New Italian guidelines for design of externally bonded Fabric-Reinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) systems for repair and strengthening of masonry and concrete structures

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect ScienceDirect

Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 Available online www.sciencedirect.com Available online at at www.sciencedirect.com Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

ScienceDirect ScienceDirect

Procedia Structural Structural IntegrityIntegrity Procedia1100(2018) (2016)202–209 000–000

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

XIV International Conference on Building Pathology and Constructions Repair – CINPAR 2018 XIV International Conference on Building Pathology and Constructions Repair – CINPAR 2018

New Italian guidelines for design of externally bonded FabricNew Italian guidelines for design of externally bonded FabricReinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) systems and XV Portuguese Conference on Fracture, PCF 2016, 10-12 February 2016,for Paçorepair de Arcos, Portugal Reinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) systems for repair and strengthening of masonry and concrete structures strengtheningmodeling of masonry Thermo-mechanical of aand highconcrete pressurestructures turbine blade of an a b Luigi Ascionea, Francesca Giulia Carozzi , Tommaso D’Antinobb, Carlo Poggib,b,* airplane gas turbine engine b Luigi Ascione , Francesca Giulia Carozzi , Tommaso D’Antino , Carlo Poggi *

University of Salerno, Via Ponte don Melillo, Fisciano 84084, Italy a Ponte b Fisciano cItaly Salerno, Via don Melillo, 84084, Italy Politecnico diofMilano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, Milan 20133, b Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, Milan 20133, Italy a Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal b IDMEC, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, Abstract Portugal Abstract c CeFEMA, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, The paper summarizes the main features of a standardization activity carried out in Italy by the Ministry of Public Works, to which Portugal a

P. Brandão , V. Infante , A.M. Deus *

b aUniversity

The paper mainpart, features of ahomologation standardization carried out Italy by the Ministry of Public Works, which two of the summarizes authors havethe taken for the andactivity the acceptance of in Fabric-Reinforced Cementitious Matrix to (FRCM) two of the authors taken part,such for the homologation andhave the becoming acceptanceincreseangly of Fabric-Reinforced Matrix (FRCM) composites. Duringhave the last years, composite materials popular inCementitious the civil engineering field for composites. theconstructions, last years, such composite materials have becoming increseangly popular in thethat civilis engineering field for strengthening existing even if difficulties can occur in their mechanical characterization strongly affected by Abstract During strengthening existing failure constructions, even ifThe difficulties canACI occur in their mechanical that is strongly by different and complex mechanisms. American 549.4R-13 is currently characterization the only available guideline for affected design and different complex failure mechanisms. The American 549.4R-13 is currently the for only guideline for design and construction of these systems. In thisaircraft framework, the components paperACI describes Italian proposals theavailable homologation process ofconditions, FRCM Duringand their operation, modern engine arethe subjected to increasingly demanding operating construction of systems. In this framework, the paperconditions describes Italian for the homologation process of FRCM especially thethese high pressure turbine (HPT) blades. Such cause theseproposals parts to undergo different types of time-dependent materials as well as for the design of strengthening interventions with the these composites. Comparisons with the American guideline materials as well as for the design of strengthening interventions with these composites. Comparisons with the American guideline degradation, one of which is creep. A model using the finite element method (FEM) was developed, in order to be able to predict are also reported together with some considerations regarding the different partial safety factors. arethe alsocreep reported togetherofwith some considerations different safety factors.provided by a commercial aviation behaviour HPT blades. Flight dataregarding records the (FDR) for apartial specific aircraft, company, used to obtain thermal and mechanical data for three different flight cycles. In order to create the 3D model Copyright © were 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Copyright B.V. All rights reserved. needed ©for theElsevier FEM analysis, athe HPT blade scrap organizers was scanned, and its chemical composition and material properties were Copyright ©2018 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Peer-review under responsibility of CINPAR 2018 Peer-review responsibility the CINPAR organizers obtained.under The data that wasofgathered was 2018 fed into FEM model and different simulations were run, first with a simplified 3D Peer-review under responsibility of the CINPAR 2018the organizers rectangular block shape, incriteria; order Design to better establish the model, and then with the real 3D mesh obtained from the blade scrap. The Keywords: FRCM; Acceptance formulations; Italian Guideline. overall expected behaviourcriteria; in terms of displacement was observed, Keywords: FRCM; Acceptance Design formulations; Italian Guideline.in particular at the trailing edge of the blade. Therefore such a model can be useful in the goal of predicting turbine blade life, given a set of FDR data.

