Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cscm

Case study

Natural disaster mitigation using advanced ferrocement – Future

research directions for improved building resilience
Richard P. Clarke
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Natural disaster mitigation encompasses a wide range of activities which are required to avert the
Resilience occurrence of natural disasters and is a major goal of the Sendai Framework applicable to all
Advanced ferrocement exposed territories worldwide. With respect to earthquakes and hurricanes, the structural retro­
Earthquakes
fitting of buildings which were designed before the availability of seismic codes of practice, or the
Hurricanes
Lamination theory
enforcement of existing codes, can be an effective form of mitigation. Advanced Ferrocement
(AF), which is ferrocement based on Lamination Theory (LT), encompasses the use of mesh angle,
layer-by-layer mesh layup, possibly with non-metallic mesh, and/or non-standard mortars, for the
design and construction of structural components. As a pilot study, a set of core research ques­
tions and nine research directions or study areas are presented for investigating the use of AF for
retrofitting existing buildings, in the context of earthquake and hurricane resilience. This is also
useful for deriving new structural components for new buildings,. The experimental results of the
pilot study are that when ferrocement overlays were applied to the faces of concrete masonry-
infilled walls of steel frames, the lateral yield strength and displacement at yield increased by
factors of 1.50 and 2.30, respectively. For the tested ferrocement shear panels of channel-shaped
cross-section, the lateral maximum strength-to-weight ratio was 3.37 times higher than that for an
alternative reinforced concrete masonry minimum cost solution. For the tested AF one-way
spanning roof panel, the wind load capacity had a strength-to-weight ratio 10.78 times higher
compared with the present minimum cost metal sheet-and-purlins solution. LT suggests that the
performance of the infilled-frame retrofit, and the ferrocement wall panel, can be increased by
aligning the mesh in the principal stress directions, etc. The research directions and preliminary
findings presented can serve as the basis for an extensive research effort regarding AF as the
application of LT to mesh-reinforced cementitious composite structural building components.

1. Introduction

The development of a new structural system can begin with a pilot study. If wide application of the new system is envisaged, then
before investing significant sums on the development of the system, it is useful to validate the concept by testing the system and
measuring the most desired performance under a limited scope of control variables and measurements. A pilot study is comprised of
four phases: (i) identification of a need for improved performance relative to existing systems; (ii) insight into possible physical means
of achieving the better performance; (iii) identification of control variables and their relative degree of significance and (iv), proof-of-
concept testing.

E-mail address: richard.clarke@sta.uwi.edu.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e00990
Received 4 October 2021; Received in revised form 23 February 2022; Accepted 27 February 2022
Available online 1 March 2022
2214-5095/© 2022 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

The need for the new system can be identified via the expression of research needs by research institutions or other technical
organizations, and by governmental or other social institutions. The performance of the structural system can be in terms of one or
more of the following properties: strength; stiffness; durability; fire resistance; environmental sustainability; constructability; aes­
thetics; handleability; maintainability, and cost. The insight into how to achieve improved performance, and identification of control
variables, is determined based on knowledge of the causal mechanisms that give rise to the performance based on familiarity with
other materials, and the theory of material behaviour. Such knowledge enables the determination of research questions and hypotheses
of how a control variable may cause specific behaviour. If the test results indicate significant benefits relative to cost compared with
other systems, then investment into further development of the system is justified. This development is in terms of additional testing
and analysis that is sufficiently comprehensive to address the requirements for public use.
It is necessary that measures be put in place to reduce the impact of natural hazards such that when they occur, a country can
recover in minimum time. Over the past thirty years there has been a series of international frameworks with signatories from many
countries of the world: the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) [1] in the last decade of the twentieth century,
succeeded by the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) [2] in 2000–2005, the Hyogo Framework [3] of 2005–2015, and
at present, the Sendai Framework [4] (2015–2030) in which the concept of Build Back Better is one of its four priorities. Compatible
with the Sendai framework, is the U.S. Resiliency Council formed in 2011 as an advocacy group. The ultimate aim of the U.S. Resiliency
Council is the legislation of new policies towards natural disaster risk reduction in the United States starting with the adoption of
building rating systems for seismic risk assessment. The subject of disaster mitigation with respect to earthquakes and hurricanes
includes many activities and an effective form of mitigation, is to ensure that the buildings and infrastructure are resilient.
Multi-hazard design for earthquakes and hurricanes is controlled by the former even if the resultant forces of the latter are higher.
Except for slender structures such as pole-type structures or wing-like parts of structures such as stadium roofs, the applicable types of
structural systems for hurricane resistance are the same as those applicable to earthquake-resistant design. Therefore, in this paper the
relevant technologies and resources presented for earthquake resistance are considered applicable for the multi-hazard conditions of
both earthquakes and hurricanes.
If conventional construction materials are used, providing an environmentally sustainable design requires the use of less of a
material. However, a resilient design in terms of hurricanes and earthquakes, requires the use of more of the material to reduce the
level of damage, so there is a conflict of design targets. This situation can be avoided via innovation in material design. Structural
components made of the new material, or the same material used in different ways, must be thinner and have higher strength, hence
providing strength-to-weight ratios much higher that what is available today. The material called ferrocement is a thin cementitious
composite material that is anomalously both the newest and the oldest form of reinforced concrete (RC). It is comprised of several
layers of mesh reinforcement of small wire diameter and spacing impregnated with a cement-rich mortar. Ferrocement possesses
properties which are in many respects superior to RC - high strength-to-weight ratio; crack resistance; deformability; toughness, and
impermeability, and such that it is classified as a distinct material. Traditional ferrocement construction is labour-intensive which
makes it suitable for developing regions. This is because the cost of labour is a very significant factor in the economic viability of
ferrocement as a construction material. Furthermore, in developing countries ferrocement raw materials are readily available and
formwork is not essential. The labour cost can be further drastically reduced because the construction method facilitates fabrication on
a self-help basis. As a result, the unit cost of a ferrocement component is often substantially lower compared with conventional ma­
terials. In developed countries, ferrocement construction by the traditional method is prohibitive due to the cost of labour, quality
control and quality assurance programmes, transportation, and raw materials. Ferrocement construction can be viable in developed
territories if industrialized manufacturing methods are used. The U.S.A Federal Emergency Management Agency’s document FEMA
172 [5] acknowledges the use of ferrocement overlays as a feasible approach for retrofitting unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings.
It is well-known that if the analysis and design theory of ferrocement is based on reinforced concrete, the resulting predictions of
the strength and deformation capacities are significantly underestimated [6]. Many applications of ferrocement, such as for floor slabs,
tanks, curved roofs, etc., have principal stresses that are not aligned with the axes of the element. For two-way spanning slabs, from
reinforced concrete theory, it is expected that yield lines would form from the corners, and at 45 degrees to the edges, but the high
efficiency ratios (of test to theoretical result) are still observed even if the theory considers the angle of the mesh relative to the axes of
the element. Since the test results exceed the theoretical predictions, providing a more sophisticated theory was not deemed necessary.
However, in seeking to improve ferrocement it is reasonable that types of mesh that are different than the conventional be investigated.
This also provides an opportunity to consider how the mesh layers would interact and the result in terms of strength and deformation
capacity given the problem of the high efficiency ratios.
By modelling the structural component as a type of laminated orthotropic composite, a study of ferrocement square slabs was
undertaken by Clarke and Sharma [7]. It was generally concluded that in order to more accurately predict the behavior of ferrocement,
it is necessary to use a theory that considers the laminae layup, mesh orientation, etc. Clarke [8] undertook a finite element analysis
parametric study, based on such a theory, of the effect of using mesh with different reinforcement in the two-directions, mesh
orientation, and layer-by-layer mesh layup. In general, such variables result in the formation of coupling stiffnesses that change the
behaviour of the component and can therefore be used as a design variable to control performance in terms of strength, stiffness and
cost. The study verified that it is important to model ferrocement as a laminated composite because otherwise, there are conditions
under which the stresses in the member can be very significantly underestimated hence making the design unsafe. For example, it was
shown that if the ratio of a mesh’s Young’s moduli in the two-directions is 2.0, the mesh orientation angle is 45 degrees, and the
number of mesh layers is an odd number, the principal stresses can be underestimated by 94% relative to conventional ferrocement
analysis. This is contrary to expectation, based on conventional analysis, which predicts an increase in strength for a mesh orientation
of 45 degrees. This possibility is increasingly important as the availability of new innovative alternative mesh reinforcement is very

