See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/248879115

Debonding Failures of RC Beams Strengthened with Near Surface Mounted CFRP

Strips

Article  in  Journal of Composites for Construction · April 2006

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2006)10:2(92)

CITATIONS READS
105 459

6 authors, including:

J.G. Teng Laura De Lorenzis

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Technische Universität Braunschweig
307 PUBLICATIONS   14,081 CITATIONS    160 PUBLICATIONS   4,525 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Lik Lam
Redland Precast Concrete Products Limited
55 PUBLICATIONS   6,358 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Granular Solids and Silos View project

Shear behavior and strength of RC beams shear-strengthened with FRP View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Laura De Lorenzis on 15 December 2013.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Debonding Failures of RC Beams Strengthened
with Near Surface Mounted CFRP Strips
J. G. Teng1; L. De Lorenzis2; Bo Wang3; Rong Li4; T. N. Wong5; and Lik Lam6

Abstract: This paper presents the results of a series of tests conducted on reinforced concrete 共RC兲 beams strengthened in flexure with
near surface mounted 共NSM兲 carbon fiber-reinforced polymer 共CFRP兲 strips. As the main focus of the research is on debonding failure
mechanisms, the only test variable investigated was the embedment length of the NSM strip and the NSM strip was extensively
strain-gauged to monitor its bond behavior. Load-deflection curves, failure modes, strain distributions in the CFRP strip, and local bond
stresses at the CFRP–epoxy interface from the tests are all examined in detail and compared with the predictions of a simple analytical
model where appropriate. Of the four embedment lengths investigated, all but the shortest one led to a notable increase in the load-
carrying capacity and, to a lesser extent, in the postcracking stiffness of the beam. Debonding was found to be the primary failure mode
in all cases except for the beam with the longest embedment length. Also reported in this paper are results from preliminary bond tests
used to characterize the local bond-slip behavior of the NSM system. Apart from gaining a better understanding of debonding failures in
RC beams with NSM FRP strips, the test results reported in the paper should be useful for future verification of numerical and analytical
models.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲1090-0268共2006兲10:2共92兲
CE Database subject headings: Bonding; Fiber-reinforced polymers; Flexural strength; Reinforcement; Concrete beams.

Introduction
Over the past decade, extensive research has been conducted on
the strengthening of reinforced concrete 共RC兲 structures using
externally bonded fiber-reinforced polymer 共FRP兲 sheets/plates
共Teng et al. 2002, 2003a兲 and the technology has been adopted in
a large number of practical projects. More recently, strengthening
of RC structures with near-surface mounted 共NSM兲 FRP rein-
forcement has attracted a significant amount of attention in both
research and practical applications due to some important advan-
tages of this technique 共Parretti and Nanni 2004; De Lorenzis and
Teng unpublished兲. In the NSM FRP method, grooves are first cut
into the concrete cover of an RC beam/slab and FRP bars/strips
1
Chair Professor of Structural Engineering, Dept. of Civil and
Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ., Hong Kong,
China. E-mail: cejgteng@polyu.edu.hk
2
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Innovation Engineering, Univ. of Lecce,
Lecce, Italy. E-mail: laura.delorenzis@unile.it
3
Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of
Technology, Harbin, China; formerly, Research Associate, Dept. of Civil
and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ., Hong
Kong, China.
4
Research Associate, Dept. of Civil and Structural Engineering, The
Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ., Hong Kong, China.
5
Undergraduate Student, Dept. of Civil and Structural Engineering,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ., Hong Kong, China.
6
Senior Research Fellow, Dept. of Civil and Structural Engineering,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ., Hong Kong, China.
Note. Discussion open until September 1, 2006. Separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos-
sible publication on May 12, 2005; approved on July 28, 2005. This paper
is part of the Journal of Composites for Construction, Vol. 10, No. 2,
April 1, 2006. ©ASCE, ISSN 1090-0268/2006/2-92–105/$25.00.
are then inserted and bonded therein with an appropriate binding
agent 共typically epoxy paste or cement grout兲.
In existing research on NSM FRP reinforcement, FRP bars of
various shapes have been used, including round, square, or
rectangular bars as well as narrow strips. In particular, the latter
have been shown to be the least prone to debonding from the
concrete substrate 共Hassan and Rizkalla 2002; El-Hacha and
Rizkalla 2004兲, for two main reasons: 共1兲 they maximize the ratio
of surface to cross-sectional areas, which minimizes the bond
stresses associated with a given tensile force in the FRP reinforce-
ment; and 共2兲 the normal stresses accompanying the tangential
bond stresses, which in the case of NSM round bars tend to split
the epoxy cover and the surrounding surface layer of concrete, act
in this case mainly towards the thick lateral concrete 共Blaschko
2003; De Lorenzis 2004兲 so that splitting failure becomes less
likely.
The behavior of NSM carbon FRP 共CFRP兲 strips in simple
bonded joints and in RC beams has been the subject of a number
of investigations to date 共Sena Cruz and Barros 2002; Blaschko
2003; Hassan and Rizkalla 2003; Nordin and Taljsten 2003;
Barros and Fortes 2004; El-Hacha and Rizkalla 2004; Nanni et al.
2004; Sena Cruz and Barros 2004兲. The experimental evidence
accumulated so far indicates that 共1兲 in bond test specimens,
failure of the NSM CFRP strip usually occurs at the strip–epoxy
and/or the epoxy–concrete interface 共Sena Cruz and Barros 2002;
Blaschko 2003兲; 共2兲 the associated local bond strength can reach
or even exceed 20 MPa, which is higher than typical local bond
strengths of externally bonded systems as well as of NSM round
bars; 共3兲 the local bond-slip behavior has a pseudoductile post-
peak branch due to the residual friction at the failed interface; this
implies that the ultimate pull-out load increases steadily with
the bond length, so that a development length exists instead of
an effective bond length which exists for externally bonded
systems 关see De Lorenzis and Teng 共unpublished兲 for a detailed

