: 1) Economical and
locally available material and 2) the minimum requirement of labour skill before adopting any
retrofitting method. Hence some of the cost effective and easily applied retrofitting techniques
are only discussed in the following.
5.1 Mesh type retrofitting
The seismic resistance of a structure lay with the good interconnection between adjacent
walls, floors and foundations. Perfection of masonry can stop large pieces of debris to fall
outside of building. Based on those reasons many researches have develop their experiments
on mesh type retrofitting for masonry structures to delay the collapse of buildings. Mesh
retrofitting is mainly used for hold the cracked masonry parts in to single unit and prevent
instant collapsing.
It can have made with any ductile material such as: steel cage, industrial geo-grid, soft
polymer, polypropylene band and plastic carrier bag. Providing vertical strengthening bands
help to tie the wall to the foundation, adjacent wall or to the ring beam. It is help to restrains
out-of-plane bending force and in-plane shear force. These strip bands help to move the
bending and inertia forces in transverse walls to the supporting shear walls. Controlling the
shear forces in wall panels minimize the diagonal and lateral crack propagation. The both
horizontal and vertical direction bands can have tied together and to the other structural
elements (foundations, roof, etc.) by means of nylon string.

This attachment results a stable matrix, which is inherently stronger than the individual
components. Generally, mesh distributed the total stress through the cracks of element,
transferring it to the undamaged portions of the structure. So that new cracks appeared to
allowing cracking without the loss of wall integrity. The meshes enhance structural ductility,
deformability and energy dissipation capacity while holding divided/cracked parts of the
structural elements together, thus preventing collapse. Provision of energy dissipation is more
efficient method in seismic resist building design.
5.1.1 Steel Cage
The external welded wire mesh has been used by several researchers as a reinforcement
system since that could be applied both to new and existing earthen construction (San
Bartolome et al, 2008; Tetley & Madabhushi, 2007). In this method the mesh is placed as
horizontal and vertical strips and it was nailed and fixed with metal bottle caps to adobe
masonry wall. Then it is covered by thick cement sand mortar. In the test of shaking table, the
steel mesh retrofitted model suffered damage, but did not collapse. Hence it is proved that
steel cage can hold the crack propagation and dissipate the seismic energy efficiently. But the
expensive material usage of this method make it as a problematic solution for masonry
building retrofitting. Other hand usage of steel can have the danger of corrosion problem.
5.1.2 Polymer mesh
This method is known as Industrial geo-grid and soft polymer technique and in here mainly
used the geo-mesh which is commonly used in geotechnical applications. The advantage of
this material depend with the compatibility of earthen wall deformation. The ability to provide
a proper transmission path of tensile strength to the walls up to the final state also affect to the
selection of proper geo polymer mesh. The mesh is attached to adobe walls by plastic or nylon
forming a confinement and consequently preventing the total collapse. By the industrial
applications and more laboratory experiments researchers have found that it is possible for the
walls to disintegrate into large blocks during severe ground shaking, however the mesh
prevents the walls from falling apart, and collapse can be avoided (Blondet et al, 2006). In
recent years also it has tested and invented various polymer mesh retrofitting system such as
fiber-reinforced polymer, polymer, textile and polymer carbon mesh are effective
strengthening solutions for masonry structures.
5.1.3 Polypropylene (PP) band mesh
This retrofitting method is a simple and low-cost method that consists of confining all
masonry walls with a mesh of PP-bands. These bands are widely available as a packing
material. Also it is durable, an inexpensive, strong, resistant, and easy to handle.
This retrofitting technique is simple enough to be understood by any people and hence no any
especial engineering knowledge effect on this method usage. It can be applied by craftsmen
and homeowners without any prior knowledge and special expertise. This easy-to-use
concept make this method more desirable in the seismic retrofitting in developing countries.
The applicability of PP-band meshes to retrofit unreinforced masonry structures has been
tested under static (Sathiparan et al 2005), cyclic (Mayorca & Meguro, 2003) and dynamic
loading (Sathiparan et al 2012).