2
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

likely to increase, in response to the modern demands of both resilience and environmental sustainability.
Research on ferrocement-based retrofitting of Caribbean URM wall houses was undertaken by Clarke [9]. Caribbean houses are
characterized by very low roof load and wall weight and these conditions promote the behaviour modes of sliding, out-of-plane
overturning, or combinations of these, under relatively low levels of applied lateral displacement. Such behaviour is different
compared with URM housing elsewhere in the world making Caribbean houses particularly vulnerable. This is because higher roof and
wall weights significantly reduce the likelihood of sliding and overturning, and promotes the rocking mode of response, which is
favorable for seismic resistance. Although the conventional ferrocement-based retrofit solution was shown to be effective, performance
can be improved in terms of strength-to-weight ratio, if advanced ferrocement (AF) is used. AF encompasses the use of mesh angle,
layer-by-layer mesh layup and possibly non-metallic mesh, and/or non-standard mortars, for the design and construction of structural
components.
There are two types of seismic retrofit design: global structural system adjustment, or local structural component adjustment. In the
former approach, the existing lateral force resisting structural system is augmented via such measures as the addition of braces, frames,
shear walls, supplemental damping, or base isolation. For the latter approach, the structural member’s constituents are altered.
Regardless of the approach, retrofit design must comply with the provisions of codes or guides specified by the authority having
jurisdiction in the country where the design is to be applied. Since systems of ferrocement and AF are considered as “alternative”, or
“undefined” systems relative to the conventional materials (i.e. concrete, structural steel, masonry, timber) it is necessary that the
retrofit design code or guide contain provisions for alternative systems. Provisions exist for the seismic evaluation and rehabilitation of
structures such as the ASCE 41 [10], FEMA P-154 [11], and FEMA P-155 [12] of the United States of America. In Europe there is the
Eurocode 8 Part 3 [13]. However, at this time only the U.S.A codes cater for alternative systems via ASCE 41 [10]. In the ASCE 41 [10],
maximum allowed limit sate values are not provided for alternative systems, but detailed guidance for the testing, data reduction, and
interpretation of new systems resulting in those values are provided. Upon approval of the test results by the authority having
jurisdiction, the design information for the new structural component or system can be accessed by appropriate state-owned channels.
For example, new materials or structural systems in the U.S.A become linked to the IBC [14] via the ICC-ES [15].
Pilot studies were derived regarding the use of AF for retrofitting existing buildings, or for developing new structural components
for new buildings, in the context of earthquake and hurricane building resilience. The aim of this paper is to present these pilot studies
in terms of the core research questions and nine research directions or study areas. Results from proof-of-concept testing are also
presented for the three structural systems that seem to be in highest demand worldwide – earthquake and hurricane-resistant infilled
masonry for multi-story buildings in urban areas; earthquake and hurricane-resistant precast shear panels for low-cost housing; and
hurricane-resistant residential roofing, also for low-cost housing.

2. Advanced ferrocement

In terms of the look of the final component, a structural system of AF is not different from conventional ferrocement. With a
thickness typically in the range from 6 mm to 25 mm, the type of AF considered in this paper, like traditional ferrocement, consists of
several layers of thin steel wire mesh of small inter-wire spacing, tied together to form a dense cage and impregnated with cement
mortar with very little cover over the reinforcements. In the traditional hence typical design, the mesh are oriented parallel and
perpendicular to axes of the element. If RC theory is applied to ferrocement, the predicted strength, deformability, and other property
values are invariably significantly less than the values obtained by testing and since RC theory assumes the “mixtures rule”, the
implication is that ferrocement is a synergistic material. This consistent under-prediction of the performance of ferrocement if based on
RC theory, led to research into an alternative approach to its modelling and analysis - Lamination Theory (LT), which was developed
for composite materials within the aerospace industry [16]. Therefore, in this paper, AF is ferrocement that is analysed, designed, or
constructed based on LT.
Fig. 1 shows the basic structural model of a laminated plate using 5 laminae as an example. The cause of the different behaviour
between laminated and homogeneous plates is the coupling stiffnesses - [A], [B], and [D]. These are referred to as the extension,
bending-extension, and bending stiffnesses respectively and are 3 × 3 matrices. They are given by,

Fig. 1. Structural model of a 5-layer laminate.