92 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006

 Fig. 1. Schematic of bond test specimens
discussion兴; 共4兲 RC beams strengthened in bending with NSM
CFRP strips typically fail at loads higher than those of identical
beams strengthened with an equivalent amount of externally
bonded FRP, when failure of the latter is controlled by debonding;
and finally 共5兲 RC beams with NSM FRP strips in general exhibit
similar failure modes as observed in RC beams with externally
bonded FRP, including concrete crushing, rupture of the FRP
strips, debonding at the cutoff point 共Smith and Teng 2002a,b,
2003兲, or intermediate crack-induced debonding 共Teng et al.
2003b; Yao et al. 2005b兲.
Although NSM strips are less susceptible to debonding than
externally bonded systems, the strength of RC beams with NSM
FRP strips is still likely to be governed by “premature” debonding
mechanisms. The current understanding of these mechanisms is
very limited, so extensive further research is required. This paper
thus presents the results of an experimental study on RC beams
strengthened in flexure with NSM CFRP strips, with its main
focus being on the identification and investigation of debonding
failure mechanisms. The only test variable was the embedment
length of the NSM strip and extensive strain gauging was used to
study the bond stress distributions along the FRP strip. In
addition, limited results from corresponding bond tests are
presented and contrasted with the bond behavior observed in the
strengthened RC beams.
Materials
Three 150-mm concrete cubes and three 100-mm⫻200-mm
concrete cylinders were cast for each beam to obtain the compres-
sive strength and the tensile strength of concrete, respectively.
The average cube compressive strength ranged between 42 and
46 MPa, with an overall average of 44 MPa, and the average
splitting tensile strength ranged between 3.1 and 3.7 MPa, with
an overall average of 3.3 MPa. The yield and ultimate strengths
of the 8-mm steel bars, used as both compression and shear rein-
forcement, were 375 and 503 MPa, respectively, whereas the
yield and ultimate strengths of the 12-mm steel bars used as
tension reinforcement were 532 and 623 MPa, respectively. The
corresponding yield strain of the tension reinforcement, computed
with an assumed elastic modulus of 210 GPa 共as strains were not
measured in the tests兲, is equal to 2,530 ␮␧.
The CFRP strips had a thickness t f of 2 mm and a width h f
of 16 mm. Their ultimate tensile strength f u and modulus of elas-
ticity E f , as reported by the manufacturer, were, respectively,
equal to 2,068 MPa and 131 GPa. However, the value of E f
deduced from strain readings in the bond tests is 151 GPa,
JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006 / 93
as reported later. From the latter value of elastic modulus, the
ultimate tensile strain of the CFRP strip can be computed as
1.37%. The strips had a surface texture obtained by peel-ply treat-
ment. The groove-filling material was a two-component epoxy
adhesive with a mixing ratio of 2 共resin兲: 1 共hardener兲 by weight.
The elastic modulus and tensile strength averaged from five ten-
sile tests conducted according to ASTM D638M-93 共1993兲 are
2.62 GPa and 42.6 MPa, respectively.
Two CFRP strips were bonded together with the same
adhesive used for groove filling, thus forming a double-strip bar
whose total thickness was approximately equal to 5 mm 共i.e.,
4 mm of CFRP plus about 1 mm of adhesive兲, whereas the width
was still 16 mm. The use of such two-strip CFRP bars allowed
strain gauges to be sandwiched between the two CFRP strips
so that the strain gauges did not interfere with the interfacial
behavior of the NSM reinforcement and, in the meantime, were
protected against mechanical damage due to interfacial move-
ment. Since the width to-thickness ratio of the double-strip bar is
more than 3 共4 considering only the CFRP兲, these double-strip
bars may be considered as strips themselves and are termed
“strips” in the following description for the sake of brevity.
Bond Tests and Interpretation
In order to provide a preliminary characterization of the bond
properties of the NSM strips to be used in the flexural strength-
ening tests, a series of bond tests was carried out, as described in
detail elsewhere 共Li et al. 2005兲. In these bond tests, the same
epoxy and CFRP strips as well as the same groove dimensions
were used, whereas the concrete strength was different. The bond
specimens had an average cube compressive strength of 29 MPa.
However, as bond failure occurred at the strip–epoxy interface,
this difference in concrete strength is believed to have had no
significant effect on the specimen behavior and failure load.
The bond specimen details are shown in Fig. 1. The groove
size, designed as 8 mm in width by 22 mm in height, as in the
subsequent flexural tests, was found to be 9-mm wide and 22-mm
deep by postpreparation measurements. The bond length was
varied from 30 to 250 mm, with the two longest bond lengths
being 200 and 250 mm. Results of these two long bond length
specimens are believed to be the most representative of bond
behavior of the NSM reinforcement, as failure of the remaining
specimens was by shear tension fracture within the concrete
prism. Results of these two tests are briefly reported herein for
later comparison with results from the flexural tests.
Table 1. Bond Test Results
Average
Bond Ultimate bond
length load strength Failure
Specimen 共mm兲 共kN兲 共MPa兲 mode
CS-200 200 54.5 6.8 Failure at CFRP–epoxy interface
CS-250 250 64.0 6.4 Failure at CFRP–epoxy interface

