A New Concept for the Computation of Maximum Moment Capacity of

Reinforced Concrete (RC) Beams Strengthened with

Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)
P.N.Balaguru*
Introduction

Manufacturers recommended fracture strain of fibers

Use of Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composites for

strengthening, repair and retrofit of Reinforced Concrete
(RC) beams is steadily increasing over the past 15 years.
Since this composite is lightweight and does not corrode,
it is replacing steel piate for repair and retrofit of beams
in various applications including bridges and parking
garages. The lightweight not only reduces the amount of
extra dead load but also makes the construction much less
expensive because heavy cranes are not needed for
repair. The loss of headroom due to repair is also insignificant because the FRP plates are only a few mm thick.
A number of researchers have evaluated RC beams
strengthened with FRP sheets (ACI Committee 440 1996
to Varastehpour and Hamelin 1996). They all concluded that FRP can be effectively used for repair,
retrofit and strengthening of RC beams. Another major
conclusion is that, most failures occur by delamination of
FRP at a strain, which is much lower than the fracture
strain of fibers used in the FRP. Research is also being
conducted to predict this defamination mechanism, so
that analysis and design procedures can be developed.

Manufacturers recommended modulus of elasticity of

fibers (sheet, fabric or plate)

The number of layers of sheets or fabric and

The type of exposure that the repaired beam will

endure during its lifetime.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new concept

for the computation of maximum moment. This concept,
developed after a careful analysis of results from two
dozen investigators around the world, author's own experience in his laboratory and the discussions with the
collogues of American Concrete Institute Committee
(ACI) 440 on FRP, is based on the following hypothesis.
Instability occurs when the tension steel reinforcement at
the location of maximum bending moment starts strain
hardening and this instability controls the maximum FRPsirain that can be attained before failure. Since the maximum moment capacity is the most important parameter
in strengthening, only this aspect is presented in this
paper. In order to keep the focus on the strength, other
important factors such as rotation capacity and section
ductility are not discussed.
Summary of the Current Concept
ACI Committee 440 provides a comprehensive guideline
for the analysis and design of FRP strengthened RC
beams. The force contribution of FRP, which is the subject matter of this paper, is based on:
* Distinguished Professor, Rutgers The State
University of New Jersey, USA and Program
Director. National Science Foundation USA.

A number of safety factors are also recommended. But

the main hypothesis is: if failure occurs by failure of FRP,
then the fracture strain of the fiber is achievable and can
be used in the computation of maximum of moment of
strengthened beam. The variable that reduces this usable
strain is the number of layers. If the Committee recommendation is used, as the number of layers increase the
usable strain of FRP reduces significantly. A number of
researchers have also proposed analytical procedures
using similar concepts Delamination of FRP is seen as a
problem that should be overcome by some means, such
as anchoring. Results published by Bonacci and Maalej,
in which they analyzed 127 specimens from 23 separate
investigations show that strain of FRP at maximum load,
which averages to 63% of fracture strain does not correlate to variables such as amount of FRP reinforcement as
related to steel reinforcement or FRP needed to produce
balanced failure. They also show that anchoring helps but
does not eliminate delamination. Results published by
Toutanjeeet.all ( 2003 ), in which they used an inorganic
polymer and eliminated failure by delamination, also
show that the fracture strain of fibers can not be achieved
before the failure of the beams.
The Proposed Concept
The hypothesis of the proposed concept is that the maximum attainable FRP strain in a strengthened RC beam
is controlled by the strain hardening of the steel tension
reinforcement. Consider a typical simply supported RC
beam strengthened with FRP and tested in bending using
four point loads, figure 1. Assume that the beam is
reinforced with mild steel with yield strength of about 420
MPa. This steel yields at a strain of about 0.002 and starts
strain hardening at a strain of about 0.006, Figure 2 The
yield Plato and the subsequent strain hardening are
specified in the Standards to assure ductile behavior.
American Society for Testing and Materials also specifies
thai the steel's fracture strength should be 50% higher
than the yield strength.
[n the test setup shown in figure 1, when the load reaches
the yield load, the reinforcing steel at the mid-span will

ICIJournal

October-December 2003

k**s

'*&ffi:-f-

-'' ''('.^^j. <

; -'V-'--

'

'

-'tj-^'^--

'^''''

v : i

n[-yi elding

1
I

1
/

Fig.4 Stress state at maximum load

ll e lin :1M

'- "

1
Fig.1 Load setup and typical load-deflection behaviour

Strain

Fiq.2 Stress-strain curves for mild steel

start yielding. When the steel at this critical section is in
the yield plato, as the curvature increases with the increase in load, the FRP's contribution continues to increases linearly because the fibers in FRP behave linearly
elastic up to failure. Since the force contribution of steel
does not increase at this stage, slopes of both the momentcurvature and load-deflection curves decrease. With further increase in load, the steel at this critical section, where
the stress is maximum, starts to strain harden and the
stresses at the adjacent locations of the same steel bar (or
bars) begin to reach and exceed yield strength. When the
steel starts to yield in one of the adjacent sections as

shown in Figure 4, the moment-curvature relation at the

maximum moment section is no longer section dependant. Yielding of steel at adjacent locations creates instability at the maximum moment section, making
increase in FRP stress, region dependant rather than
section dependant. Yielding of steel at nearby locations
can create local debonding as observed by Leung et all
(Leung et all, 2002). Their statements: "From our experience, this type of failure was induced by opening of
flexural cracks in the middle of the beam, rather than
stress concentrations near the plate cut-off point. Indeed,
in the test on the largest beam, we were able to capture
the failure sequence with a video camera. On replaying,
it was clear that interfacial failure first started below a
flexural crack near one of the loading points, and then
propagated towards the end of the bonded plate", provide physical evidence for the proposed hypothesis. It
should also be noted that the large flexural crack widths
near the maximum load aids to create the instability and
in a typical laboratory setup maximum stresses can occur
anywhere in the constant bending moment region, rather
than at the mid-span.
Based on the aforementioned explanation, it can be
concluded that the maximum usable strain in FRP is
controlled by the strain at which the steel reinforcement
starts to strain harden. For most of the tests, the reinforcement used consisted of ASTM Grade 60 type steel bars,
which starts to strain harden at a strain of 0.006. Since
the system is stable till the strain hardening is initiated and
the linear strain distribution across the thickness of the
beam is valid, the strain in FRP when the steel strain is
0.006 can be estimated using similar triangle principles.
For typical beam dimensions with FRP bonded to the
extreme tension face, the usable strain falls in the range
of 0.006 to 0.007. If steel used for reinforcement is similar
to ASTM Grade 40, then the strain in steel when instability
occurs is about 0.008. It should be noted that in old
structures use of ASTM Grade 40 steel bars was very
common. If high strength steel with no yield plato is used
then the instability does not occur.

