Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
= (4a)
370
5 . 1
100
3 =
s
fl fl
p
E
E
(4a)
5 . 1
1000
4
=
d
d
(4b)
72 . 0 2 . 0
3
'
=
cd vcd
f f (MPa) (4d)
where
n
=1.0 for members without axial force,
b
is a strength reduction factor,
'
cd
f =
'
c
f /
c
is the design
compressive strength, and
c
is the compressive strength material factor =1.3 for
'
c
f <50 MPa and 1.5
otherwise.
The contribution of the FRP shear reinforcement, V
f
, in non pre-stressed flexural members is given by:
b
s s fv fv fv
f
jd
s
E A
V
+
=
) cos (sin
(5a)
fv
bend
fv fv
fl fl mcd
fv
E
f
E
E f
=
'
0001 . 0 (5b)
mfb
fuv
b
b
bend
f
d
r
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ = 3 . 0 05 . 0 (5c)
10 / 1
' '
300
|
.
|
\
|
=
h
f f
cd mcd
(5d)
where
fv
is the design value to limit the maximum strain in the FRP shear reinforcement, jd =d/1.15,
s
is the
angle between the shear reinforcement and the member axis, h is the members height,
mfb
=1.3 (safety factor
for the bend portions of FRP bars), and r
b
and d
b
are the bends radius and bars diameter, respectively.
CSA Design Approach
The nominal shear capacity of FRP-RC flexural members not subjected to significant axial tension can be
calculated based on CSA S806-02 using the following equation:
d b f V V V V
w c cf f cf n
'
6 . 0 + + = (6)
In a similar way to that of ACI recommendations, the concrete contribution to the shear capacity, V
cf
and the
FRP stirrups contribution, V
f
in FRP-RC beams with minimum shear reinforcement is calculated using equations
(7) and (8 and 9), respectively.
d b
M
d V
E f V
w
f
f
fl fl c cf
3 / 1
'
035 . 0
|
|
.
|
\
|
= for d 300 mm(7a)
d b f V d b f
w c cf w c
' '
2 . 0 1 . 0 (7b)
d b f d b f
d
V
w c w c cf
' '
08 . 0
1000
130
</ |
.
|
\
|
+
= for d >300 mm (8)
d b f d b f V
w c w fuv fv f
'
6 . 0 4 . 0 = (9)
fuv
f is the ultimate strength of FRP bars parallel to the direction of fibers.
ISIS Canada Design Approach
ISIS Canada adopted similar principals used by CSA A23.3-94 (1994) for shear design of steel-reinforced
concrete in its design manual for FRP-RC structures with minimal modifications. The ISIS Canada method
calculates V
cf
and V
f
using the following equations:
s
fl
w c cf
E
E
d b f V
'
2 . 0 = for d 300 mm (10)
s
fl
w c
s
fl
w c cf
E
E
d b f
E
E
d b f
d
V
' '
1 . 0
1000
260
|
.
|
\
|
+
= for d >300 mm (11)
371
s
fv c
w w fuv fv f
E
E f
d b d b f V
'
8 . 0 = ( is assumed = 0.4) (12)
Experimental Database
In the current study, shear strength results for 150 simply supported, rectangular concrete beams (50 of which are
without shear reinforcement) were collected from published literature. Beams without shear reinforcement had
FRP bars as longitudinal reinforcement. For beams with shear reinforcement, FRP stirrups were used, 72 of
which had FRP bars. Table 1 provides the range and average values of all parameters used in the database.
Table 1. Range of shear design parameters and V
n
for beams used in database
Parameters
Without shear reinf. (50 beams) With shear reinf. (100 beams)
Minimum Maximum Average COV Minimum Maximum Average COV
D (mm) 150.0 360.0 253.1 26 210.0 500.0 291.2 22
b
w
(mm) 150.0 1000.0 360.5 82 135.0 300.0 200.8 20
a/d 1.8 6.5 3.7 36 1.2 4.3 2.7 27
fl
E
fl
(GPa) 0.3 3.2 0.9 60 0.3 9.6 1.1 0.53
fv
f
fv
(MPa) -- -- -- -- 0.7 20.3 6.0 0.95
f
c
(MPa) 22.7 49.0 38.5 17 22.5 84.2 39.5 33
V
n
(kN) 31.5 190.0 87.8 54 56.2 375.5 164.1 47
DISCUSSION OF CODE EQUATIONS PERFORMANCE
The predicted shear capacities in comparison to those calculated using ACI 440.1R-06, J SCE-97, CSA S806-02,
and ISIS Canada-01 were then compared to the experimentally measured values. The performance of each
method was assessed based on both the ratio of measured to calculated shear strength (V
m
/V
p
), and the average
absolute error (AAE) calculated using equation (13):
100
1
x
V
V V
n
AAE
m
p m
= (13)
The average, standard deviation (STDV), and coefficient of variation (COV) for V
m
/V
p
, and the average absolute
error (AAE) of the investigated shear calculation methods are listed in Table 2.