1. Introduction

©1.2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Introduction Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of PCF 2016.

Fiber-reinforced composites are widely used to strengthen and retrofit existing concrete and masonry structures. Fiber-reinforced composites are widelyFinite used to strengthen retrofit existingand concrete andofmasonry structures. They are characterized by high strength-to-weight ratios, invasiveness easiness application. Fibre Keywords: High Pressure Turbine Blade; Creep; Element Method;limited 3Dand Model; Simulation. They are characterized by high strength-to-weight ratios, limited invasiveness and easiness of application. Fibre

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-02-2399-4362; * Corresponding Tel.: +39-02-2399-4362; E-mail address:author. [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected] 2452-3216 Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 2452-3216 Copyright © 2018 Elsevier All rights Peer-review under responsibility of the B.V. CINPAR 2018 reserved. organizers. Peer-review under responsibility of the218419991. CINPAR 2018 organizers. * Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 E-mail address: [email protected] 2452-3216 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of PCF 2016. 2452-3216 Copyright  2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Peer-review under responsibility of the CINPAR 2018 organizers 10.1016/j.prostr.2018.11.027

2

Luigi Ascione et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 11 (2018) 202–209 L. Ascione et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

203

reinforced polymer composites (FRP) are currently the most popular but present some drawbacks such as their poor resistance to high temperature and UV radiation, difficulty of application onto wet surfaces, and absence of vapor permeability. Fabric-Reinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) composites are currently increasing their popularity. They showed good results for strengthening RC and masonry structures and can overcome the issues connected to the use of polymers matrices. In the technical literature, such composites are also referred to as TRC (Textile Reinforced Concrete), TRM (Textile Reinforced Mortars), or IMG (Inorganic Matrix-Grid composites). Despite their widespread application, the FRCM mechanical behaviour and failure mechanisms have not been adequately investigated. The occurrence of debonding mechanisms at different interfaces (Focacci et al. 2016) and the complex interaction between shear and tensile stresses determine important difficulties in the definition of reliable criteria for the homologation, acceptance, design, and quality control of these materials when applied as structural strengthening systems. The American ACI 549.4R-13 is currently the only available guideline for design and construction of these systems. In Italy, two new guidelines providing acceptance criteria and design provisions for externally bonded FabricReinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) systems for repair and strengthening of masonry and concrete structures will be published soon by the Ministry of Public Works. They considered the most recent results obtained by many researchers (Ascione et al. 2015, Bellini et al. 2017, Carozzi et al. 2017, De Santis et al. 2017, Focacci et al. 2017, Valluzzi et al. 2014). The preparation of the two guidelines required a considerable effort due to variety of composite materials, both fibres and matrices, considered. This paper presents the essential features of these two guidelines. Comparisons with the American guideline are also reported together with some considerations regarding the different approaches followed. 2. Characteristics of the FRCMs The composite materials (i.e FRCM systems) treated by the Italian guidelines consist of: 1) an inorganic matrix, 2) a reinforcing mesh, 3) organic additives (if any). Their thickness is usually between 5 and 20 mm. Polymeric microfibers, dispersed in the matrix with various aims, mainly for controlling the shrinkage, are also allowed. It is mandatory that the FRCMs are: (1) provided by a single Manufacturer, who assumes responsibility for the declaration of performance; and (2) marketed by the same Manufacturer or Distributor, as defined in the EU Regulation no. 305/2011. In particular, the Manufacturer has to be equipped with a permanent internal production control system, in agreement with UNI EN ISO 9001: 2000. The matrix, comprising cement or lime, is reinforced with open-mesh textiles realized with continuous fibres of different materials: 1) steel (mainly UHTSS, Ultra High Tensile Strength Steel), 2) aramid, 3) basalt, 4) carbon, 5) glass, 6) polyparaphenylene benzo-bisoxazole (PBO). The overall organic component weight percentage, compared to the weight of the inorganic binder (cement and/or lime), shall be explicitly indicated by the Manufacturer on the pre-packaged bags in which the binder is contained for commercialization. This percentage cannot exceed 5%. An organic coating/impregnation of the dry fabric is allowed, which does not fall within the aforementioned 5%. The net distance between the bundles/yarns or strands cannot be greater than 3 times the thickness of the composite and cannot be greater than 20 mm. Fig. 1a shows an example of a balanced carbon reinforcing mesh with bundles spaced at 10 mm on centre in both longitudinal and transversal direction.