Sathiparan et al. (2008), tested four 1/4 scale wallets (with dimensions of 50 mm thickness,
275 mm width and 275 mm height): two wallets for diagonal shear test and two wallets for
out-of-plane test. Authors found that, using PP-band mesh reinforcement for strengthen the
unreinforced masonry wall can be increased both in-plane shear and out-of-plane resistance of
the wall. Further authors found that, residual strength after crack initiation and residual
stiffness of masonry wall with PP-band mesh retrofitting are directly proportional to PP-band
density up to some value and after the optimum value, they do not increase with the PP-band
density; and looseness of the PP-band attachment with specimen reduces the residual strength
after crack initiation of the specimen. However, an application of surface finishing makes
beneficial effect in residual strength as it fills the gap between mesh and wall.
Macabuag et al. (2008), has also carried out diagonal shear test and claimed that, the main
effect of the PP-band mesh is to restrain separated sections of masonry allowing for
redistribution of the load within the masonry itself while vertical bands apply normal
compression once sliding of rows occurs, resulted in increasing the masonrys frictional
resistance to shear sliding and horizontal bands directly bear load by resisting the separation
of bricks within the same row. The method is simple, cost effective, no requirement of special
technology and knowledge. Polypropylene is durable, inexpensive, harder, possesses excellent
resistance to organic solvents and degreasing agent as well as electrolytic attack and
worldwide available. Material has also no corrosion or insect failure effect. The investigation
into the scale model test results, it can be concluded that a structure retrofitted with PP-band
meshes would be able to resist against strong dynamic loading.
5.1.4 Plastic Carrier Bag Mesh
This is an innovative new method that using ordinary plastic carrier bags made into a mesh to
reinforce the model (Tetley & Madabhushi, 2007). Plastic bags were cut into 20mm strips,
these were then plaited together to make ropes. These plaited ropes were then knotted
together to make 50mm50mm mesh. The mesh was tied and wrapped around the wall as one
continuous rope and fixed to the base using tacks to mimic pegging to the ground. The surface
was covered by cement sand mortar layer. The plastic bag mesh made the masonry more
ductile and give more stress capacity against lateral force to wall. By this the ductile failure
mechanism in an earthquake was controlled effectively. But the lack of larger portion of
resources material and extra pre preparation process make problem on this retrofitting
method; when it uses in public.

5.2 Ferrocement
Shah (2011), has conducted an experiment on evaluating the effect of ferrocement
using twenty one masonry columns of 221 mm x 221 mm x 784 mm and they were tested
under axial compression. Author proved that, ferrocement cover of 6.125 mm and 1:2 cement
sand mortar with water cement ratio of 0.5 (w/c=0.5) and mesh spacing of 12.25 mm on
masonry columns substantially improved the load carrying capacity, ductility and
serviceability of unreinforced masonry columns. Author found that, encasement of

unreinforced masonry brick columns by ferrocement double the failure load, increased
ultimate load by 121%. When lower the wire spacing in mesh, lower the average crack
spacing. However, mortar strength has comparatively smaller influence on failure load. Clear
cover to reinforcement shall not be greater than 2 mm and one layer of reinforcement may be
satisfactory for each 6 mm thickness of ferrocement casing. Premature failure may occur if
mesh is not properly wrapped and plaster does not fully penetrate into it. Ferrocement can be
used to repair column, which have been loaded close to failure. It seems that this method is
simple, cost effective, required low technology and adding limited mass to the existing
structure
5.3 Bamboo reinforcement
Dowling et al. (2005), suggested that a significant improvement in the earthquake resistance
of adobe mud-brick structures can be obtained by using external vertical and horizontal
bamboo reinforcement, internal horizontal chicken wire mesh reinforcement and a ring beam.
They tested five 1:2 scale u-shaped adobe mud-brick walls; each had 150 mm thick, 1800
mm wide and 1200 mm high wall. One of them was a control specimen with no retrofitting
and others were retrofitted as one with only corner pilasters; one specimen with internal
horizontal chicken wire mesh, external vertical bamboo (inside and outside) and timber ring
beam; one specimen with internal vertical bamboo reinforcement, internal horizontal chicken
wire mesh and a timber ring beam; and another specimen with external vertical (inside) and
horizontal (outside) bamboo reinforcement, internal horizontal chicken wire mesh and a
timber ring beam. The specimens were subjected to transient dynamic loading using the uniaxial shaking table to evaluate the response to out-of-plane seismic forces. Test results
indicated that significant improvement in the earthquake resistance of adobe mud brick
structures can be obtained by using technique specification used in 3I specimen. Although the
specimen has showed severe damage at (100%) x 4 intensity time-scaled simulation of the
January 13, 2001 El Salvador earthquake (Mw 7.7), the collapse of wall was not imminent.
This method seems to be relatively simple and easy to undertake, and utilize low-cost and
readily-available materials, making them appropriate for application in developing countries.
It is important to consider precautions against insect failures of bamboo. The behaviour of
unreinforced masonry walls reinforced by internal vertical bamboo reinforcement should be
the focus of further investigation.
The result showed that the bamboo-band mesh retrofitting technique enhanced the seismic
capacity of the adobe masonry building significantly. The retrofitted masonry building could
withstand over twice larger input energy than what non-retrofitted specimen could do.
Bamboo is universally available material and using of this material for retrofitting purposes
not only enhances the seismic capacity of new and existing building but also promote the
local new business in the vicinity.
5.4 Old tires
Kaplan et al. (2008), has performed an experiment with axial load, lateral load and
incremental reversed cyclic imposed sway to the models to obtain hysteretic behaviour, to
identify the effect of old tire strips as reinforcement on strengthen of unreinforced masonry
buildings against earthquakes. They used six full scale masonry wall constructed by standard
masonry bricks with vertical holes; three walls are having window opening and other three are
with no openings. One from each two types was used as control specimens. Groves were