Table 2. Performance of shear design methods in predicting the shear strength of FRP-RC beams.
Method
Without shear reinf. (50 beams) With shear reinf. (100 beams)
AAE (%)
V
measured
/ V
calculated
AAE (%)
V
measured
/ V
calculated
Average STDV COV (%) Average STDV COV (%)
ACI 440.1R-03 68.35 4.02 2.11 52 45.57 1.90 0.91 47
ACI 440.1R-06 29.74 1.51 0.69 45 31.33 1.22 0.48 39
CSA S806-02 33.13 1.68 0.66 39 17.49 1.13 0.27 24
J SCE-97 33.16 1.69 0.71 41 50.05 2.22 0.73 32
ISIS Canada-01 34.57 1.69 0.81 48 29.52 1.06 0.33 31
Beams without Shear Reinforcement
Figure 1 displays the shear strength of FRP-RC beams without shear reinforcement calculated using current
shear design provisions are plotted against the experimentally measured values. It is clear that shear design
equation provided by the latest version of ACI guidelines (ACI 440-06) is considerably improved from that of
ACI 440-03 and better estimates the shear capacity of FRP-reinforced concrete beams without stirrups with an
average (V
m
/V
cal
) of 1.51 (4.02 for ACI 440-03) (Figure 1). The 2003 version of ACI guidelines assume that the
shear strength of FRP-reinforced concrete beams increases linearly with the axial rigidity,
fl
E
fl
of the
longitudinal reinforcement and decreases as the compressive strength of concrete increases. The first assumption
leads to overestimating the shear capacity of highly reinforced concrete beams, especially beams reinforced with
carbon fiber-reinforced polymer CFRP (high E
fl
), whereas the latter assumption yields very conservative shear
strength for FRP-RC beams without stirrups. The improved equations of ACI 440-06 properly assume that the
372
shear strength, V
cf
, is a function of compressive strength of concrete, f
c
, longitudinal reinforcement ratio,
fl
, and
the modular ratio (E
fl
/E
s
).
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Beams
V
m
/
V
C
a
l
ACI 440-03 ACI 440-06
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Beams
V
m
/ V
C
a
l
CSA S806
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Beams
V
m
/
V
C
a
l
JSCE
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Beams
V
m
/
V
c
a
l
ISIS
Figure 1. Measured versus calculated shear capacity of FRP-RC beams without shear reinforcement.
Similarly, shear design equations adopted by J SCE-97, CSA S806-02, and ISIS Canada-01 generally yielded
conservative results even without applying reduction factors (Figure 1) with an average V
m
/V
p
of 1.69.
Nonetheless, ISIS shear equations (eqs. 10 and 11) displayed a more scattered pattern than those of J SCE and
CSA with a COV of 48 % compared to 41 % and 39 % for J SCE and CSA, respectively.
Current guidelines and recommendations show an incoherent approach to modify the existing steel-based shear
design guidelines in order to adjust them to FRP-RC beams. For instance, the axial rigidity of the longitudinal
reinforcement (E
f
/E
s
) is square root for ISIS-01, and cubic root for J SCE-97and CSA S806, while mixed for
ACI-440. This is mainly caused by the limited verification with experimental results by each standard,
something that the current study aimed at exposing. Due to different availability of FRP materials in various
markets, researchers may be less exposed to other types of products and subsequently derive conclusion limited
to the range of tested parameters. Moreover, ISIS guidelines does not account for other important shear design
parameters on V
cf
, such as the longitudinal steel ratio,
l
, and the shear span to depth ratio, a/d. This could be the
reason for the very conservative values of shear strength calculated using ISIS equations for the case of slightly
reinforced slender concrete beams (
l
<0.5 % and a/d >2.5).
Beams with Shear Reinforcement
Figure 2 illustrates the calculated values of shear strength for concrete beams reinforced with FRP stirrups using
the design guidelines discussed earlier in comparison to the experimentally measured values. Despite the
conservative nature of shear equations proposed by ACI 440 in calculating V
cf
(Figure 1), these equations, in
some cases, offered unsafe predictions of the nominal shear strength V
n
=V
cf
+V
f
(Figure 2). This indicates that
ACI 440 tends to highly overestimate the V
f
component in the equation. A closer look at results reveals that the
majority of the beams for which ACI 440 overestimated the nominal shear strength had either a high shear
reinforcement ratio,
fv
or were reinforced with stirrups having a high modulus of elasticity (E
f
). This indicates
yet again the need to revisit these two parameters (
fv
, E
f
/E
s
) and their powers in the equations. Similar
observations are valid for shear equations proposed by ISIS (Figure 2), and to a lower extent for equations
proposed by CSA S806 (Figure 2).