Proposed Procedure for Analysis

Once, the procedure for establishing the maximum force
contribution of FRP is established, the moment capacity
of the strengthened beam can be computed using the
basic principles of mechanics and the established proce-

Fig.3 Assumed stress-strain behaviour of concrete

October-December 2003

ICI Journal

'

'

'

, < - . . - . . . .

, . . ; . : '

- r . - i

, . ;

* , . . .

M . . . . . .

. .

dures used for un-strengthened RC beams. One major

difference between typical RC beam analysis and the
proposed procedure is the computation of concrete contribution. Typically the compressive force contribution of
concrete is computed using rectangular stress block assumption ( ACI code 318-95, 1995). For the current
situation, since the maximum strain in the extreme tension
face is limited, the strain in the extreme compression face
may not reach 0.003 and therefore an approach using a
non-linear stress-strain curve for concrete is proposed.
The general procedure can be summarized in the following major steps. The assumptions of the classical analysis
for bending are not repeated.
At maximum load, the strain in tension steel is equal
to the strain when strain hardening is initiated. This
strain is 0.006 for steel with yield strength of about
420 MPa and 0.008 for steel with yield strength of
about 270MPa.

Assuming linear strain distribution across the thickness of the beam, principles of similar triangles and
axial force equilibrium derive an equation to solve for
the depth of neutral axis, c.
Using the moment equilibrium, derive an equation to
obtain the moment capacity.

Derivation of Equations
A typical cross section, strain and force distributions are
shown in Figure 5. The following standard notations are
used for the derivation of equations.

ds'

- depth of the center of gravity of compression steel

from extreme compression face

df

- distance between the extreme compression fiber

and the FRP plate. In most cases this will be h

- thickness of the beam

Ef

- modulus of elasticity of fibers in FRP

Contribution of Concrete,

Fc

As mentioned earlier, when the strain in tension steel is

0.006, in most cases, the maximum compressive strain
will be less than 0.003 Therefore, it is proposed to use
a non-linear stress-strain relationship to compute the
compressive force contribution from concrete, F c , and its
location, y, measured from the extreme compression
fiber. The proposed stress-strain relationship is:

Where fc' = compressive strength

fc = stress at a strain s
= strain at a stress, fc
o = strain at fc'
In most cases, eo can be assumed to be 0.002. If the strain
at the extreme compression fiber is eo, the force contribution of concrete can be written as:
t

/ 1 EC

1 / .-

(2}

Location of the resultant force, y,, measured from the

extreme compression fiber, is:

As

- area of tension steel

As'

- area of compression steel

Af

- area of fibers in the composite plate (FRP)

V=

- width of the beam

Contribution o/ Compression steel, Fs'

- depth of neutral axis, measured from the extreme

compression face

d3

- depth of the beam, measured from extreme

compression fiber to the center of gravity of
tension steel

(3)

Depending on the strain in the compression steel, the

force contribution of the compression steel can be computed using:
Fs' =

s' = As% if

c-ds
C-ds

< 0 002

(4)

[5)

0.002

In most cases, Fs' can be neglected because the area of

compression steel is normally much less than the tension
steel area and they also tend to be located near the neutral
axis resulting in low stress levels.
Contribution of Tension Steel, Fs'
: 1: II J L-.: : !. KM1

Fig.5 Cross-section, strain and force distribution

The contribution of tension steel,

Fs'= A4,

(6)
October-December 2003 >

ICI journal

aShs

Contribution of Composite (FRP), Ff

Computation of Moment Capacity, Mn

Since the behavior of FRP is linearly elastic up to failure,

the force contribution:

Once the depth of neutral axis, c. is known the maximum

compressive strain is:

(7)

The modulus of elasticity of fibers, Ef, should be chosen

based on the type of fibers such as aramid, carbon, or
glass and the type of sheet, fabric, or plate. If commercially available fabric is used, the modulus can be assumed to be about 70% of the fiber modulus because of
the undulations and alignment of fibers. If specially
prepared sheets are used, about 90% of the fiber modulus
can be assumed.

Mn = Asfv(ds - y) + EfAf (0.006) \d! ~ C\ {df - y) (17)

\ds - cj

Over Reinforced Beams

If the maximum compressive strain computed using equation 16 is higher than 0.003, then the beam is over
reinforced or the failure will be initiated by crushing of
concrete. There are two possibilities. If the original beam
itself was over reinforced, then at maximum moment,
tension steel will not yield. In this situation adding extra
tension reinforcement in the form of FRP will provide very
limited increase in moment capacity and therefore adding
FRP is not recommended. For the second possibility, in
which, tension reinforcement will reach yield strain but
will not strain harden, the depth of neutral axis, c can be
computed assuming the strain at the extreme compression fiber at maximum moment to be 0.003.

Using axial force equilibrium:

Compressive force contribution of (Concrete, C + Compression steel, Cs) = Tension force contribution of (steel,
Ts + FRP, Tf)
or

(8)
or

Strain in FRP will be =0,003 (df-c)/c

c -

Ff= 0.003 (df-c)EfAffc

0,75 fcbc2 + (0.003 EfAf-As fv)

- 0.003 EfAfdf^O

Comparison of Analytical and Experimental

Results
The validity of the proposed method was verified using
five sets of experimental results from four universities
located in three countries. These results were chosen
because the information on compressive strength, yield
stress of steel and accurate modulus of FRP composite
used for strengthening are available. The results were
published between 1992 and 2003, yield strength of steel
was in the range of 420 to 450 MPa, compressive strength
of concrete was about 45 MPa and tension reinforcement
ratio varied from 0.26 to 1.13%. Beam cross sections
varied from 75x200 mm to 300x800 mm and ail the
beams were tested under four point bending and simply
supported conditions. Inorganic and organic adhesives
were used and the modulus of the composite varied from
145 to 205 GPa. These modulus values were measured

(11)

Where ai = 6bfc'

(12)

02 = - [3bd5fc - Asfv ~ 0.006AfEfj

(13)

03 = - [2Asfvds + O.OOOAfEf (df +

(14)

04 = Asfvds2 + 0.006Af Ef df ds

(15)

ICI Journal

(20)

Once c is computed using this quadratic equation, moment

capacity can be computed using equations 16 and 17.

