Concrete Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting II Alexander et al (eds)

2009 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-415-46850-3

An approach of service life in repair of structures with concrete

due to natural hazards
N.G. Maldonado, N.F. Pizarro, R.J. Michelini & A.M. Guzmn
Regional Mendoza Faculty, National Technological University, CEREDETEC, Mendoza, Argentina

ABSTRACT: In the last fifteen years, the problems generated by pathologies and vulnerability in reinforced
concrete structures are increased due the aging of materials and the forces generated by natural phenomena. The
new Argentine regulations of reinforced concrete define the service life in fifty years. They include durability
as an action in the evaluation of environmental conditions. The problems of damage generated by a natural
phenomenon imply new issues about the residual service life with important social and economic impacts. In
this paper through laboratory tests different types of repairs in seismic-resistant structures such as: additional
ties, reinforced steel or plastic mesh are evaluated. Structural safety, habitableness and durability with national
standards are also evaluated. The results of testing repairs show that they are applied with measures of maintenance. In the evaluation of service life the results of all constructive process must be included together with
cultural changes.

1
1.1

INTRODUCTION

1.2

Overview of service life and natural phenomena

The service life of structures is subjected to performance and aging of materials. The evaluation
of service life is based on experience and there are
few regulations which define explicitness because
the reinforced concrete is a relatively new material
(Helene 2007).
The question is if there is advancement in pathological problems for reinforced concrete structures
or if the performance of materials relatively new is
evident. In regions with random natural phenomena
such earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, etc, special
path loads are added.
In non developed countries these effects make an
impact on social and economical aspects (for examples: Mxico Earthquake, 1985; Sumatra Earthquake
and Tsunami, 2004; Pisco and Ica Earthquake, Per,
2007).
The challenge of estimate the service life is necessary but it is not sufficient because it is difficult to
prove that the service life can be reach without periodical inspections and adequate maintenance. Plus
complex is when the phenomena had extraordinary
registrations such the above earthquakes mentioned.
The cost of construction should be included since
partially dependent on the estimated service life and
the used materials.

National framework

The Repblica Argentina has 2/3 of its territory under

seismic risk, but the mid-west, Mendoza and San
Juan provinces have the most seismic risk, (INPRES
1989).
The aim of codes is to establish the minimum technological requirements in order to guarantee a level of
structural safety and the ability to foresee future service conditions. The new national code of reinforced
concrete incorporates the environmental conditions
as loads on the structure which must be identified
to establish the criteria for its protection, as well as
the requirement of a concrete design with a fifty-year
service life. The environmental exposure conditions
are classified as: general exposure conditions relate
to degradation of the structure by corrosion processes
and specific exposure conditions related to freezing
and thawing, as well as effects of chemicals or salts
contained in soils and water contacting structures
(CIRSOC 201 2005).
The definition of service life in the code in force
is: the period of time after construction during which
safety, functionality or aptitude in service and acceptable aspect must be maintained, without significant
operating expenses. The service life is a value which
is established by owner in the preview design of
construction.
But to retrofit or rehabilitate the service life is not
defined neither for innovative systems. Only in the

1129

Seismic-Resistant Code of Mendoza is explained the

methodology to repair or rehabilitate of construction but only from the point of view of structures
(Seismic-Resistant Code of Mendoza 1987).
1.3

Local research programs

The National Technological University has into its

research program studies about social housing, innovative systems of structures, high performance materials
and local near source earthquakes especially located in
Ceredetec, Regional Mendoza Faculty. The rehabilitation of structures included all these study subjects.
Structural materials that are damaged or seriously
deteriorated may have an adverse effect on the seismic performance of an existing building during a
severe earthquake. This problem is detected specially
in social housing, where the evaluation of service life
is conditioned by costs, (National Secretary of Housing 2000). The required service life is of thirty years,
but the new cementitious materials with pozzolans,
fly ash, etc require additional research. The design of
social housing has not yet considered durability and
habitableness such a load so far.
Although the repairing techniques for lateral
bonded masonry have been investigated in our region
since 1985 (Maldonado & Olivencia 1992), the new
codes in force also include the evaluation of service
life and the inclusion of new techniques expecting
better performance of materials and structures.
The experimental works for improving performance of the existing structure include the three basic
classes of measures taken to retrofit a building: add
elements, enhance performance of existing elements
and improve connection between components (FEMA
547 2006).
2
2.1

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
Methodology of research

The original lateral bonded masonry is tested to horizontal static cyclic loads up to failure. In this damage
state, the structure is repaired with different techniques and it is tested at the same level of load or
up to failure. The conclusions about repair technique
used are obtained by comparison of both tests.
2.2

for strengthening wall we used rhomboidal wire

mesh with anchor ties (5 103 m) and wire (3
103 m), reinforced steel mesh # (4 103 m diameter at 0.40 m interval) and cement coating.
for strengthening wall we used high density polyethylene mesh # (0.34 103 m diameter wrapped
fabric 2-row 1-row or anti-hail mesh) adjusted
Table 1.