Shear provisions of ACI 440, CSA S806, and ISIS adopted the rationale of equation (1) in calculating the
nominal shear capacity, V
n
, assuming that stirrups yield at failure and the capacity of FRP shear reinforcement
varies linearly with
fv
E
fv
(in the case of ACI) or with
fv
f
fuv
(for CSA and ISIS). These assumptions result in
overestimating the shear strength of concrete beams reinforced with FRP materials of high ultimate strength or
high modulus of elasticity. Moreover, CSA S806 (eq. 10) and ISIS (eq. 13) assume the dependency of shear
reinforcement capacity on the strength of FRP bars at the bend portion, which is estimated to be 40 % of the
ultimate tensile strength parallel to the direction of FRP fibers. However, an experimental study conducted by
Duranovic et al. (1997) to investigate the shear strength and mode of failure of concrete beams reinforced with
FRP stirrups lead to a conclusion that stresses in FRP stirrups at failure never exceeded 65 % of their bends
capacity.
373
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Beams
V
m
/
V
C
a
l
ACI 440-03 ACI 440-06
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Beams
V
m
/
V
C
a
l
CSA-S806
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Beams
V
m
/
V
C
a
l
JSCE
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Beams
V
m
/
V
C
a
l
ISIS
Figure 2. Measured versus calculated shear capacity for RC beams with FRP shear reinforcement.
CONCLUSIONS
This study verified the accuracy of several existing shear design methods to predict the nominal shear strength of
FRP-RC beams, and compared such predictions with actual experimental values. Several conclusions can be
drawn:
Existing shear provisions considered in this study provided highly conservative results in estimating the
shear strength of FRP-RC beams without shear reinforcement.
The ACI 440 equation for the FRP stirrups contribution to shear capacity, V
fv
is more for FRP materials
having low modulus of elasticity. However, it overestimates the capacity of FRP stirrups with high modulus
of elasticity.
Shear standards of J SCE-97 provided good estimation of the shear capacity supplied by FRP shear
reinforcement for low shear capacity beams. However, such standards are highly conservative for beams
having high shear capacity.
The CSA S806 method reasonably estimated shear strength of concrete beams having relatively low shear
reinforcement ratio, yet overestimated the shear capacity of highly reinforced beams with FRP stirrups of
high tensile strength.
The effect of the axial rigidity of FRP longitudinal reinforcement on the shear capacity of FRP-RC beams is
better captured by a cubic root.
REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute (2006). Guide for the design and construction of concrete reinforced with FRP
bars. Technical Committee Document No. 440.1R-06, Farmington Hills, Mich.
Canadian Standards (CSA S806-02), Design and construction of building components with fiber-reinforced
polymers, Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale, Ontario, Canada, 2002, 116 p.
CSA A23.3-94, Design of concrete structures, Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale, Ontario, Canada,
1994, 220 p.
Duranavic, N., Pilakoutas, K., and Waldron, P. (1997) Test on concrete beams reinforced with glass fiber
reinforced plastic bars, Proceeding of FRPRCS-3, Sapporo, J apan, pp. 479-486.
ISIS Canada (2001) Reinforcing concrete structures with fiber-reinforced polymers, The Canadian Network of
Centres of Excellence, Design Manual No. 3, Zukewich, J ., editor, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg,
Manitoba, Canada, 133 p.
J apan Society of Civil Engineers (J SCE-97), Recommendations for design and construction of concrete
structures using continuous fiber-reinforced materials, Concrete Engineering Series 23, Machida, A.,
editor, 1997, 325 p.
J oint ACI-ASCE Committee 445 (1998) Recent approaches to shear design of structural concrete, J ournal of
Structural Engineering, V. 124, No. 12, pp. 1375-1417.
Razaqpur, A. G., Isgor, B. O., Greenaway, S., and Selley, A. (2004) Concrete contribution to the shear
resistance of fiber-reinforced polymer reinforced concrete members, ASCE J ournal of Composites for
Construction, Vol. 8, No. 5, pp. 452-460.
Russo, G., and Puleri, G., Stirrups effectiveness in reinforced concrete beams under flexure and shear, ACI
Structural J ournal, Vol. 94, No. 3, 1997, pp. 227-238.
374