Luigi Ascione et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 11 (2018) 202–209 L. Ascione et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

204

a)

3

b)

Fig. 1. a) Example of a carbon reinforcing mesh. b) Example of stress-strain constitutive law exhibited by a FRCM sample during a uniaxial tensile test

Generally, the stress-strain behaviour exhibited by the FRCMs during a uniaxial tensile test can be schematized as a polygonal line consisting of three consecutive branches (Fig. 1b, Ascione et al. 2013, Ascione et al. 2015, Carozzi and Poggi 2015, D’Antino and Papanicolaou 2017,). The branches are associated with the three stages of the FRCMs response under tensile loading: namely 1) un-cracked (stage A), 2) crack development, (stage B), and 3) cracked (stage C). The tensile constitutive law is not sufficient to characterize the mechanical behaviour of a FRCM strengthening system because different failure modes may occur and they must be taken into account. The FRCM failure modes reported in the literature are (Fig. 2):

Fig. 2. Failure mechanisms

     

debonding with cohesive failure in the support (Fig. 2a); debonding at the reinforcement-to-support interface (Fig. 2b); debonding at the fibre mesh-to-matrix interface (Fig. 2c); slippage of the fibre mesh within the reinforcement thickness (Fig. 2d); slippage of the fibre mesh within the reinforcement thickness with cracking of the mortar layer nearest to the tensile force (Fig. 2e); tensile rupture of the fibre mesh (Fig. 2f).

4

Luigi Ascione et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 11 (2018) 202–209 L. Ascione et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

205

3. Main features of the homologation process The Italian guideline qualifies the FRCM composites based on predefined mechanical properties evaluated by means of homologated tensile and debonding tests performed by the Manufacturer through accredited laboratories under the supervision of the Ministry of the Public Works. After a long debate within the Italian scientific community, the following properties have been identified (Ascione and Feo 2016): a) Conventional limit stress (characteristic value), lim,conv, and conventional limit strain, lim,conv, as defined in the following; b) Tensile stiffness of the FRCM sample in the stage A, if detectable (E, mean value); c) Tensile ultimate stress u (characteristic value) and tensile ultimate strain u (mean value) of the FRCM sample; d) Tensile ultimate stress u,f (characteristic value) of the bare (non-impregnated) mesh; e) Young modulus Ef (mean value) of the dry mesh; f) Compressive strength fc,mat (characteristic value) of the matrix,. The tensile ultimate strain u,f of the bare mesh is obtained dividing u,f by Ef. The stresses are referred to the area of the cross-section of the bare mesh (Af) present in the sample, without considering the matrix. The values of mechanical quantities should be suitably stable with respect to degradation induced by environmental actions, as described below. The conventional limit stress is obtained by debonding and tensile tests as illustrated in Fig. 3. The guideline recommends three possible types of conventional supports (concrete, tuff masonry, and solid brick masonry), even if other types of supports can be proposed by the Manufacturer. The Manufacturer can choose the type of standard support for which the homologation is required.

Fig. 3. Evaluation of lim,conv and lim,conv

The stability of the mechanical properties of FRCMs with respect to the degradation induced by environmental actions is evaluated trough tensile tests of the composite material. The durability tests include freeze-thaw cycles and artificial aging tests. To perform such tests, 4 unconditioned FRCM coupons (used as reference) and other conditioned samples are subjected to tensile testing. The mean value of the tensile ultimate stress provided by the conditioned specimens should not be lower than a specific percentage of the mean ultimate limit stress provided by the unconditioned specimens. The reference standard tests are indicated in Table 1.