Mechanical properties of used materials.

Evaluated item

Value
MPa

Compressive strength of cement mortar

Compressive strength of concrete
Elastic modulus of concrete
Tensile strength of steel
Elastic modulus of steel
Compressive strength of masonry (ladrilln)*
Flexural strength of masonry (ladrilln)
Shear modulus G (ladrilln)
Compressive strength of epoxy resin
Flexural strength of epoxy resin
Weight of polyethylene mesh/m2
Tensile strength of polyethylene mesh
Melt flow index of polyethylene

10
17
18000
6770
180000
9
3
560
6070
20
55
340
1.2

* Massive ordinary clay brick.

Table 2.
walls.

Characteristics of original and repaired masonry

Original
material

Dc

Steel

No.

Reparation
material

1
1R
2
2R
3

1.29
1.29
2.39
2.39
1.10

0.18
0.24
0.18
0.21
0.18

2.90
2.90
2.91
2.91
2.93

0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18

0.6
0.6
2.0
2.0
0.35

3R
4
4R
5
5R

1.10
1.15
1.15
1.12
1.12

0.215
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13

2.93
2.91
2.91
2.82
2.82

0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18

0.35
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85

6
6R

2.34
2.34

0.18
0.18

2.97
2.97

0.18
0.18

0.6
0.6

7
7R

2.35
2.35

0.18
0.18

2.98
2.98

0.18
0.18

0.6
0.6

8
8R

2.35
2.35

0.18
0.18

2.89
2.89

0.18
0.18

0.6
0.6

Repair techniques used

For closing cracks injection epoxy resin is used for

reinforced concrete of columns (Rendn & Zambrano
2007).
For the repairing of masonry walls we used different techniques:

1130

Ladrilln
Steel mesh
Ladrilln
Steel mesh
Ladrilln
Polyethylene
mesh
Ceramic
Mid-beam
Ceramic
Mid-beam
Hollow
ceramic
Mid-beam
Hollow
ceramic
Replace unit
Hollow
ceramic
Replace unit

with anchor tie (5 103 m diameter at 0.50 m

interval in the half of wall) and wire (3 103 m)
and cement coating.
for improved connections we used a reinforced
concrete mid-beam anchored in tied columns.
for adding elements we used units of masonry
without damage bonded with cement mortar for
replacing damaged units.

ultimate load (Hu), the horizontal damaged reinforced

concrete load (Hc), the relation between ultimate load
and capacity of rupture criteria of Mohr-Coulomb
of masonry (Tu) according to Seismic-Resistant Code
of Mendoza, (1987) and ultimate distortion at level of
head of wall.

4 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
2.3

Used materials

The mechanical properties of used materials are presented in Table 1.

2.4

Tests

The different techniques are verified through 1:1 laboratory tests applying horizontal cyclic load such as a
Cantilever masonry beam.
The characteristics of the tested walls are presented
in Table 2 with: length (L), thickness (T), height (H),
original material of wall and material of reparation,
thickness of tie reinforced concrete column (Dc) and
amount of reinforced steel of tie-column. The number
with R records the same repaired structure.
3

RESULTS OF TESTS

Results of laboratory tests are presented in Table 3

with: the horizontal damaged masonry load (Hm),

Table 3.
walls.

Results of tests on original and repaired masonry

Table 4 presents the evaluation of structural security according to Section 8 Seismic-Resistant Code
of Mendoza (1987). This code presents four levels
of security with its corresponding type of rehabilitation according to quality of materials, importance
of building and structural safety. The reparation with
mesh attains the sufficient level of security. The midbeam repair and the replacement of units are not
safety enough.
The level of distortion of wall head does not surpass the limit established by code (1%) for all tests.
For repairing with added elements or replacement of
units the tests showed the highest value in Table 3.
The amount of steel was the limit for deformation
capacity (Maldonado et al. 1998).
The cover of reinforced concrete ties and the evaluation of necessary cover due to durability such as new
national code CIRSOC 201 (2005) are presented in
Table 4. Carbonation is considered the only cause of
deterioration of concrete, but this attack can produce
Table 4.
walls.

Results of tests on original and repaired masonry

Cover

Hm

Hu

Hc

No.

Hu/Tu

1
1R
2
2R
3
3R
4
4R
5
5R
6
6R
7
7R
8
8R

375
300
800
820
150
200
280
240
160
160
480
400
480
480
575
175

510
650
1200
1160
180
264
280
580
240
520
520
620
640
690
600
275

225
300
340
360
90
160
100
120
40
100
300
140
300
400
350
175

1.04
0.96
2.55
2.14
0.80
1.17
0.67
1.78
0.52
1.44
0.59
0.70
0.72
0.77
0.68
0.31

Ultimate
distortion
0.007
0.008
0.001
0.003
0.006
0.004
0.005
0.008
0.004
0.009
0.002
0.009
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.004

No.

