Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{200763,
        author = {Rasika Raju Varak and Vidula R. Waskar and Devashish Chauhan and Vivek Suryawanshi},
        title = {Comparative Study of RC Column with RC Jacketing and FRP Jacketing.},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2026},
        volume = {12},
        number = {12},
        pages = {1666-1676},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=200763},
        abstract = {Reinforced concrete columns are key structural members in multistorey buildings that carry loads from superstructure to the foundation. Retrofitting is required when columns can no more meet structural requirements due to aging, increased loading, or revised seismic design provisions. In this study, a G+10 RC moment-resisting building in Pune was analyzed in ETABS using response spectrum analysis as per IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016. Axial load and biaxial bending checks carried out as per IS 456:2000 identified Column C3 as unsafe, with a demand–capacity ratio (DCR) greater than 1.0. To strengthen the deficient column, RC jacketing was designed according to IS 15988:2013 and SP-16 guidelines. The original 400 × 700 mm column was jacketed to 600 × 1000 mm using M35 concrete and 12 longitudinal bars of 20 mm diameter. Under an axial load of 408.77 kN, the retrofitted section was within the interaction limit with a DCR of 0.43, resulting in sufficient capacity. Strengthening using CFRP wraps was also assessed according to ACI 440.2R-17 provisions. The confinement ratio of 0.204 met recommended limits and increased the effective concrete compressive strength to 26.41 MPa. Comparative results show that RC jacketing considerably enhances stiffness and load capacity but increases member size and self-weight. In contrast, CFRP jacketing improves confinement and ductility without increasing cross-sectional dimensions and easy installation. However, limited studies compare RC and CFRP jacketing using a building-level demand–capacity approach. This study presents such an approach to support selection of suitable seismic retrofitting techniques based on performance requirements.},
        keywords = {RC Column, Retrofitting, RC Jacketing, FRP Jacketing, ETABS, Numerical Analysis.},
        month = {May},
        }