Luigi Ascione et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 11 (2018) 202–209 L. Ascione et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

206

5

Table 1 – Tests of environmental durability Type of treatment

Reference standard

Test condition

Moist

ASTM D 2247-11 ASTM E 104-02

 90%; 38 ± 2 °C

Saline

ASTM D 1141-98 ASTM C 581-03

Immersion at 23 ± 2 °C

Alkaline

ASTM D7705/D7705M

Immersion in solution with pH= 12.5; 23± 2°C

Test Duration (hours)

1000 and 3000

Stress Retention (%)

85 (1000 hours) 80 (3000 hours)

Table 2 summarizes the number of tests required to the Manufacturer on each FRCM system to be qualified. Table 2 – Summary of the homologation tests Test Mechanical tests Tensile test on dry mesh Tensile test on FRCM coupons Debonding test Durability tests Unconditioned specimens Freeze-thaw cycles Moist environment Saline environment Alkaline environment Total

Number of specimens 9 9 9 4 4 2 x 4 = 8 (1 for the test duration of 1000 hours and 1 for 3000 hours) 2x4=8 2x4=8 59

4. Acceptance tests The acceptance tests:  are mandatory and should be carried out under the responsibility of the Director of the works;  have to be performed simultaneously to the strengthening intervention;  have to be performed on specimens made on site, following the installation procedure prescribed by the Manufacturer. For each type of FRCM strengthening system to be installed, 6 specimens shall be prepared. The dimensions of the specimens are the same as those specified for the FRCM coupon tensile tests. The test is considered passed if the mean value of the tensile ultimate stress is not lower than 85% of the tensile characteristic tensile ultimate stress u,f, as determined during the homologation phase, and is higher than at least 15% of the conventional limit stress lim,conv determined during the same phase. In the case of a negative result, the tests can be repeated on additional 6 specimens. In this case, the mean value of the failure stress is evaluated on the 12 specimens subjected to tensile test. If the result is still unsatisfactory, the FRCM composites cannot be accepted. 5. Main design provisions The use of the conventional limit strain allows for designing the FRCM strengthening intervention by avoiding an explicit verification with respect to the possible phenomenon of end debonding, otherwise necessary when such kind of phenomenon is possible. End debonding might occur when the tensile stress in the FRCM system is maximum at its end, as in the case of seismic loading. The same does not happen for strengthening masonry panels under out-ofplane loads, as well as concrete beams subjected to gravitational loads. Instead, in the verifications governed by the phenomenon of intermediate debonding, the following values have to be utilized: lim,conv =·lim,conv and lim,conv =Ef ·lim,conv.

6

Luigi Ascione et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 11 (2018) 202–209 L. Ascione et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

207

The coefficient  is assumed equal to 1.5. Higher values are allowed but have to be justified by experimental tests performed of structural elements. In all cases, the following inequality shall be verified: lim,conv≤u. In the applications where failure is governed by the tensile strength of the mesh, the values u,f and and u,f should be employed. 6. Design values The design value of a generic property of the FRCM system is obtained as:

X d  

Xk

(1)

m

where η is a conversion factor, Xk is the characteristic value of the property considered and m is the corresponding partial safety factor: m = 1.5 for the Ultimate Limit State (ULS) and m = 1.0 for the Serviceability Limit State (SLS). For the ULS, the effects of the environmental actions have to be taken into account. If more specific data are not available, the values of the corresponding conversion factor, ηa, provided in Table 3 should be adopted. Table 3 – Values of ηa Kind of Kind of exposition reinforcement Indoors Glass/Basalt Aramid/PBO Carbon/UHTSS Outdoors Glass/Basalt Aramid/PBO UHTSS Carbon Aggressive Glass/Basal environment Aramid/PBO UHTSS Carbon

ηa 0.80 0.90 0.95 0.70 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.60 0.75 0.85 0.90

Table 4 – Kind of interventions Kind of structure Intervention Masonry

Reinforced concrete

Panels under in-plane loads Panels under out-of-plane loads Realization of bond beams Simple or double curvature vaults Confinement of axially-loaded columns Beams subjected to gravitational loads Confinement of axially-loaded columns