3
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

∑
N
[ ]
Aij = QBij k
(hk − hk− 1 ) (1)
k=1

1 ∑
N
[ ] ( )
Bij = QBij k
hk 2 − hk− 1
2
(2)
2 k=1

1 ∑
N
[ ] ( )
Dij = QBij k hk 3 − hk− 1
3
(3)
3 k=1

where i,j = 1, 2, 6, and [QB]ij is the transformed reduced stiffness matrix for the kth lamina [10]. The [QBij] for a lamina, are functions
of the mesh orientation, θ, within a lamina, and the mechanical properties of a lamina (i.e. the Young’s moduli E1 and E2; the shear
modulus G12, and the Poisson ratio ν12).
A laminated plate is a generalization of all possible types of plates hence it can be shown that for a single-layer plate in bending that
is modelled as isotropic, [B] = [0]. The coupling stiffnesses are so-called because they result in the governing equilibrium equations for
in-plane behaviour and bending behaviour to become inter-dependent or coupled. Therefore, if bending is applied to LT, there will be
mid-plane stress resultants even at small bending displacements. For homogeneous and isotropic plates under small displacement
bending, there is no coupling because [B] = [0]. A parametric investigation of the coupling stiffnesses for the case of ferrocement
plates in bending was undertaken and it was shown that under certain conditions of E1 ∕ = E2, use of conventional analysis would yield
unconservative stress analysis results [8]. Therefore, for ferrocement structural elements built using hexagonal or expanded metal
mesh, there may be performance implications if the design is based on conventional analysis.
The design of practical ferrocement structures is not based on available codes or guidelines for ferrocement at this time. Practical
design is based entirely on structural testing, or a combination of realistic modelling and analysis verified by some structural testing.
This is because the majority of practical ferrocement applications are continuum structures (i.e. panels, flat plates, folded plates, and
single and double curvature shells used for walls, roofs, and tanks, etc.) whereas design equations in the codes and guides are for one-
dimensional elements. Also, the dimensions of practical ferrocement components are such that large-displacement effects are
significant.
LT enables the following variables and their typical values to be considered in the design of AF, and for fixed lamina mechanical
properties: (1) number of laminae (3− 7); (2) mesh orientation angle in a lamina (0/90; 15/75; 30/60; 45/45), and (3) laminae layup
classification relative to the mid-plane (symmetric; antisymmetric; unsymmetric). Hence there are 60 possible configurations that can
be considered in the study of any structural component, if the properties of the individual lamina are fixed (e.g. type of mesh and type
of mortar). If variables relative to the individual lamina properties are considered, the following are possible: (1) continuous rein­
forcement for the mesh in each direction of a lamina in terms of the material, size, and spacing (e.g. steel; basalt rock; glass; polymer;
textile); (2) discontinuous reinforcement in a lamina mortar matrix in terms of the material, dimensions, end conditions, and dosage (e.
g. steel; basalt rock; glass; polymer; textile), and (3) lamina matrix additives (water reducer; plasticizer; rapid hardener; permeability
reducer). Therefore, if the total number of possible variables and their values are considered, the possible configurations that can be
considered in the study of any structural component is quite large. From this pool of possible configurations, research questions
relevant of any application of interest can be defined, and thereby, an experimental physical and/or numerical programme can be
readily designed, based on LT. By comparison, if the mortar properties and type of mesh are constant, conventional ferrocement
analysis enables only the study of the effect of the number of mesh layers. This is because the effect of mesh orientation is accounted for
simply by taking direction cosines of the mesh wires in the direction of the load. This approach assumes homogeneity and isotropy thus
cannot account of lamination effects.

2.1. Research questions

The internationally acknowledged need for improved natural disaster resilience implies a need for practical, cost-effective, and
sustainable retrofit design of existing buildings, and sustainable new materials for new construction. It is envisaged that AF is a
material that can be a solution in this regard. In the context of deriving practical solutions, given the possibilities outlined in the
previous section, the following are the basic relevant research questions that can be a basis of formulating the aims and objectives of
any specific investigation towards providing resilient and environmentally sustainable solutions:

1. What is the optimal combination of number of mesh, orientation angle per mesh, and overall stacking sequence in terms of
symmetry, anti-symmetry, or asymmetry relative to the mid-plane of the laminate?
2. Can overall strength and/or stiffness be significantly improved by varying, for the individual laminae, the Young’s Modulus (E),
Shear Modulus (G), Poisson ratio (ν), tensile, compressive, and shear strengths, in the directions of its principal axes relative to each
other?
3. Is it practically beneficial to use a mortar with one or more of the following characteristics: high strength; rapid-hardening;
lightweight; impermeable; fire-resistant, or combinations of these, for the matrix of the composite, relative to conventional
ferrocement?

4
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

3. Research directions

The Research Questions lead to Research Directions as proposed Experimental Programmes. The following are 9 proposed Research
Directions for pilot studies. The results of these pilot studies can reveal directions of future and more comprehensive research that are
more likely to be successful, in the context of natural disaster resilience. The first 8 of the proposed Research Directions are with respect
to lateral load resisting systems, and the final one is with respect to roof pressures due to hurricanes. It should also be mentioned that
the experiments of the proposed research can also be replicated or simulated using advanced finite element analysis software. Proof-of-
concept experimental results are presented for 3 of the 9 pilot studies which are in progress at the University of the West Indies.

3.1. Advanced ferrocement/unreinforced masonry wall

Consider the retrofitting of unreinforced masonry block residential structures such as those in the Caribbean islands of Trinidad and
Tobago which are built using clay units. Each unit is compliant with ASTM C34, of dimensions 200 mm high x 300 mm long x 100 mm
thick, and weighs 2.2 kg. In this approach, a URM shear wall is converted to a hybrid AF/URM wall by the application of the AF as an
overlay to the external faces.
Research on this application begins with ferrocement comprised of mesh aligned at 0/90 degrees to the edges of the wall as the
reference, and this phase of the research has been completed [17,18]. Fig. 2 is a photograph of one of the walls under in-plane lateral
quasi-static reversing cyclic load. For design based on AF the aforesaid research questions apply with a focus on the meshes angles at 45
degrees. This is because in the in-plane direction, the principal stress is typically close to that orientation. Performance in the
out-of-plane direction is important when the wall is under wind loads, and under seismic loads due to inertia forces arising from the
distributed mass of the wall. In the out-of-plane direction for the walls, since they are often 2-way spanning, the principal stress di­
rections per lamina are not aligned with the wall’s edges and are also approximately 45 degrees for square walls. Therefore, it is
reasonable to expect that aligning the mesh at that angle should increase the performance of the wall. Hence the use of LT would be
useful for this form of AF if only to account for the mesh angle. The effect of substituting some of the mesh with other mesh types,
possibly non-metallic, can also be evaluated using LT.