Hu/Tu

1
1R
2
2R
3
3R
4
4R
5
5R
6
6R
7
7R
8
8R

1.04
0.96
2.55
2.14
0.80
1.17
0.67
1.78
0.52
1.44
0.59
0.70
0.72
0.77
0.68
0.31

1131

Structural
security level mm
Sufficient
Sufficient
Sufficient
Sufficient
Low
Sufficient
Limit
Sufficient
No sufficient
Sufficient
No sufficient
Limit
Limit
Limit
Limit
No sufficient

15
45
15
22.5
15
16.75
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15

Durability
for cover
years
8
30
8
21
8
10
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8

corrosion of reinforced steel of ties as well. The rate

of carbonation is measured in normal cement concrete specimens but for pozzolan cement concrete is
considered with a plus 10% because there are no tests
in the region (Tronconis 2006).
Concrete ties in corners and connections are more
exposed and they will generate concentration of moisture, called thermal bridge, and the habitableness may
be diminished. The risk of corrosion will be increased
when reinforced steel mesh is used provided the cover
is not sufficient to obtain the estimated service life.
Figure 1 shows the type of design applied in social
housing, with no coatings, thus this situation generates concentration of condensation of water and loss
of hydrothermal conditions.
The risk of corrosion will decrease if polyethylene
mesh is used as in test No. 3. Figure 2 show that this
pattern of distribution of damages is better than the
other reparations with steel mesh.

Figure 1.

Model of seismic-resistant social housing.

The cost of repair with steel mesh is 13.5 dollars

per m2 and the cost of repair with polyethylene mesh
is 3 dollars per m2. If the replacement of units and the
incorporation of ties are cheaper than other repairs,
they are not recommended because safety is not
sufficient.
The reparation with polyethylene mesh is consistent with the state of the art of construction and
the seismic resistant design. It is allowed to find
a solution with local workmanship, with lower
cost and acceptable structural and environment
response.

CONCLUSIONS

The reparation system must be evaluated in according the available materials and workmanship in the
region. The choice of reparation system must be
in account not only the cost also the durability of
solution.
The reparation system of mesh diminishes and
redistributes the splitting in the panel.
The reparation with polyethylene mesh allows a
longer service life compatible with new regulations
for social housing.
The reparation with steel mesh must include
measures of maintenance to avoid corrosion of
reinforcement.
The reparation with mid-beam attains a level of
damage incompatible with estimated service life.
In the evaluation of service life of reparations
the results of all constructive process must be
included.
It is necessary to improve the study of technique
applied to joint the meshes to the wall and the
effect of repaired coating in the durability with the
new used additions.

REFERENCES

Figure 2. Damages of original wall (left) and repaired wall

with polyethylene mesh (right).

CIRSOC 201. 2005. Reglamento Argentino de Estructuras de Hormign. Buenos Aires, Argentina: INTI. (in
Spanish).
FEMA 547. 2006. Techniques for the Seismic Rehabilitation
of Existing Buildings. Washington, D.C.: NEHRP.
Government of Mendoza. 1987. Seismic-Resistant Code of
Mendoza. (in Spanish).
Helene, P.R. 2007. A arte de projetar e construir estruturas.
In Proc. IX Congreso Latinoamericano de Patologa de
la Construccin & XI Congreso de Control de Calidad
CONPAT; Proc. Intern. Quito, 2427 October 2007.
Ecuador: Alconpat.
INPRES. 1989. Seismic Microzonation of Great Mendoza.

1132

Maldonado, N.G. & Olivencia, L.A. 1992. Techniques

used to repair seismic-resistant masonry walls. In Tenth
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid,
Espaa; Proc. Intern. A.A.Balkema, Rotterdam, Brookfield. 9: 53895394.
Maldonado, N.G., Michelini, R.J. & Olivencia, L.A. 1998.
Criterios de diseo, construccin y evaluacin por capacidad de la mampostera sismorresistente reparada. In XVI
Jornadas Argentinas de Ingeniera Estructural; Proc.
Buenos Aires: 1: 116

National Secretary of Housing. 2000. Law 18. Standards for

social housing (in Spanish).
Rendn Ospina, J. & Zambrano Lpez, J. 2007. Refuerzo
de estructuras frente a sismo. In P. Helene & F. Pereira
(ed), Rehabilitacin y mantenimiento de estructuras de
concreto: 477:497. Brasil: Sika (in Spanish).
Tronconis de Rincn, O. 2006. Durability of concrete
structures: DURACON, an iberoamerican project. Preliminary results. Building and Environment 41: 952962.
Sciencedirect: Elsevier.

1133