7. Types of strengthening intervention considered in the guideline The Italian design guideline provides indications for the following strengthening interventions (Table 4): The predictive formulae provided by the guideline are based on the following assumptions:  Plane sections remain plane;  Perfect adhesion between mesh and matrix as well as between FRCM composite and support. The design of strengthening interventions of masonry elements shall be carried out only with respect to the ultimate limit states, whereas the strengthening of concrete beams subjected to gravitational loads shall be carried out both with respect to the ultimate and serviceability limit states. Furthermore, within the SLS verifications, the maximum tensile stress in the FRCM cannot exceed a limit value in order to take into account the possible phenomenon of creep rupture. If the results of specific analysis are not available, the limit values provided in Table 5 should be respected. Table 5 – Tensile limit stress in the FRCM strengthening for long-term loading Type of fibre UHTSS

AR Glass

Aramid

Basalt

Carbon

PBO

0,55 u,f

0,20u,f

0,30 u,f

0,20u,f

0,55u,f

0,30u,f

208

Luigi Ascione et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 11 (2018) 202–209 L. Ascione et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

7

8. Comparison with the American ACI 549.4R-13 The American ACI 549.4R-13 provides design recommendations based on the acceptance criteria described by AC434 (2013). According to these criteria, the FRCM composite stress-strain behavior is assumed to be bilinear, where the slope of the first un-cracked stage is mainly governed by the matrix mechanical properties whereas the slope of the second cracked stage, Ef,ACI, depends on the embedded mesh textile mechanical properties and on the matrix-textile interaction. The bond properties of the FRCM composite with respect to a specific substrate are not investigate during the acceptance procedure. The parameters needed to design a strengthening intervention with FRCM composites are obtained by tensile tests on FRCM coupons using the clevis-grip method (Arboleda et al. 2015). These parameters are the slope of the cracked stage Ef,ACI and the effective tensile strain fe=ffu/Ef,ACI≤0.012, where ffu is the ultimate tensile stress of the FRCM coupon. The effective tensile strain in further limited in the case of shear strengthening. When designing a FRCM strengthening intervention, perfect adhesion is assumed at all material interfaces and plane sections are assumed to remain plane. Since only the cracked stage of the stress-strain behavior of the FRCM coupons is considered in the acceptance criteria and the effective tensile strain is limited to 0.012, the maximum stress in the FRCM composites is generally significantly lower than ffu, which in turn leads to a general underestimation of the strengthened element maximum capacity. The level of safety obtained with the American and Italian guidelines cannot be compared directly. Indeed, the American approach provide different partial safety factors depending on the failure mode (brittle or ductile) and reduces the maximum capacity of the strengthened element employed a pre-determined factor. The Italian guidelines comply with the Eurocode approach and employs characteristic and design values of applied loads and material resistances according to the semi-probabilistic limit-state method. 9. Example of FRCM strengthening of a masonry wall against out-of-plane load An FRCM strengthening intervention to a masonry wall subjected to out-of-plane load is designed in this section following the ACI 549.4R-13 and Italian Guideline approaches. The design is carried out considering average values of the material properties and neglecting all partial safety coefficients. The wall is made by clay bricks, has a width of b=1.8 m, a height of h=3 m, and a thickness of t=0.3 m and it is subjected to a vertical compressive load N=22 kN. The measured compressive and flexural tensile strength of the masonry are equal to fm=9 MPa and fmf=0.52 MPa, respectively. The cracking moment of the unstrengthened wall is:

N  b t2  6.94 kNm M cr  f    mf  bt  6 

(2)

The wall is strengthened on one both sides applying one layer of a carbon FRCM system with an overall thickness tF=10 mm. The carbon mesh textile has a nominal thickness tf=0.047 mm, a tensile strength u,f=2000 MPa, an elastic modulus Ef=203000 MPa. Bond tests on the specific support considered provided the conventional strain lim,conv=0.58%. Tensile tests on FRCM coupons provided the slope of the cracked stage Ef,ACI=80000 MPa, and the effective tensile strain fe=1.00%. Since according to the Italian guideline approach, in the case of out-of-plane strengthening, the conventional strain is lim,conv =·lim,conv=0.87%, the bending strength of the strengthened panel is:

 t tF  t  (α) M R f m b k1 x   k2 x   tf b lim,conv Ef      31.22 kNm 2  2 2 

(3)

where k1 and k2 are stress block coefficients of the masonry parabola rectangle stress-strain behavior considered (D’Antino et al. 2018), and x is the neutral axis depth. Applying the ACI 549.4R-13 approach, the bending strength of the strengthened panel is:

8

Luigi et Ascione et al. / Procedia Integrity (2018) 202–209 L. Ascione al./ Structural Integrity Structural Procedia 00 (2018)11 000–000

x  t tF  t M R  f m b 1 x   1   tf b fe Ef,ACI      15.67 kNm 2 2 2 2 

209

(4)

where  and 1 are stress block coefficients of the masonry stress-strain behavior considered (Tumialan et al. 2003). Employing the Italian and American guidelines, an increment of 4.5 and 2.3 with respect to the unstrengthened masonry cracking moment, respectively, was obtained. This is due to the effect of considering the slope of the cracked stage in clevis-grip tests or the elastic modulus of the bare textile on the bending strength. This result is consistent with the general trend observed in D’Antino et al. (2018) where a detailed comparison between experimental and analytical results is reported and it is shown that the Italian approach provides a better approximation. 10. Conclusions The paper summarizes the main features of Italian guidelines that the Ministry of the Public Works is preparing regarding the homologation and acceptance criteria of FRCM composite materials as well as design rules to be used for strengthening existing constructions. This standardization activity is particularly useful because of the increasing diffusion of these materials, despite shared homologation, acceptance and design procedures are still lacking. References Arboleda, D., Carozzi, F.G., Nanni, A., Poggi, C., 2015. Testing procedure for the uniaxial tensile characterization of fabric-reinforced cementitious matrix composites. Journal of Composites for Construction. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000626. Ascione, L., de Felice, G., De Santis, S., 2015. A qualification method for externally bonded Fibre Reinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) strengthening systems. Composites Part B Engineering 78, 497-506. Ascione, L., Feo, L., 2016 Use of FRCM/TRM in Italy: Qualification and Acceptance Criteria. In: Proceedings of CINPAR 2016. October 2016. Ascione, L., Poggi, C., Savoia, M. 2013. On the mechanical behaviour of FRCM composites. In: Proceedings of XXI Congress AIMETA. September 2013. Bellini, A., Incerti, A., Bovo, M., Mazzotti, C., 2017. Effectiveness of FRCM reinforcement applied to masonry walls subjected to axial force and out-of-plane loads evaluated by experimental and numerical studies. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 1-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2017.1323246. Carozzi, F.G., Bellini, A., D'Antino, T., de Felice, G., Focacci, F., Hojdys, L., et al., 2017. Experimental investigation on tensile and shear bond properties of Carbon-FRCM composites applied on masonry substrates. Composites Part B Engineering 128, 100-119. Carozzi, F.G., Poggi, C., 2015. Mechanical properties and debonding strength of fabric reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM) systems for masonry strengthening. Composites Part B Engineering 70, 215-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.10.056. D’Antino, T., Carozzi, F.G., Colombi, P., Poggi, C., 2018. Out-of-plane maximum resisting bending moment of masonry walls strengthened with FRCM composites. Composite Structures. In Press. D’Antino, T., Papanicolaou, C., 2017. Mechanical characterization of textile reinforced inorganic-matrix composites. Composites Part B Engineering 127, 78-91. De Santis, S., Ceroni, F., de Felice, G., Fagone, M., Ghiassi, G., Kwiecien, A., Lignola, G.P., Morganti, M., Santantandrea, M., Valluzzi, M.R., Viskovic, A., 2017. Round robin test on tensile and bond behavior of steel reinforced grout systems. Composites Part B Engineering 127, 100120. Focacci, F., D’Antino, T., Carloni, C., Sneed, L.H., Pellegrino, C., 2017. An indirect method to calibrate the interfacial cohesive material law for FRCM-concrete joints. Material and Design 128, 206-217. Tumialan, J.G., Galati, N., Nanni, A., 2003. Fiber-reinforced polymer strengthening of unreinforced masonry walls subjected to out-of-plane loads. ACI Structural Journal 100, 321-329. Valluzzi, M.R., da Porto, F., Garbin, E., Panizza, M., 2014. Out-of-plane behavior of infill masonry panels strengthened with composite materials. Materials and Structures.