3.2. Advanced ferrocement/masonry-infilled steel and reinforced concrete frames

The infilling of deficient moment resisting frames with wall-type elements is a well-known method of retrofitting existing buildings.
Alternatively, structural use can be made of existing infill. By these methods the beneficial characteristics of a shear wall are trans­
ferred to the overall system. For non-structural reasons, masonry is also often used to completely infill the space between the frame’s
members. In such a case, for the U.S.A building codes for new buildings prior to 2015, the wall is structurally ignored in terms of
structural interaction with the frame. However, for the evaluation of existing infilled frame buildings, the analysis of the building
including the infilled frame is required.
Considering the possibility of structurally using existing masonry infill, it is typical that the masonry does not have sufficient shear
strength and a well-known method of improving the infill wall is to use a RC overlay. However, the resulting wall is thick and the
placing of the concrete is cumbersome. Furthermore, the additional weight will increase the seismic forces, and there may also be a
need to retrofit the foundations. The use of an AF coating instead of the RC is a viable retrofit approach given the superior technical
performance and constructional advantages of AF. That is, an additional 12 mm in thickness per external face, and without the use of
formwork or shotcreting thus making the construction process simple. The existing foundation is typically sufficient to transfer the

Fig. 2. Ferrocement retrofitted clay block masonry wall under in-plane lateral load.

5
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

forces to the soil. The types of infilled frames that may be retrofitted are those with steel I-section columns with the major axes aligned
in the plane of the wall, and with the minor axes aligned in the plane of the wall. Likewise, the frames may be comprised of RC columns.
Fig. 3 is a sketch of these configurations. It is also necessary to consider the application of the AF to only one face of the wall as this can
be sufficient if the shear demand is sufficiently low.
An infill wall is also required to resist forces in the out-of-plane direction such as due to hurricane wind internal and external
pressures, or the seismic inertial forces due to the weight of the wall. The out-of-plane failure of masonry walls is a major source of life-
safety vulnerability in urban areas due to earthquakes or hurricanes. The use of ferrocement comprised of mesh aligned at 0/90 degrees
to the edges of the wall has been used in the island of Trinidad in the Caribbean for retrofitting infilled masonry steel frames.
Fig. 4 shows the ferrocement cage just before placing of the mortar. The method of attaching the ferrocement to the wall is
noteworthy. This was done using steel bolts fabricated from mild steel rods and with washers at the ends in a 300 mm by 300 mm grid.
The bolts go through the entire thickness of the wall. This mesh anchorage method was also used for the walls of Fig. 2.
The design of the ferrocement retrofitted masonry infilled frame was based on the equations of the ASCE 41 [4]. The effect of the
ferrocement on the shear strength of the retrofitted wall was considered by use of the shear strength equation by Paul and Pama [6]
given by,
∑ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
τc = τm + Fi (1 − F 2i ) σf νf (4)

where τc is the ferrocement shear strength for one overlay, τm is the mortar shear strength, Fi is the direction cosine of a wire, σf is the
wire strength, and νf is the wire volume fraction. The summation is over each layer of mesh. The shear strength of the wall is the sum of
the shear strength of the ferrocement overlays and the masonry shear strength. However, these equations should be verified by
experiment and would also serve as reference baselines for comparisons with improved designs based on AF.
Not much research has been undertaken internationally on ferrocement retrofitted masonry infill walls. Work has been done by
Amanat et al., [19]; Korkmaz et al. [20]; Abdel-Hafez et al. [21] and Leeanansaksiria et al. [22]. Reversing cyclic loading was generally
not considered in this work and the type of frame is RC. Research work on structural steel masonry-infilled frames is common. The
work by Ghobadia et al. [23] is noteworthy. For both RC and steel frames, the emphasis is mainly on repair of damaged walls, rather
than retrofitting.
Preliminary research on ferrocement retrofitted infilled frames was done at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engi­
neering, The University of the West Indies. Two infilled frames were tested under in-plane lateral quasi-static reversing cyclic load with
the load protocol as two cycles of 2 mm initial amplitude and increasing by 2 mm for two cycles until failure. One wall was unre­
inforced, and the other was retrofitted by applying a ferrocement overlay to each face. Each overlay was comprised of 3 layers of ½ x ½
x 19 g square-welded wire mesh. The wall was comprised of 150 mm hollow vertical cell concrete masonry blocks compliant with
ASTM C90. Fig. 5 is a sketch of the design of the test walls (detail A not shown), and Fig. 6 shows the wall prior to applying the mortar
to the mesh. The hysteresis loop test results are shown in Fig. 7(a) and 7(b) which are for the unreinforced and retrofitted walls,
respectively.
Fig. 8 shows the damage of the unreinforced wall when the test was stopped. The damage mode is diagonal tension of the masonry.
In the testing of both infilled frames, the strength of the test specimen exceeded expectation and the full strength was not realized due
to damage to the test apparatus, especially in the negative direction. This is also implied by the envelopes of the hysteresis loops which
do not have a plateau region. For the retrofitted wall, no damage was observed. By comparing Fig. 7(a) and (b), it can be concluded that
in the positive direction, the lateral yield strength and displacement at yield increased by factors of 1.50 and 2.30, respectively.
Performance in the pre-yield region is important for seismic resilience in terms of the Operational limit state, or zero recovery time.
Due to the ferrocement retrofitting, the maximum lateral strength and the displacement at maximum strength increased by factors of
1.19 and 1.25, respectively, in the positive direction. However, these are minimum values relative to the likely values if the tests were
completed as originally intended. The diagonal tension crack pattern at failure in the unreinforced wall was not a stepped crack hence
along the mortar joints. This indicates that the tensile strength of the concrete masonry unit controls the behaviour. As the direction of
the principal stress is at approximately 45 degrees, as for the previous case of unreinforced masonry walls, it is reasonable to expect
that aligning the mesh at that angle should increase the performance of the wall. Hence the use of LT would also be useful for this form
of AF. It is also important to investigate the case where the columns of the infilled frame are aligned in their minor-axis direction. This
is because a main reason for the masonry infilling is as an alternative to steel bracing for such columns due to their relatively low
strength. Note that the use of different types of mesh in the same overlay can also be considered.

3.3. Advanced ferrocement irreplaceable shear panels

The addition of new external shear walls is another method of increasing the seismic lateral strength or decreasing the lateral drift
of an existing building. AF shear walls can be used in that regard and for minimum cost, rather than have an entire bay occupied by a
shear wall, shear panels that occupy a fraction of the bay can be used instead. Channel-shaped panels may be more aesthetically
attractive, compared with I-shapes, as they enable the projecting flanges or ribs to be on the outside of the building’s exterior faces

Fig. 3. Advanced Ferrocement Overlay on Masonry Infill Walls.