formed by removing plaster on other four walls according to the pattern of tire strips to be
placed. One of two walls with no openings was retrofitted diagonally by tire strips and other
one was retrofitted by both vertically and horizontally placed tire strips. Two walls with
openings were retrofitted by diagonally placed tire strips; and additional vertical and
horizontal tire strips for one of them and only horizontal tire strips for other, were placed
around the wall openings to prevent local crushing around the wall openings. After placing
tire strips, groves were covered by plastering or high quality mortar.
In addition to the experiment, models were also analyzed by using commercially available
software, ANSYS. The same results from numerical and experimental investigations have
been found. Tire strips have no significant effect on lateral load capacity of walls, whereas use
of the strips improves ductility and energy consumption capacity of the walls significantly
with improvement in displacement capacity about 250~300% in the case of no openings and
about 30~40% in the case of the walls with openings. Introduction of strips do also have some
minor effect on the damage pattern. Kaplan et al. (2008), identified that, the method is an
economic and easily applicable method and has an environmental aspect with important
contribution to the waste problem caused by old tires. When looking at the method, it can be
said that it is less technical requirement and less labour intensive method. Therefore, seismic
strengthening of unreinforced masonry walls by strips from old car tires is possible in
developing country as low cost method.
5.5 Fibre-Reinforced Polymer (FRP) reinforcement
Velazquez-Dimas (2000), tested four half-scale slender masonry walls, each had height
thickness ratio of 28 and 1220 mm length, using running bond pattern with a mortar joint of a
6.35 mm. Three of the tested walls were constructed with 1420 mm height and fourth wall
was constructed in with 2470 mm height and a header course placed every six courses. The
specimens were strengthened by attaching strips of a fabric constructed with E-glass, in which
glass fibres were aligned vertically to each face of walls using two component epoxy resin
and the wet layup procedure.
The specimens were subjected to cyclic out-of-plane loading. Lateral pressure was applied
through an air bag system. From experimental, authors found that the out-of-plane capacity
(ultimate pressure supported by the walls or supporting pressure) of walls was increased up to
25 times their weight and ultimate deflection was increased as much as 5% of the wall height
by using FRP technique. It was also observed that the ultimate strain on composite strips was
not dependent on the reinforcement ratio. Limitation of the reinforcement ratio up to two
times that of the balanced condition to avoid very stiff behaviour and for improved hysteretic
response was also found.
When considering the method, use of epoxy resin is costly and technical requirement is
higher. Therefore, this is suitable for buildings which have more social economic value such
as power generating center, water purification and delivering center, industrial buildings, etc.
rather than domestic household one or two story buildings. A number of other studies have
also been carried out on masonry buildings that were strengthened by using FRP
reinforcement (Ehshani et al., 1999, Ehshani and Saadatmanesh, 1996, ElGawady et al.,
2006a and Grillo, 2003)