If the contribution of compression steel is neglected and

ey is taken as 0.006, this equation can be written as:
+ ~2<?
Q2CT ++ O3C
03C +
+ 04
04 == 00

(19)

Equation for computing depth of neutral axis is;

(10)

If ey is known, the two equations can be combined to a

single cubic equation with the depth of neutral axis, c, as
the only unknown. Since the magnitude of compression
steel contribution is often negligible, this term is neglected
in the following equations. This force is often negligible
because the area of compression steel is often much
smaller than tension steel area and the strains are also
small due to their location near neutral axis. If any of these
conditions are not true, the contributions of compression
steel should be added to the equations.

QIC

(18)

Contribution of concrete can still be computed using

equation 2. The maximum strain has to be assumed as
0.003. Equation 6 is still valid for computing the contribution of steel. Contribution of FRP,

(9)

Using the principle of similar triangles and linear strain

distribution across the thickness of the beam,

ds-c

(16)

ds-c

If C is known, y can be computed. Then the moment

capacity:

Computation of Depth of Neutral Axis, c

= 0.006

10

Octobf-r-December 2003

Table 1 - Comparison of predicted and experimented maximum moment values

Speci

b,

Ao1

A of

men

mm

mm

mm

Steels
mm

FRP
mm

mm

1
2

200
200

254

303

157

300

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

200
200
110
110

254
254
254
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
200
400
400
800

160
160
215
430
430

254
254
254
142
142
142
142
142
142
142
142
142
188
654
654

860
S60

2712
2712

84
29
43
72
37
56
56
74
93
37
56
56
74
17
66
66
264
264

48
36
39
41
31
36
36
38
42
31
36
36
38
48
94
94
243
243

No,

110
110
110

no

110
110
110
75
150
150
300
300

800

300
300
160
160

160
160
160
160

160

Moment, kN-m
Analyt

Ex per.

51.0
38.5
44,2
53.6
12.8
16.2
16.2
18.6
21.4
12.8
16.2
16.2
18.6
21.2
161,1
161.1
1235.0
1235.0

50,0
40.3
45.9
55.1
12.7
15.6
15.5
18.4
19.8
12.9
15.6
15.7
18.4
22.7
164.5
163.5
1221.1
1239.6

Error

Exper.

1.020
0.955
0,963
0.973
1.008
1.038
1.045

-2.0

1.011
1.081
0.992
1.038
1.032

1.011
0.934
0.979
0.985
1.011
0.996
1.004

Avr.

using tension samples of composites and the maximum

moments are sensitive to these values. The low value is
for the composite made using commercially available
carbon fiber tapes and the high value is for the specially
prepared well-aligned fiber sheets. Model calculations for
a beam are presented in the Appendix A.

Analyt

>

'

0.4

-0.4

AC! Committee 318, (1995), Building code requirements

for structural concrete, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit.

2.

ACI Committee 440, (1996), "Siate-of-the-Art Report on

Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures," ACI 440-R-57, American Concrete Institute, Detroit.

ACI Committee 440-F, (2003), "Guidelines for selection,

design and installation of fiber reinforced polymer (FRP)
systems for externally strengthening concrete structures."
AC] Committee 440-F, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit.

Arduini, M., and Nanni, A. (1997), "Behavior of precrackedRC beams strengthened with carbon FRP sheets."
J. Compos, for Constr.. ASCE, 1(2), 63-70.

5.

Blaschko, M., Niedermeier, R., and Zilch, K, (1998),

"Bond failure modes of flexural members strengthened
with FRP." Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Compos in Infrastruct., Tucson, Ariz., 1, 315- 327

l1

-1.1

References

ICI Journal

' -

6.4
2,1
1.5

The proposed procedure provides an accurate prediction

of experimental values obtained at four institutions located in three different countries.

The results are presented in Table 1. Specimen 1 was

tested at University of Sherbrooke, Canada (Kurtz, 2001),
specimens 2 to 4 were tested at Rutgers University, USA
(Kurtz, 2001), specimens 5 to 13 were tested at the
University of Alabama, USA (Toutanji, 2003) and
specimens 16 to 18 were tested at Hong Kong University
of Science and Technology, Hong Kong (Leung, 2003).
It can be seen that the differences between predicted and
experimentally obtained moments are very small. In the
author's opinion, the analytical results were very close to
the experimental results, primarily due to the use of
experimentally measured values of: compressive strength
of concrete, yield strength of steel and modulus of rarbon
composite for the computations. If specified values of
compressive strength of concrete, yield strength of steel
and estimated carbon composite modulus values are
used, analytical procedure will underestimate the moment
capacity by 10 to 15%.

'

1.8

-3.8
-3.2
-1.1

A new procedure for computing the maximum moment

capacity of RC beams strengthened with FRP is
proposed. The primary difference between the procedure
used currently and the proposed procedure is the strain
in FRP at the maximum moment. The proposed limit on
the maximum usable strain for FRP is based on instability
that occurs when the tension steel reinforcement starts
strain hardening.

The depth of neutral axis c = 48 mm

Maximum strain in concrete = 0.0019
Location of compression force y = 18 mm
Moment capacity Mn = 21.12 kN-m (Experimental value
was 21.72 kN-m)

-0.2
3.8
-4.5
-1.1
-8.1

Specimens
2 to 9,
strengthened
with inorganic
polymer. For
others organic
polymer was
used for
strengthening.

Conclusions

Appendix A
Model calculations presented below are for the 75 x 200
mm beam tested by Leung et al (2002). The details of the
beam are b = 75 mm; ds = 200 mm;
dp = 215 mm;
f-c = 47 MPa; As = 188 mm2; Af = 17 mm2; Ef = 212
GPa (90% of reported value); fy = 460 MPa.