6
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 4. Ferrocement cage for retrofitting an infilled masonry wall.

only. As for the previously mentioned applications, research on this application of AF will also need ferrocement shear panels
comprised of mesh aligned at 0/90 degrees to the edges of the wall to be tested to serve as a reference or baseline. Such panels can also
be used for at least part of a hurricane resisting lateral load system. Experimental data on the behaviour of the panel under at least the
following conditions are required: (1) in-plane reversed cyclic load; (2) in-plane monotonic load; (3) out-of-plane reversed cyclic load;
(4) out-of-plane monotonic load; (5) eccentric monotonic axial load such that the flanges are in tension, and (6) eccentric monotonic
axial load such that the flanges are in compression. In each case the load is to be applied at the top of the specimen. Tests (5) and (6) are
required because the panel can be arranged to also be part of the gravity-load system for the building, or because axial load can be
transmitted to the panel when the building is under lateral load. Only one eccentric monotonic axial load test would be required if the
panel were of an I-shaped cross-section.
Preliminary research on ferrocement shear panels comprised of mesh aligned at 0/90 degrees to the edges of the wall and with a
channel-shaped cross-section was done at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of the West Indies
for cases (1), (2), (5), and (6). Each panel was of dimensions 2498 mm clear height by 914 mm width and the flanges were 152 mm
deep. The panel was comprised of 150 mm by 150 mm by 3.5 mm diameter wire fabric reinforcement, with 2 layers of ½ x ½ x 19 g
square-welded wire mesh on each side of the fabric reinforcement. For case (1) the load protocol was 3 reversing cycles at an amplitude
of 3 mm with subsequent cycles increasing by 3 mm until a maximum of 15 mm. Fig. 9 shows the resulting plot of the hysteresis loops.

7
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 5. Specimen design for infilled masonry wall test.

Fig. 6. Test specimen infilled masonry retrofitted wall before plastering.

Examination of the loops indicate substantial ductility and it is possible that further displacement capacity hence ductility is possible
because the hysteresis envelope was still in the strain-hardening region when the test was stopped.
For case (2) the test setup and load-displacement plot are shown in Figs. 10 and 11 respectively. The test setup for case (1) was very
similar. Fig. 10 also shows the crack pattern at failure. The crack pattern is generally consistent with the applied moment hence the
dominant crack is at the base of the wall. However, it should be noted that some twisting of the panel was also observed. This likely
contributed to the cracking on the flanges which include cracks that are not parallel to the base, but with more extensive cracking on
the tensile side of the panel. Fig. 10 indicates a drop in resistance between displacement of 15–30 mm and is due to stress redistribution
coupled with the torsional response.
For case (5) putting the panel’s flanges in tension or compression under an axial load is achieved by shifting the contact point of the
load apparatus to provide the required eccentricity relative to the centroidal axis of the panel. For the test with the flanges in tension
the eccentricity was 15 mm in the direction towards the web. Fig. 12 shows the test setup. Fig. 13 shows the cracking at failure, and
Fig. 14 shows the plot of load vs vertical displacement. The cracks in the vicinity of the base are consistent with the tensile stresses
there due to the location of the eccentric vertical load such as to cause a clockwise out-of-plane moment if viewed such that the flanges
are on the left. The crack width at the base of the flange decreases from the outer to the inner edge of the flange, because the mesh wires
progressively fractured from the outer to inner edge.
For case (6) in which case the flanges are in compression, the eccentricity was 201 mm in the direction away from the web. Fig. 15
shows the cracking at failure, and Fig. 16 shows the plot of load vs vertical displacement. The cracking occurs in one flange and is due
to the buckling of the flange at that location. Prior to the buckling, the eccentric vertical load was such as to cause an anti-clockwise
out-of-plane moment if viewed such that the flanges are on the left. Upon buckling there was a redistribution of stress likely including a
torsional moment that caused the diagonal cracks shown in the web, concentrated in the area away from the buckled flange.

8
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 7. (a). Hysteresis loops for the infilled frame with unreinforced masonry, (b) Hysteresis loops for the infilled frame with ferrocement retro­
fitted masonry.

From the failure modes and load-displacement plots, when the flanges are in tension the failure is ductile due to the meshes in the
flange. But when the flanges are in compression, the failure is brittle and due to the buckling of the flange. The (P,M) values are
(162.5 kN, 2.4 kNm) when the flanges are in tension, and (65.9 kN, 13.3 kNm) when the flanges are in compression.
An alternative reinforced concrete masonry minimum cost solution is of similar dimensions and built using 150 mm concrete block
units. The reinforcement is comprised of 12 mm diameter grade 60 vertical rods at 200 mm centers, and 10 mm diameter grade 60
horizontal rods at 400 mm centers. Upon comparison, the results indicate that for the tested ferrocement shear panels, the lateral
maximum strength-to-weight ratio was 3.37 times higher than the masonry panel. Given this successful proof-of-concept, the
experimental programme is to be expanded to include the LT variables of mesh angle, lamina stacking sequence, and the inclusion of
non-metallic mesh.

9
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 8. Cracking of infilled frame masonry wall.

Fig. 9. Hysteresis loops for a ferrocement shear panel.

3.4. Advanced ferrocement replaceable or sacrificial shear panel

Beside adding a lateral force resisting system or strengthening the existing system, another approach to retrofitting multi-story
buildings is to decrease the demand on the building. One approach is supplemental damping which can be sub-divided into
viscous, friction, and natural yield damping. In natural yield damping, a device is integrated with the structural system in such a
manner that it acts like a fuse absorbing the damaging seismic energy into itself such that no damage occurs elsewhere. In Japan, the
silted panel by Muto [24], composed of reinforced concrete, is used for this purpose. In effect, the Muto silted panel is a type of infill. AF

10
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 10. Test setup for a ferrocement shear panel under monotonic load.

Fig. 11. Load-displacement plot for a ferrocement shear panel under monotonic load.

11
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 12. Test setup for panel under eccentric axial load.

Fig. 13. Crack pattern at failure for panel flanges in tension.

12
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 14. Load-displacement plot for panel flanges in tension.

Fig. 15. Crack pattern at failure for panel flanges in compression.