FRP composite materials have experienced a continuous increase of use in structural

strengthening and repair applications around the world. By the experiment and practical
applications, it was found that externally bonded FRP composites can be applied to different
members such as beams, columns, slab and cantilever non-structural parts to improve their
structural performance such as load carrying capacity, stiffness, ductility.
6.0 Conclusions and Future Directions
Unreinforced masonry structure is most widely used construction in developing counties in
the world. Unfortunately, unreinforced masonry construction has critical hazard to seismic
attack. Those constructions are totally non engineered and constructed only based on the
experience of the local construction workers. Considering the situation of lack of unreinforced
masonry structural integrity, it is needed to identify the technically feasible and economically
affordable retrofitting techniques utilizing different type of materials. There are number of
laboratory tests and industrial applications have been done by different kind of retrofitting
techniques.
Comparison of these characteristics will helpful to identify the best retrofitting method for
any particular masonry structure. Selection of suitable method of retrofitting basically
depends upon the construction cost, resources availability, technical knowledge. Moreover, an
understanding of failure mode, structural behaviour with the weak and strong aspects of
design as derived from rapid visual inspection surveys also helpful for the selection of the
retrofitting method.
The experimental results indicate that the energy absorption capacity, strength and
deformability of an existing building can be increased by retrofitting the building using the
retrofitting method. It was recommended that retrofitting method is effective to reduce the
seismic response and increase the earthquake resistance of the masonry building. Especially
the above retrofitting techniques can use for new building construction as well as for the
existing low earthquake resistant structures (unreinforced masonry structures). This
strengthening drastically changes the structural seismic properties. Usage of local available
and cheap material without requiring high skills and any change of the lifestyle of the area can
be achieve by selecting the best retrofitting method.
7.0 Acknowledgement
The authors express their sincere gratitude to the support given by to the research supervisor,
Dr. Sudhira De Silva, senior lecturer of the department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, co-supervisor of the research senior lecturer Dr. Subashi De Silva and senior
lecturer Dr. Tushara Chaminda, the module coordinator of CE7607 Undergraduate Research
Project.

8.0 References
Blondet, M., Torrealva, D., Vargas, J., Velasquez, J., and Tarque, N. (2006), Seismic reinforcement of
adobe houses using external polymer mesh, Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on
Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, September 3-8, 2006.

 Sathiparan, N., Mayorca, P., Nesheli, K., Ramesh, G., and Meguro, K. (2005), Experimental study on
in-plane and out-of-plane behavior of masonry wallettes retrofitted by PP-band meshes, Seisan
Kenkyu, 57(6), pp. 530-533.
Mayorca, P., and Meguro, K. (2003), Efficiency of polypropylene bands for the strengthening of
masonry structures in developing countries, Proceedings of the 5th International Summer
Symposium, Tokyo, Japan, July 26, 2003.
Sathiparan, N., Mayorca, P., and Meguro, K. (2012), Shake table tests on one-quarter scale models
of masonry houses retrofitted with PP-band mesh, Earthquake Spectra, 28(1), pp. 277-299.
Tetley, R., and Madabhushi, G. (2007), Vulnerability of adobe buildings under earthquake loading,
Proceedings of 4th Conference Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Thessaloniki, Greece, June
25- 27, 2007.
Sathiparan, N., Mayorca, P., and Meguro, K. (2008), Parametric study on diagonal shear and outofplane behavior of masonry wallettes retrofitted by PP-band mesh, In Proceedings of 14th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Beijing, China, October 12-17, 2008.
Arya A S (2000) Non-engineered construction in developing countries an approach towards
earthquake risk prediction, The 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 30
January,2000, Auckland, New Zealand.
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (07 February 2003) Unreinforced clay brick masonry
house, World Housing Encyclopedia Report,
(available online http://www.eeri.org/lfe/pdf/indonesia_unreinforced_clay.pdf [accessed on
02/09/2016])
Macabuag J, Bhattacharya S and Blakeborough T (2008), Extending the collapse time of nonengineered masonry buildings under seismic loading, The 14th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, 12-17 October 2008, Beijing, China.
Saatcioglu M, Ghobarah A and Nistor I (2005) Reconnaissance report on the December 26,
2004 Sumatra earthquake and tsunami, (available online
http://www.caee.uottawa.ca/Publications/PDF%20files/CAEE%20Sumatra%20Report.pdf
[accessed on 03/09/2016])