4.5
3.7
2.6

Remarks

'

October-December 2003

'

'

- '

>

>

6.

Bonacci, J. F., and Maalej, M. (2000), "Externalsbonded FRP for rehabilitation of corrosion-damaged concrete beams." ACI Struct. J., 97(5), 703-711

7.

Brosens, K.( and Van Gemert, D. (1997), "Anchoring

stresses between concrete and carbon fiber reinforced
laminates." Proc, 3rd Int. Symp. on Non-Metallic
(FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Struct., Japan 1
271-278.

S.

Chaalal, O., Nollet, M.J., and Perraton, D. (1998),

"Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams with externally bonded fiber-reinforced plastic plates; design
guidelines for shear and flexure." Can. J. Civ. Engrg
Ottawa, 25, 692-704.
Chaallal, O., Nollet, M,J., and Perraton, D. (1997),
"Experimental investigation of RC beams strengthened in
flexure with externally-bonded CFRP strips " Proc , 1997
Ann. Conf., Sherbrooke, Canada, 6, 21-30.

12 Hutchinson, A.R., and Rahimi, H. (1996), "Flexural

strengthening of concrete beams with extern ally-bonded
FRP reinforcement." Proc, 2nd Int. Conf. on Advanced
Compos. Mat. in Bridges and Struct., M. EI-Badry, ed.,
Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Ottawa, 519-526.

24

Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M. (1990), "Fiber

composite plates can strengthen beams." Concrete Int.:
Des. and Constr., 12(3), 65-71.

Sharif, A., Al-Sulaimani, G. J., Basunbul. [.A.,

Baluch, M.H., and Ghaleb, B.N. (1994) "Strengthen
ing of initially loaded reinforced concrete beams using
FRP plates." ACI Struct. J., 91(2), 160-168.

28. Spadea, G., Bencardino, F., and Swamy, R.N.

(1998), "Structural be-havior of composite RC beams with
externally bonded CFRP " J Com-pos. for Constr .
ASCE, 2(3), 132-137.

Maeda, T., Asano, Y., Sato, Y., Ueda, T., and

Kakuta, Y. (1997), "A study on bond mechanism of
carbon fiber sheet." Proc, 3rd Int. Symp, On Non-Metallic
(FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Struct, Japan, 1, 279286.

29

Toutanji, H., Balaguru, P.,Deng. Y. and Zang. Y.

(2003),'' Performance of RC Beams Strengthened with
Carbon Fiber Organic/Inorganic Composites", Proc ,
Concrete Solutions, 1ST International Conference on
Concrete Repair, St-malo, France, 2 783-791

30

Triantafillou. R.C., and Plevris. N. (1992),

"Strengthening of RC beams with epoxy-bonded fibercomposite materials." Mat. and Struct., 25, 201-211.

31. TrianrafiUou.T.C. (1998), "Shearstrengtheningofreinforced concrete beams using epoxy-bonded FRP composites." ACI Struct. J , 95(2), 107-115

17. Miilck. A. M., Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M.R.

(1998), "Prediction of failure load of R/C beams
strengthened with FRP plate due to stress concentration
at the plate end." ACI Struct. J., 95(1), 142-152.

32

18. Meier, U., and Kaiser, H. (1991), "Strengthening of

structures with CFRP laminates." Proc, Specialty Conf.
on Advanced Compos. Mat., ASCE, New York, 224232.
12

'.

Ross, C.A., Jerome, D.M., Tedesco, J.W. ami

Hughes, M.L., (1999), "Strengthening of Reinforced
Concrete Beams with Externally Bonded Composite
Laminates," ACI Struct. J., 96(2), 212-220

27

15 Leung, C.Y., Chen, Z., Lee, S.K. and Tang, J. (2002),

"Effect of Size on the Failure of FRP Strengthened Reinforced Concrete Beams." Proc Advances in Building
Technology, Hong Kong, China, 1.797-801.

"

23

26 Shahawy. M. A., and Beitelman, T. (1996), "Flexural

behavior of rein-forced concrete beams strengthened with
advanced composite materials. " Proc, 41st Int. SAMPE
Symp. and Exhibition, G. Schmitt et al, eds., Anaheim,
Calif., 1015-1025.

14. Kurtz, S. and Balaguru, P. (2001) "Comparison of

Inorganic and Organic Matrices for Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Beams." J of Structural Engineering,
ASCE,127(1), 35-42.

.i'-

Nakamura, M., Sakai, H,, Yagi, K., and Tanaka, T.

(1996), "Experimental Studies on the Flexural Reinforcing
Effect of Carbon Fiber Sheet Bonded to Reinforced Concrete Beam," Proc, 1st Int. Conf. on Compos, in Infrastruct., ICCI'96, Dept. of Civ. Engg and Engg. Mech.,
Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 760-773.

25. Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani. M. (1991), "RC

beams strengthened with GFRP plates, j: Experimental
study " J. Struct Engrg , ASCE, 117(11), 3417-3433

13. Kachlakev, D., and McCurry, D., (2000), "Testing of

Full-Size Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with
FRP Composites: Experimental Results and Design
Methods Verification," Report No FHWA-OR-00-19,
U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, 26 October 2001 104 pages.

riTT

20

22. Ritchie, P. A., Thomas, D.A., Lu, L. W., and Connelly, G.M. (1991), "External reinforcement of concrete
beams using fiber reinforced plastic.", ACI Struct. J., 88(4),
490-500.

11. Hefferman, P.J., and Erki, M.A. (1996), "Equivalent

capacity and efficiency of reinforced concrete beams
strengthened with carbon fiber reinforced plastic sheets."
Can. J. Gv. Engrg., Ottawa, 23, 21-29.

ICIJoumal

Mukhopadhyaya, P., Swamy, N., and Lynsdale, C.

(1998), "Optimizing structural response of beams
strengthened with GFRP plates." J. Com-pos. for Constr.,
ASCE, 2(2), 87-95.

21. Norris, T., Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M.

(1997), "Shear and flexural strengthening of R/C beams
with carbon fiber sheets." J. Constr. Engrg , ASCE,
123(7), 903-911.