13
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 16. Load-displacement plot for panel flanges in compression.

panels can be used in the same manner as the Muto panels by replacing existing infill walls or adding the new wall to vacant spaces
within bays. Beside retrofitting deficient RC frames, the panels can be used for the drift control of steel framed structures as well. The
panel is designed in such a manner that since the damage occurs only in the panel, it can be replaced, like a fuse, after the event, hence
the term “sacrificial panel”. As the AF panel is relatively light, it is possible to precast the panel and hoist it into place. Fig. 17 shows an
example of an AF sacrificial shear panel and where they can be installed, after analytical study of the most appropriate locations. It
does not seem that any research has been done internationally on ferrocement sacrificial shar panels. For the experimental programme
of the pilot study the number of layers of mesh, the type of mesh, and the mesh orientation angles are to have the typical values of
conventional ferrocement (i.e. 4 layers of ½ x ½ x 19 g square-welded mesh, at 0/90 degrees to the edges of the panel). The precast
panel is inserted into an identical steel frame of Section 3.2 and the assembly tested under increased reversing lateral load, as for the
shear panel of Section 3.3. The control specimen is the steel frame without the panel. It is expected that the results will indicate a
substantially higher energy absorption, hence that the proof-of-concept was achieved. Then the research programme will be expanded
to include the LT variables of mesh angle, lamina stacking sequence, and the inclusion of non-metallic mesh.

3.5. Advanced ferrocement/rc columns

The importance of the seismic design of the RC columns of moment frames is well known given the strong-column-weak-beam
frame design philosophy. Razvi et al. [25] reported favourable results on the use of fabric reinforcement around the inner core of
RC columns. The overlay can provide upgrades to the moment and axial strengths, and the section ductility, hence overall frame lateral
displacement capacity. The layer of fabric may be regarded as an intermediary between RC and ferrocement. It is envisaged that AF can
be utilised in the same manner, as shown in Fig. 18, but with its superior characteristics further enhancing the overall behaviour of the
column. There has been substantial research on the use of a ferrocement overlay for RC column confinement: Abdullah et al. [26];
Kazemi et al., [27]; Kondraivendhan et al. [28]; Xiong et al. [29]; Mourad et al. [30]; Kaish et al. [31], and Kaish et al. [32]. However,
in most of these studies reversing cyclic load was not considered. This previous research is to be considered as the reference meth­
odology and data with respect to conventional ferrocement. The proposed experimental programme of the pilot study has two parts
and are in consideration of AF guided by LT. In the first part, the experimental programme will include a mesh angle of 45 degrees and
a symmetric lamina stacking sequence. The second part of the experimental programme comprises of the same specimen configura­
tions of the first part, but with the loading as reversed cyclic load. It is expected that proof-of-concept will be achieved in terms of
significantly improved performance. Then the experimental programme will be expended to include other values of mesh angle and
lamina stacking sequence, as well as inclusion of non-metallic mesh.

3.6. Advanced ferrocement/RC beams

As regards the RC beams of moment frames, the concept is the same as for the columns. Fig. 19 shows various possibilities. Fig. 19
(a), (b), and (c), show the location of the AF for upgrading the beam’s positive moment strength, negative moment strength, and shear
strength or local rotation capacity, respectively. The overlay can be attached to the surface of the beam, or the cover of the existing
beam can be removed, and the AF then installed. In this way, the dimensions of the original beam are preserved. As shown in Fig. 19
(b), removal of the cover will be important for the negative moment strength application in order to avoid a raise or upstand in the slab.
Research work on the application of ferrocement for beam repair and/or strengthening began several decades ago with increased
research interest in the first decade of the new millennium by Paramasivam et al. [33]; Shang et al. [34]; Sivagurunthan et al. [35], and
Khan et al. [36]. The proposed pilot studies and follow-up research, are as presented in the previous section for the AF/Reinforced
Concrete columns.

14
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 17. Advanced ferrocement sacrificial shear panel.

Fig. 18. Advanced ferrocement /RC columns.

Fig. 19. Advanced ferrocement/RC beams.

3.7. Advanced ferrocement/rc beam-column joints

It is well known that one of the most critical areas in a RC frame under seismic excitation is the beam-column joint. The phenomena
that most adversely affect the seismic behaviour of the joint are the shear failure of the core, and bond deterioration. It is envisaged that
AF can be placed on the faces of all the members comprising the joint, including the floor or roof slab, as shown in Fig. 20. The rebar
cover of the RC members is removed then the AF is installed therefore the original dimensions are maintained. A similar concept was
researched by Ravichandran et al. [37] and Li et al. [38]. However, in these cases, the joint configuration is two-dimensional and
excludes the slab. The proposed experimental programme of the pilot study will comprise of control specimens fabricated using the
approaches of conventional ferrocement. Additional specimens will consider a mesh angle of 45 degrees and a symmetric lamina
stacking sequence for comparison with the control specimens, and the previous research of Ravichandran et al. [37] and Li et al. [38].
It is expected that proof-of-concept will be achieved in terms of significantly improved performance. Then the experimental pro­
gramme will be expended to include other values of mesh angle and lamina stacking sequence, as well as inclusion of non-metallic
mesh.

3.8. Advanced ferrocement/RC shear wall

This concept is the same as for the case of the unreinforced masonry shear walls discussed in Section 3(a) above, and is shown in
Fig. 21 below. However, the wall is usually not unreinforced, but is comprised of reinforcement arranged in such a manner that the

15
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 20. Advanced ferrocement rc beams-column joint.

Fig. 21. Advanced ferrocement /RC shear walls.

resulting behaviour is non-ductile. The need for this type of application of ferrocement is rare since RC shear wall buildings are rarely
used for low to mid-rise buildings, and the percentage of hi-rise buildings within a typical stock of buildings is low. It is also possible
that the results of proof-of-concept investigations were disappointing. These factors may account for the lack of publications as regards
this application. However, as for the case of the previously mentioned AF conceptual designs, the use of mesh orientation and layup as
control variables, plus replacement of some of the layers with non-metallic mesh, may improve results significantly beyond what is
possible with conventional ferrocement. Even though such buildings occur more rarely, the potential losses due to failure of a hi-rise
building can be very significant in urban areas because of the falling of the walls onto the street below. Therefore, successful research in
this area will be of practical utility.
For the experimental programme of the pilot study the control specimen is a reinforced concrete shear wall with non-conforming
reinforcement details. Another specimen is fabricated exactly as the control specimen but with a ferrocement overlay applied to each
face. The number of layers of mesh, the type of mesh, and the mesh orientation angles are to have the typical values of conventional
ferrocement (i.e. 4 layers of ½ x ½ x 19 g square-welded mesh, at 0/90 degrees to the edges of the panel). These specimens are to be
tested under reversed cyclic lateral load. It is expected that the results will indicate a substantially higher energy absorption, hence that
the proof-of-concept was achieved. Then the research programme will be expanded to include the LT variables of mesh angle, lamina
stacking sequence, and the inclusion of non-metallic mesh.

