## 10 Conclusions and Results  
This paper presents the design process, experimental evaluation, and in-situ implementation of a shear-strengthening solution applied to 19 shear-deficient RC-MRF T-beams in an existing 12-story building in downtown Los Angeles, California. The results of the experimental study presented herein served as a design basis for the in-situ retrofit, which was recently completed within the building. The shear-strength deficiency of these beams was up to 30% at the end-hinging region. The EB-FRP-strengthening scheme for the end region of the shear-deficient MRF beams was developed in three iterations, each of them evaluated experimentally via fully reversed cyclic testing of a 4/5-scale half-length cantilever specimen, replica of a representative beam in the building. Specifically, the following shear-strengthening concepts were tested: (a) specimen S1, strengthened with an unanchored continuous U-wrap; (b) specimen S1B, furnished with a continuous U-wrap anchored at the ends with embedded FRP anchors; and (c) specimen S5, strengthened with fully closed FRP hoops, achieved with discrete FRP U-wrap strips and spliced CFRP rope anchors through the beam flanges and supplemented with intermediate flexural crack-inducement joints. Results from testing the FRP-strengthening scheme at the end-yielding region of S1A and S1B were used to develop the strengthening scheme tested on S5. The FRP laminates were designed according to the procedure outlined in ACI 440.2R-08, whereas the FRP anchors were designed using the model by [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2010) for straight anchors and design recommendations found in literature. With comparable (internal) transverse reinforcement ratios (0.0035 for S1A/S1B and 0.0033 for S5, Table 1) and unstrengthened shear capacities (Table 6), specimen S5, retrofitted with FRP hoops, outperformed the initial two specimens (S1A and S1B) constructed with conventional shear-strengthening solutions. Despite a more challenging and labor-intensive installation, requiring simultaneous access to the top and bottom of the beams, the fully closed FRP-strengthening scheme was selected for the in-situ implementation. The FRP hoops enabled the development of a ductile flexural failure with considerably high rotation values--0.034 rad (3.4% drift) at peak and 0.038 rad (3.8% drift) at strength loss for a beam that, otherwise, would have prematurely failed in shear (due to a 30% overstress at the beam end). The rotation at peak capacity was about 30% higher than the ASCE 41 rotation limit corresponding to the LS performance objective. Energy dissipation achieved with the fully closed scheme (S5) was 108% higher than that of the unanchored FRP U-wrap (S1A) and 45% higher than that of the FRP U-wrap with traditional embedded anchors (S1B). The intermediate saw-cut grooves successfully attracted crack formation at the desired locations, i.e., in between the strips and away from the FRP reinforcement, which contributed to not having any discernable debonding of the strips up to 3% drift. The FRP anchors, two per strip, were successful at developing the FRP reinforcement. Fracture of one of the second-next CFRP strips from the support, followed by fracture of one of the splice anchors on the first strip and subsequent substantial loss of strength, only occurred after complete plastic hinging during the second cycle at 3.8% drift (0.038 rad). Although more disruptive than a U-wrap with FRP-embedded anchors, complete wrapping around the perimeter of the beam using FRP splice anchors through and over the slab is a better option for seismic applications on ductile regions of RC moment-resisting frame beams with a top slab (RC-MRF T-beams) given the reversible nature of the loading, and the only option when additional confinement is required, for example, to control premature buckling of the top reinforcement.