10 Crasto, A. S., Kim, R.Y., and Mistretta. J.P. (1996),

"Rehabilitation of concrete bridge beams with externally
bonded composites plates Part II." Proc, 41st Int. SAMPE
Symp, and Exhibition, Anaheim, Calif., 1269-1279

16

19

Varastehpour. H., and Hamelin, P. (1996), "Experimental study of RC beams strengthened with CFRP
plate." Proc, 2nd Int. Conf. on Ad-vanced Compos. Mat.
in Bridges and Struct,, M EI-Gadry, ed., Canadian
Society for Civil Engineering, Ottawa, 555-563.
Ocrobf-r-December 2003

Behaviour of Full Scale RC Beam - Column Joint on NPP Structures

T.S.Thandavamoorthy*, N.Lakshmanan**, G.R.Reddy* and H.S.Kushwaha ##
Introduction
The design of beam-column connections is an important
part of earthquake resistant design for reinforced concrete
(RC) moment resisting frames. They are critical because
they ensure continuity of a structure and transfer forces
from one element to another. The flow of forces within a
beam-column joint may be interrupted if the shear
strength of the joint is not adequately provided . Under
seismic excitation, the beam-column joint region is subjected to horizontal and vertical shear forces whose magnitudes are typically many times higher than those within
the adjacent beams and columns. If the joint shear
strength is not carefully detailed, the beam-column joint
may become the weak link . Considering the normal
practice adopted in structural analysis, it is assumed that
the beam- column joint is rigid. Recognizing the importance of the beam-column joint for structural integrity, it
must be provided with stiffness and strength sufficient to
resist and sustain the loads transmitted from the beams
and the columns .
Seismic design provisions for beam-column joints are still
controversial despite the great deal of research that has
been conducted over the years . The seismic design
standards of countries such as New Zealand, the U.S,
Japan and Europe have seismic design requirements for
beam-column joints that differ from each other in approach and detail. The major point of controversy relates
to the anchorage of the longitudinal bars passing through
the interior beam-column joints of the moment-resisting
frames. In the conventional seismic design, formation of
plastic hinges in the beam is aimed at rather than in the
columns. This approach avoids soft storey collapse
mechanisms, which means the column is strong and beam
is weak. Normally, the plastic hinges form in the beams
at or near their ends. Therefore, the stress in the longitudinal reinforcement in the beam approaches yield
strength at the column faces. This results in high bond
stresses along beam bars in the beams in the joint core.
This is because the bars of the beam are stressed almost
equal to yield in compression at one face of the column
and in tension at the other.

During earthquakes, severe cyclic loading occurs. This

leads to deterioration of the bond in the joint. If this is
significant, the tension in the bar penetrates through the
joint core, and the bar tensile force will be anchored in
the beam on the far side of the joint. This means the
compression reinforcement in the beam on one side of
the column may actually be in tension, with a resulting
loss in beam flexural strength and ductility. Moreover the
stiffness of the frame will be reduced significantly .
The power scenario in the country is very grim. An all out
effort is needed to augment the power generation
capacity. Among the various sources of power generation, the nuclear energy based source is acknowledged to
be safe and eco-friendly5. Therefore, the emphasis now
is on setting up of as many nuclear power plants as
possible. The NPP structures are built with reinforced
concrete. In view of the increased incidence of seismicity
in the country, the safety of these structures against
earthquake loading assumes greater significance. In order
to sustain such loading, the beam-column joints in these
structures must be ductile to undergo large rotation so that
they can absorb the energy of the earthquake without
being damaged. In the past several decades, a number of
investigations have been carried out to study the behaviour of beam-column joints subjected to seismic loading . However, these studies have been mostly confined
to behaviour of joints in multi-storeyed buildings of
residential and commercial complexes 7 Thesi^es of joints
in these structures were smaller than those in NPP structures. The percentage of reinforcement used in the joints
in NPP structures is far greater than that used in joints in
ordinary multi-storeyed buildings. Therefore, full scale
joints identical to those available in the existing NPP
structures both in size and reinforcement detail were cast
in the laboratory and tested under monotonic loading to
evaluate their strength and study their behaviour. Strain
gauge instrumentation was extensively used to determine
the stress distribution in the joints. The paper presents a
complete description of the experimental investigation
about the testing of the joint under static loading and the
results obtained.

Details of the Beam-Column Joint

Deputy Director, Structural Engineering Research
Centre, ChennaiGQQ 113.
Director, Structural Engineering Research
Centre, Cbennai600 113.
Scientific OfncerC, Bhabha Atomic Researd)
Centre, Mumbai-400 085.
Head, RSD, Bhabha Atomic Research
Centre, Mumbai-400 085.

A beam-column joint of T-geometrical configuration and

identical to that available in the existing old NPP structures was selected for casting and testing in the laboratory.
The size of the beam was 2000 mm x 6 1 0 m m x 915 mm
and column 2915 mm x 610 mm x 915 mm. The reinforcement detail and the sizes of bars used are shown in fiu
1. The shear reinforcement was designed as per IS1 45o
because the old NPP structures had been designed and
built as per this code. The completed reinforcement griil
is shown in fig. 2.

iCI journal

October-December 2003

- J

/"

>

NOTEt
1 ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN mm
1. ALL STEEL-USD BARS
1 CLEAR COVER TCI MAIN B A R S - W mm
BOTH IN COLUMN * N D BEAM

|_

SECTION

3-3

BEAM

B-q

2t
1U

! .
fit*

" (TYPICAL)

!W 20*

!U
11

ELEVATION
SECTION

SECTION 1-1

FIG. 1

2-2

COLUMN

COLUMN

REINFORCEMENT DETAILS OF TEST SPECIMEN

Similarly strain
gauges were fixed to
each of the top and
bottom layers of the
column longitudinal
bars at the centre as
well as at third
points. The strain
gauges were well
protected against
damage by moisture
by covering them
with wax and
epoxy9.
The specimen was
concreted using a
mix proportion of
1:1657:2.63 with a
w-c ratio of 0.46.
Along with this, control specimens were
cast to determine the
28 day strength. The
average compressive strength of the
concrete was 41. 14

MPa.

The specimen was cured by ponding of water for 7 days.