3.9. Advanced ferrocement roofing

The focus of applications 3.1–3.8 above are with respect to the effects of horizontal forces on the building structure. AF can also be
used for the retrofitting of roofs by replacement, or for the construction of new roofing, in hurricane-prone areas. Such an approach is

Fig. 22. Testing of an advanced ferrocement one-way slab.

16
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

consistent with the “build-back-better” aim of the Sendai Framework for improved resilience. Although one of the earliest and well-
known application of ferrocement is for roofing, it seems work has not been done on the construction of the roofing based on precast
one-way spanning slabs. Preliminary work on one-way ferrocement slabs considering mesh orientation and layer-by-layer layup has
been undertaken at the University of the West Indies. It is possible to accurately predict the load-deflection behaviour of ferrocement
beams. But this is only for conventional ferrocement and with impractical support conditions, or if the mid-span deflection is less than
the thickness of the beam. However, support conditions for practical applications of beams or one-way slabs do not meet these
conditions therefore experimental investigation is necessary, especially for AF.
Figs. 22, 23 and 24 show the testing of such a slab, typical failure cracking on the tension side, and a plot of load vs mid-span
deflection, respectively. The load-deflection plot is for a slab of dimensions 1067 mm × 610 mm x 24 mm and comprised of 4
layers of square-welded mesh 19 mm × 19 mm x 2 mm in diameter. Each layer as oriented 60/30 degrees to the long edge of the slab.
The crack pattern indicates typical bending tensile failure as evidenced by the crack being parallel to the supports’ edges. This is
expected since the 4-point transverse load applied to the slab would induce a pure bending moment in the middle span.
It is reasonable to examine mesh at such orientations because the intended use of the slab for roofing is such that it is placed on a
sloped roof so the slab is bending transversely and in-plane at the same time. Therefore, the principal stresses would not be aligned
with the edges of the element.
A conventional form of roofing in the Caribbean is the use of 26 g metal sheets supported on 50 mm x 100 mm timber laths, or cold-
form 150 mm deep Z-purlins, at 1.2 m spacing. The sheets are attached to the laths or purlins with self-tapping screws. For the tested
AF one-way spanning roof panel, the wind load capacity had a strength-to-weight ratio 10.78 times higher compared with the con­
ventional roofing solution. Given the successful proof-of-concept, the research programme is to be expanded to consider other mesh
angles, and lamina stacking sequences. Investigation of slabs of full-scale spans and the construction of a prototype roof is also in
progress.

4. Conclusions

Considering Advanced Ferrocement as the evolution of ferrocement based on Lamination Theory, possible future investigations in
the context of earthquake and hurricane risk mitigation are presented. Pilot studies were derived regarding the retrofitting existing
buildings, or for developing new structural components for new buildings. On the basis of Lamination Theory, by considering the types
of variables and their ranges, the pilot studies are formulated in terms of core research questions and nine research directions or study
areas, that are implied from the research questions. The results of proof-of-concept testing for three of these research directions are
presented - advanced ferrocement/masonry-infilled steel frames, advanced ferrocement irreplaceable shear panels, and advanced
ferrocement roofing. For the first two areas the data are with respect to ferrocement comprised of mesh aligned at 0/90 degrees to the
edges of the wall. This serves as reference performance data relative to future specimens of advanced ferrocement with other mesh
angles and layup. This testing is also useful due to the general lack of data in these areas. For the advanced ferrocement roofing slab, the
mesh are at 60/30 degrees to the long edge of the slab.
A summary of the test results is as follows. When ferrocement overlays comprising of 3 layers of ½ x ½ x 19 g square-welded wire
mesh were applied to the faces of concrete masonry-infilled walls of steel frames, the lateral yield strength and displacement at yield
increased by factors of 1.50 and 2.30, respectively. As regards 2.5 m high x 1.0 m wide ferrocement shear panels of channel-shaped
cross-section comprised of 2 layers of ½ x ½ x 19 g square-welded wire mesh on either side of one layer of 150 mm × 150 mm x 3.5 mm
wire fabric reinforcement, and under in-plane reversed cyclic lateral load, a main result is as follows. The lateral maximum strength-to-
weight ratio was 3.37 times higher than that for an alternative reinforced concrete masonry minimum cost solution. For an advanced

Fig. 23. Failure cracking on the tension face of an advanced ferrocement slab.

17
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

Fig. 24. Load-deflection plot of an advanced ferrocement one-way slab.

ferrocement one-way spanning slab of dimensions 1067 mm × 610 mm x 24 mm and comprised of 4 layers of square-welded mesh
19 mm × 19 mm x 2 mm in diameter and with each layer oriented 60/30 degrees to the long edge of the slab, the wind load capacity
had a strength-to-weight ratio 10.78 times higher compared with the present minimum cost metal sheet-and-purlins solution.
From the pilot studies presented, the research directions and proof-of-concept test results can serve as the basis for an extensive
research effort regarding Advanced Ferrocement as the application of Lamination Theory to the design and construction of metallic or
non-metallic mesh-reinforced cementitious composite structural building components.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The author declares that he has no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

The writer acknowledges the assistance of undergraduate students Ryan Banarsee, Jonathan Chang, Vanessa Ayala, Romae Facey,
and Christina Da Silva for the collection of the unprocessed data, and to the staff of the Structures Lab of the Department of Civil and
Abdel Trinidad, for their usual quality work.