As the side shutters were removed after 7 days it was
cured by wet sacking. The control cubes were removed
from the moulds and cured by immersing in water tank
for 7 days. Later they were removed from the tank and
cured along with the specimen for 7 days. Thereafter, it
was immersed in the tank till the date of testing. Complete
details of the casting of beam-column joint have been
published elsewhere
Fig. 2 Completed grill

Testing of Joint Under Monotonic Loading

In order to measure the strain, electrical resistance strain

gauges were fixed to each one of the four numbers 36
mm diameter bars in the top and bottom layers of the
beam at the intersection (fig. 3).
17-

The joint was capped with the top and bottom hinge
assemblies. The whole system was placed under the
loading frame. The top plate of the top hinge assembly
was bolted to the cross beam and the bottom plate of the
bottom hinge assembly was bolted to the floor (fig. 4).
Linear electrical resistance strain gauges of 5 mm size and
linear types were fixed on the surface of the column along
its height at every 250 mm centres, on both sides at the
level of longitudinal steel. Mechanical brass studs were
fixed to the beam of joint both in the compression and
tension faces at every 100 mm centres for about lm from
the intersection (fig. 5). Studs were also fixed along a 45
line at the intersection in the compression zone of the
beam. The electrical resistance strain gauges were con-

Fig. 3 Strain gauge fixed to reinforcing oars

1CI Journal

: : - :

October-December 2003

Along the height of the column dial gauges were fixed at

the centre as well as the third points (fig. 4).
Load was applied on the joint in increments of 100 kN.
After each load increment, dial gauge, strain gauge and
stud readings were taken and recorded. At 500 kN load
the first crack occurred on the tension side of the beam at
the intersection extending to a length of about 100 mm.
The growth of the crack was marked. Then the load was
increased gradually.

FigA Test setup

necied to a 40 channel digital data logger device driven

by a software called AUTOSOFT -C (fig. 5). The readings
of the stud gauges were taken with The help of a 'Pfender'
gauge.

Fig. 6 Crack Pattern

As the load was increased further, the existing cracks
extended further and new cracks also formed in the beam
and column. In general, the cracks originated from the
tension fibre and extended towards the compression
fibre. The cracks were mainly inclined and in flexure shear
mode. Cracks in the joint region were mainly In the shear
mode (fig.6).
At a load of 2100 kN, the concrete in the compression
zone in the column above the intersection and in the
beam at the intersection crushed (fig. 7), The joini could
not resist further load. It only deflected further due to the
confinement of the core by the compression steel.

Fig. 5 Data logger to measure strain

Two numbers of the hydraulic jacks each of 2000 kN
capacity were fixed to the cross beam of the frame (fig.
4). Under ?he jacks, an assembly consisting of a distributor
beam of length equal to the width of the joint, a 2000 kN
strain gauge based load cell and, a hinge assembly was
placed. This hinge assembly directly rested on the join;
The jacks were connected to the electrically operated
hydraulic pumping unit with the help of high pressure
rubber hoses. Mechanical dial gauges were mounted
beneath the beam at the load point as well as at its end.
ICl lournal

EW7W

Fig 7 Failure pattern of joint

October-December 2003 >:

Discussion of Results

developed at 500 kN load in the beam at the intersection

and progressed into the column downward, there is a
release in the tensile strain in the top column. This is the
reason for a low value of the tensile strain in the top
column. In the bottom portion, the column and beam are
integral and monolithic, therefore the compressive strain
registered a higher value of 150 microstrain.

The load-deflection curve of the load point measurement

of the joint is shown in fig. S.

The strain distribution along the height of the column

outside, i.e., the side opposed to loading is shown in fig.
10. From this figure, it is clear that the top portion of the
column is under tension and the bottom under compression. The change in the nature of strain occurs at a height
of 1750 mm from the bottom. As before, the maximum
tensile strain is 50 micro strain and the compressive strain
190 microstrain. The values are more or less same as in
the previous case of the column on the loading side (fig.
9). Figure 11 shows the strain distribution across the
height of the column for the ultimate load of 2100 kN for
the loading side and in fig. 12 for the outside. The strain
distribution along the column on the loading side shows
a large tensile value of 8000 microstrain at the topmost
strain gauge (fig. 10). As there was extensive cracking,
especially in the top and middle column portions, most of
the strain gauges were either ruptured or remained in
between cracks. So the strain values were insignificant.
The maximum compressive strain recorded was 800
micro strain. The strain distribution along the outside (fig.
12) shows a very small tensile strain of 100 microstrain
and a compressive strain of 800 microstrain. The compressive strain in both cases was the same.

Fig.8 Load-dejSection curve

The curve is linear up to the ultimate load of 2100 kN. At
the ultimate load of 2100 kN, the deflection keeps increasing with load remaining constant. Essentially it is a bilinear curve with initial deflection increasing
proportionally upto ultimate load and then increasing
under constant load. The maximum deflection under the
load point recorded was 90 mm. For the ultimate load of
2100kN, the design load works out to 1400kN as per IS;
12
456*"
The strain distribution along the height of the column at
a load of 500kN is shown in fig. 9 for the loading side.
1

Fig. 9 Strain variation along height of the column at

500 kN (loading side)

50

The strain distribution indicates that on the loading side,

the portion of the column at the top level of the beam is
under tension and the portion at the soffit level of the
beam under compression. This behaviour is normally
expected of a structure subjected to the kind of loading
applied on the test specimen. But in the middle portion
of the column, the strain gauges show the- influence of
the beam bending. As a crack has formed in the beam at
the intersection in the tension fibre, the end of the beam
at the intersection started rotating about the joint core.
Therefore, the strain gauge near the centre of the beam
has registered a tensile strain of about 200 micro strains.
The maximum tensile strain for the top portion of the
column registered was 50 microstrain and compression
in the bottom portion 150 microstrain. As the crack

1CI journal

-00

Fig.10 Strain variation along height at 500 kN (outside)

mic restrain

Fig 11 Variation of strain along height at 2100 kN

(loading side)
20

October-December 2003

The crack and failure pattern is shown in fig. 15. The crack
formed from the tension fibre of beam as well as from top
portion of the column in flexure mode initially and
developed along the depth in shear mode. Therefore all
the cracks were in flexure - shear mode as the loaded
portion of the beam is its shear span. The cracks from the
beam and the column converged in the joint core and
formed more or less an open circle. This served as a hinge
about which the beam rotated. The joint core was the
exact location of the hinge. The cracking was quite extensive especially in the joint core. This crack pattern is
unique and not reported in the literature. The width of
the major crack at the level of steel for a design load of
1400 kN is 1.2 mm.