References

[1] United Nations, 1999, International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), Proceedings of the Programme Forum, Geneva, 5–9 July, 1999.
[2] United Nations last accessed 13 FebruaryU. Nations Int. Strategy Disaster Reduct. (UNISDR). 2022.last accessed 13 February〈https://sdgs.un.org/statements/
un-international-strategy-disaster-reduction-unisdr-8377〉.
[3] United Nations, 2005, Report of the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (ACONF.206/6), Kobe, Hyogo, Japan, 18–22 January, 2005.
[4] United Nations, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015-2030), United Nations, Geneva, 2015, 2015.
[5] FEMA 172, NEHRP Handbook for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, Building Seismic Safety Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), Washington D.C, U.S.A, 1992.
[6] B.K. Paul, R.P. Pama, Ferrocement, International Ferrocement Information Center, Bangkok, 1978.
[7] R.P. Clarke, A.K. Sharma, The experimental behaviour of ferrocement flat plate under biaxial flexure, J. Ferrocem. 21 (No. 2) (1997) 127–136.
[8] R.P. Clarke, 1994, "Effect of Coupling Stiffnesses on Ferrocement Strength: A Comparison of Analysis Approaches", Proceedings of the 5th International
Symposium on Ferrocement, UMIST, Manchester, 6–9 September, 1994, pp. 361–375.
[9] R.P. Clarke, The Hysteretic Behaviour of Ferrocement-Retrofitted Clay Block Masonry Walls Under In-Plane Reversed Cyclic Lateral Loads: Experimental
Investigations and Graphical Computer Models (Ph.D. Thesis), Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of the West Indies, St.
Augustine Campus, Trinidad, 1998.
[10] ASCE 41, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, Virginia, U.S.A, 2017.
[11] FEMA P-154. Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: A Handbook, third ed., Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
Washington D.C, U.S.A, 2015.
[12] FEMA P-155. Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: Supporting Documentation, third ed., Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA),, Washington D.C, U.S.A, 2015.
[13] CEN, EN 1998-3 Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance, part 3: assessment and retrofitting of buildings, European Committee for
Standardization,, Brussels, 2005.

18
R.P. Clarke Case Studies in Construction Materials 16 (2022) e00990

[14] IBC, International Building Code, International Code Council,, Washington D.C, U.S.A, 2018.
[15] ICC-ES, International Code Council Evaluation Service Inc (ICC-ES), International Code Council, Whittier, California, U.S.A, 2003.
[16] J.E. Ashton, J.M. Whitney, Theory of Laminated Plates, Technomic Publishing Company, Westport Connecticut, 1970.
[17] R.P. Clarke, A.K. Sharma, The Earthquake Strengthening of Single-Storey Unreinforced Block Masonry Houses in Trinidad and Tobago Using Ferrocement,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine Campus, Trinidad, 1997. 〈http://richardpclarke.tripod.
com/hurri/manual.pdf〉.
[18] R.P. Clarke, A.K. Sharma, The hysteretic behaviour of ferrocement-retrofitted clay tile walls, ACI Struct. J. (2004) 387–394.
[19] K.M. Amanat, M.M.M. Alam, M.S. Alam, Experimental investigation of the use of ferrocement laminates for repairing masonry infilled RC frames, J. Civ. Eng. 35
(2007) 71–80.
[20] S.Z. Korkmaz, M. Kamanli, H.H. Korkmaz, M.S. Donduren, M.T. Cogurcu, Experimental study on the behaviour of nonductile infilled RC frames with external
mesh reinforcement and plaster composites, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 10 (2010) 2305–2316.
[21] L. Abdel-Hafez, A.E.Y. Abouelezz, F.F. Elzefeary, Behavior of masonry strengthened infilled reinforced concrete frames under in-plane load, HBRC J. 11 (2015)
213–223.
[22] A. Leeanansaksiria, P. Panyakapoa, A. Ruangrassameeb, Seismic capacity of masonry infilled RC frame strengthening with expanded metal ferrocement, Eng.
Struct. 159 (No. 15) (2018) 110–127.
[23] M.S. Ghobadia, R.A. Jazanyb, H. Farshchic, In situ repair technique of infill masonry walls in steel frames damaged after an earthquake, Eng. Struct. 178 (2019)
665–679.
[24] K. Muto, 1969, "Earthquake Resistant Design of 36-Storied Kasuigasaki Building", Proc. 4th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Chile, III, J4, pp. 15–33.
[25] S.R. Razvi, S. Saatcioglu, Confinement of reinforced concrete columns with welded- wire fabric, Acids Struct. J. 86 (No.5) (1989) 615–623.
[26] T.K. Abdullah, An investigation into the behavior and strength of reinforced, concrete columns strengthened with ferrocement jackets, Cem. Concr. Compos. 25
(2003) 233–242.
[27] M.T. Kazemi, R. Morshed, Seismic strengthening of R/C columns with ferrocement, jacket, Cem. Concr. Compos. 27 (2005) 834–842.
[28] B. Kondraivendhan, B. Pradhan, Effect of ferrocement confinement on behaviour of, concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (2009) 1218–1222.
[29] G.J. Xiong, X.Y. Wu, F.F. Li, Z. Yan, Load carrying capacity and ductility of circular concrete columns confined by ferrocement including steel bars, Constr.
Build. Mater. 25 (2011) 2263–2268.
[30] S.M. Mourad, M.J. Shannag, Repair and strengthening of reinforced concrete square columns using ferrocement jackets, Cem. Concr. Compos. 34 (2012)
288–294.
[31] A.B.M.A. Kaish, M.R. Alam, M. Jamil, M.F.M. Zain, M.A. Wahed, Improved ferrocement jacketing for re-strengthening of square RC short column, Constr. Build.
Mater. 36 (2012) 228–237.
[32] A.B.M.A. Kaish, M.R. Alam, M. Jamil, M.A. Wahed, Ferrocement jacketing for, re-strengthening of square reinforced concrete columns under concentric
compressive, load, Procedia Eng. 54 (2013) 720–728.
[33] P. Paramasivam, C.T.E. Lim, K.C.G. Ong, Strengthening of RC beams with ferrocement Laminates, Cem. Concr. Compos. 20 (1998) 53–65.
[34] S.P. Shang, L.O. Zeng, H. Peng, Flexural Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Beam With Ferrocement, Hunan University, China, 2003, 28th Conference in Our
World in Concrete and Structures.
[35] B. Sivagurunthan, B. Vidivelli, Strengthening of predamaged reinforced concrete beams by ferrocement plates, Int. J. Curr. Eng. . Technol. 2 (2012) 340–344.
[36] S.U. Khan, S.F.A. Rafeeqi, T. Ayub, Strengthening of RC beams in flexure using ferrocement, Iran. J. Sci. Technol. Trans. Civil. Eng. 37 (2013) 353–363.
[37] K. Ravichandran, C.A. Jeyasahar, Seismic retrofitting of exterior beam-column joint using ferrocement, Int. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 4 (2012) 35–58.
[38] B. Li, E.S. Lam, B. Wu, Y. Wang, Experimental investigation on reinforced concrete interior beam- column joints rehabilitated by ferrocement jackets, Eng.
Struct. 56 (2013) 897–909.

Richard P. Clarke, Dr., Lecturer at The University of the West Indies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and Charter Member of the International
Ferrocement Society (IFS). His research interests include the behavior, analysis and design of cementitious composite materials, the earthquake resistant design of
buildings with an emphasis on hysteresis modeling and behavior, and the seismic evaluation and retrofitting of structural systems.

19