Fig.12 Strain variation along height oj column

at 2100 kN (outside)
The variation of compressive strain in the extreme fibre
in the beam with Eoad is depicted in fig. 13, As the load
increases, the strain in the joint also increases. The variation is linear initially upto a load of 1200 kN the corresponding strain being 180 microstrain. Afterwards the
strain increases rapidly upto 400 microstrain with marginal increase in load upto 1400 kN. From 400
microstrain onwards, the strain increases with the load
upto ultimate load, but with reduced gradient compared
to the initial linear portion. The maximum strain recorded
was 1500 microstrain. Variation of strain in compression
steel in the beam is shown in fig. 14. Initially, the strain in
the steel increased linearly with load upto the ultimate
load. Afterwards the strain kept increasing with the load
remaining constant. The maximum strain recorded was
2250 micro strain. This curve is bi-linear and is similar to
the load-deflection curve shewn in fig. 8.

Fig.15 Closer view oj crack and failure pattern at

ultimate load
The concrete in the compression zone in the top column
portion above the intersection crushed at the ultimate
load. Also the concrete in the compression zone in :he
beam at the intersection also cracked (fig. 7) at ultimate
lead. Once the ultimate load was reached, the beam
deflected continuously wiih the rotation of the beam
hinging on the joint core. This kind of set-up with hingedhinged boundary of column and lead applied on beam
alone was able to test the strength of the joint core. As the
column was weaker than the beam, ana in the concrete
in compression crushed, the joint was unabie to rotate
further than the maximum recorded deflection of 90 mm.
Conclusions

Fig.13 Load us Strain in extreme

compression fib"" in beam

A large sized heavily reinforced beam-column joint identical to that available in the oid NPP structures, both in
size and reinforcement detail, was cast in the laboratory
successfully in this investigation. The beam size was 610
mm x 915 mm and 2000 mm long. The column size was
610 x 915 mm and 2915 mm long. Beam contained
4.95% reinforcement and column 1.5%, The mean 28
day strength of specimen was 41,14 MPa.
Such a fullscale joint was tested under ;nonotor::c loading.
The ends of the column were provided with hinged
boundaries. Load was aoDiied on the beam. The shear

Fig.14 Load us Strain in compression steel in beam

21

ICI Journal

--

October-Decemter 2003

sstsa

span to depth ratio was more than 2. The span to depth

ratio of both the beam and the column was more than 2.
The joint cracked at a load of 500 kN. The ultimate load
sustained by the joint was 2100 kN. At this load, the
concrete in compression zone is the column above the
intersection and in the beam at the intersection crushed.
There was extensive cracking in the joint core. Cracks
originating from the tension fibre of beam as well as from
the top column portion converged at the joint core in the
compression zone of beam at the intersection and formed
an open circle, about which the beam rotated like a hinge.
At ultimate load, there was extensive crushing both in the
joint and the compression fibres of column in the top
portion. As the column was weaker than the beam, there
was a limit to the sustainability of load and deflection due
to extensive crushing in the column. The rotation of the
joint was limited to a maximum deflection of 90 mm. The
load-deflection curve of the joint is linear up to the
ultimate load of 2100 kN. At 2100 kN load the deflection
increases with the load remaining constant.

cknowledgement
The paper is published with the permission of the Director, SERC.

References
1.

3.

Hwang, S.J. and Lee, H.J., "Analytical Model for

Predicting Shear Sfrengths of Interior Reinforced Concrete
Beam-Column Joints for Seismic Resistance", ACI Structural Journal, Vol.97, No.l, January-February 2000, pp.
35-44.
Hwang, S.J. and Lee, H.J , "Analytical Model for
Predicting Shear Strength of Exterior Reinforced Concrete
Beam-Column Joints for Seismic Resistance," ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 96, No.5, September-October 1999,
pp. 846-857.
Shiohara, H., "New Model for Shear Failure of RC
Interior Beam-Column Connections", Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 127, No.2, February 2001,
pp. 152-166.
Hakuto, S., Park, R.r and Tanaka. H., "Effect of
Deterioration of Bond of Beam Bars Passing through
Interior Beam-Column Joints on Flexural Strength and
Ductility", ACI StructuralJournal, Vol. 96, No.5, September-October 1999
Bhoje, S.B., "The Roic of Breeder Reactors in India,"
Proc, Seminar on Indian Nuclear Power Programme,
Mysore, May 5, 2002, Institution of Engineers (India),
Mysore Chapter, Mysore, pp.1-9.

Anandavalli, N., Vimalanandam, V. and Thandavamoorthy, T.S., "Behaviour of RC Beam - Column

Joints - Annotated Bibliography," Project No. GAP
01141, Technical Report No 1, Structural Engineering
Research Centre, Madras, February 2001.

7.

Lee, HS. and Woo, S.W., "Seismic Performance of a

3-storey RC frame in a Low- Seismicity Region," En-

gineering Structures, Vol. 24. No 6, June 2002, pp. 719734

8.

IS: 456-1964, "Indian Standard Code of Practice for Plain

and Reinforced Concrete", Indian Standards Institution,
New Delhi, January 1965

9.

Thandavamoorthy, T.S., Vimalnnandiim, V.,

Jayaraman, G., Anandavalli, N. and Chitra
Sankaran, "Strain Gauge Instrumentation for the testing
of Full Scale Reinforced Concrete Beam - Column Joint",
Proc, National Symposium on Instrumentation (NSI-27),
Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, November 27-29.
2002.

10. Thandavamoorthy, T.S., Vimalanandam, V.,

Hariprasad, V., Anandavalli, N. and Reddy.G.R.,

"Quality Assurance and Construction of Large Sized and
Heavily Reinforced Beam-Column Joints in the
Laboratory," New Building Materials & Construction
World, Vol.8, Issue 6, December 2002, pp. 23-33.
11

Thandavamoort4y, T.S., Vimalanandam, V.,

davalli, N. and Rcddy, G.R., "FullScale Heavily Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints of NPP Structures
- Quality Assurance and Construction in the Laboratory,"
Proc , National Seminar on Seismic Design of Nuclear
Power Plants, Chennai, February 21-22,2003, pp.517526

12. IS: 456-2000. "Indian Standard: Plain and Reinforced

Concrete - Code of Practice," Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi, 2000.

Degussa MBT proposes a prize for

Innovative Work in the field of
Self Compacting Concrete
Rules
*

Work carried out between October 2003 end

June 2004 will be considered.

The work should have implications for practical

applications i.e. the mix designs should be
tested on actual site mixes or simulations of the
same.

* Actual use of the lab data for extension into

field usage and fine tuning through solutions
for problems faced on site carries significant
weightage.
* The work should be submitted to ICI in the
form of a technical paper / case history.
* ICI will appoint 3 judges of repute, to select the
best work. Prize will be presented at ICI Annual
General Meeting
* Prize consists of Rs. 15,000 cash, a plaque and
a citation.

October-December 2003

' * ICI Journal

- ; - , , im - ;-.-

Tests in Geotechnical

Investigations
Field and laboratory tests interpret the behaviour of foundation strata and enable the design
of safe and economical foundations, says MANOJ ANAOKAR, ME, Geotech Engineering.
geotechnical

would occur at the designed load intensity. Figure I

investigations.The type and depth of foundation depend

shows the method of providing load for giving designed

upon the nature of strata, and its engineering behaviour,

lead intensity.

Testing

is

an

important

stage

in

which are known only after different tests are carried

7.

either tn-situ or in the laboratory.

seepage through the body of earthen dam and the flow

Permeability

test: required

to

determine

the

of ground water in wells. Also, the uplift pressure acting

Field t e s t s
1. Standard penetration test (SPT)
2.

at the base of the gravity dam would depend upon the

permeability of the foundation strata below the dam.

Dynamic cone p e n e t r a t i o n test ( D C P T )

3.

Static cone p e n e t r a t i o n test (SCPT)

The first three

tests measure the

resistance to

penetration in the soil. Out of these, SPT is commonly

used

on

site

during soil

investigations

due to

its

simplicity. It helps to find out the relative density of

cohesionless soil. The results of these tests, commonly
known as 'SPT value' or 'N-value'. can also be used to
determine the value of angle of shearing resistance, i.e.
'V value on which

depend the shear strength

and

bearing capacity of the soil. The shear strength of the

soil can also be worked out by the vane shear test.
4.

Vane shear test: can also work out the shear

strength of the soil.

5.

Pressure

meter

test:

to

know

the

lateral

Figure 2: Direct shejr test ip

resistance of soil, useful when providing supports for

large excavations or for retaining walls.
6.

Laboratory tests

Plate load t e s t : to estimate the ultimate load at

The

tescs carried

out

on

the

undisturbed

failure and the bearing capacity of soil. Though long-

disturbed

term settlements cannot be worked out and the size of

provide a cross-check for in-situ observations.

samples

confirm

the

type

of strata

the small plate used is less than the actual sile of the

I.

foundation, it still indicates probable settlements that

m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t on undisturbed soil samples.

1.

Determination

of field

density

and

and
and

natural

Sieve analysis for classification of soil as per

Indian Standard Specifications.

3.

To know the liquid l i m i t and plastic l i m i t values

of the soil to know the plasticity of cohesive soils.

4.

Consolidation

test

to

find

out

the

probable

settlement of the selected type of foundation under the

given load intensity.
5.

Standard

proctor

test

(for

light

loads)

and

m o d i f i e d p r o c t o r test (lor heavy loads) to know the

compaction properties of the sail such as maximum dry
density and optimum moisture content. In pavement
construction, we
material

these

have

to

value;

compact the
of density and

sub-grade
moisture

content in order to achieve che required strength.This

Figure 1: Plate load [esc.

October 2003. Consrrucnon World

to

I JO

I;

'

..:'

\;:<-

'

'

"}.&.;-:

ut&Zyti ;;'"i--'..;;. .^iiiLi^^i" iiVC^-^jiiiiviii' jit A!

*- i i i * t ^ j j ^ u i n . V * L v , V : . '

Fi"ure 1: Unconfined

T
.
compression lesc a p p ^ i r i t u s .

helps co control
formation of pochole;
on flexible pavements.
6.
Tr i j x i i I
compaction, direct
shear,
unconfined
compression
and
laboratory vane shear
test :o determine the
shear strength of the
soil, IF we consider an
element of soil at a
particular depch below
the ground level, it is
,
. .
., . .
loaded

ircm

all

sides

and also from che top

due
to
the
weight
of the
soil
above
ic
This is replicated in the triaxial test and the sample fails
frseiv by forming an inclined crick. In direct shear test,
the soil is allowed to fail along a predetermined
horizontal plane ( F i g u r e 2). In unconfined compression
test, the load is only applied vertically and no
surrounding lateral load is applied ( F i g u r e 3). Vane
shear test is conducted by rotating the blades in soil
and noting down the resistance offered by the soil to
the relation.

Figure Li: Rock testing.

7. Crushing strength, specific gravity and density of
rock samples collected on site are determined on che
compression testing machine ( F i g u r e 4). The crushing
strength helps to find out the safe bearing capacity.
8. Chemical analysis of the soil and ground water lets
us know the level of salts, which may be harmful to the
foundation concrete if in excess.
Such tests are vital to good construction; the/
interpret the behaviour of foundation strata and enable
the design of safe and economical foundations.

.-'>
. .

'
%

EXPANSION JOINT F!
L.

have

have shown no signs of disintegf^'f[0Jt>M|l^ply|ii'^^r separation of fib

even though instafffijcT-inerafly 50 years ago!

Available as leading brands through our vendors:

SHALJTEX *T1KI-TAR * BECOTEX * RA1NGUARD * SHIVA

SUPAR * KANTAFLEX + OR1OM * LLOYD * DEEP
Jolty Board Ltd., 501 Rewa Chambers. 31 Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg,
Mumbai 400 020. Tel: 22073531 - 3 4
Fax: 22069533. Email: joboard gvsni.ccm A/eb:www.jollyboard.com

..;.::!!

-V <> r :