The test setup previously developed by Yao et al. 共2005a兲 for

bond tests on FRP strips externally bonded to concrete was used Fig. 2. Debonding failure at CFRP–epoxy interface 共Specimen
for the present bond tests. The instrumentation consisted of CS-200兲
LVDTs measuring slips at the loaded end and at the free end of
the NSM strip, and strain gauges with a 2-mm gauge length at
30-mm spacing within the bond length. Two additional strain
displacements between the CFRP strip and the concrete prism,
gauges were placed in the unbonded region on the two sides of
can be expressed as
the CFRP strip.

The test results are reported in Table 1, where the average
bond strength was computed considering all four external
surfaces of a 4 mm⫻16 mm CFRP strip 共i.e., ignoring the thick-
ness of the adhesive layer between the two strips兲. The specimens
failed along the CFRP–epoxy interface 共Fig. 2兲, a failure mode
which was also observed in previous bond tests on similar NSM
FRP systems 共see “Introduction”兲. However, due to the specific
specimen dimensions used, a few cracks perpendicular to the
applied load formed in the concrete during the last loading stages,
particularly in Specimen CS-250 which attained a larger failure
load.
From the strain readings within the unbonded region, the elas-
tic modulus of the 4 mm⫻16 mm CFRP strip could be easily
found and this led to a value of 151 GPa, larger than that reported
by the manufacturer. The strain distribution along the bond
length, together with the measured free-end slip, was analyzed to
compute local bond stresses and local slips, as explained in
De Lorenzis and Nanni 共2002兲. In particular, considering a single
NSM strip of height h f and width 2t f 共Fig. 1兲, the local bond
stress ␶ can be expressed as follows:
h f t f d␴ f h f t f E f d␧ f
␶共x兲 = = 共1兲
h f + 2t f dx h f + 2t f dx
where x⫽coordinate along the bond length; and ␴ f and
␧ f ⫽axial stress and axial strain of the strip, respectively. With
the x axis starting from the free end and the symbols defined in
Fig. 3, the local bond stresses were evaluated using the discrete
strain readings as follows:
h f t f E f ␧1 − 0
␶0 = ␶共x0 = 0兲 =
h f + 2t f x1 − 0
冕
x
s共x兲 = s fe + ␧ f 共x兲dx 共3兲
0
With discrete strain readings, the above expression becomes
s0 = s共x0 = 0兲 = s fe 共4a兲
1
si = si−1 + 共␧i−1 + ␧i兲共xi − xi−1兲 with i = 1, . . . ,n + 1 共4b兲
2
Figs. 4共a and b兲 and 5共a and b兲 show the distributions of the axial
strain in the FRP strip and of the deduced bond stress in the two
specimens. In these figures, each curve corresponds to a specific
load level given as a percentage of the ultimate load, to allow
easy comparison between the two different specimens in spite of
their different failure loads. The x axis starts from the free end
and ends at the loaded end of the FRP strip. The strain distribution
along the bond length, highly nonlinear at lower load levels,
gradually approaches an almost linear shape as the load increases.
This means that, as the load increases, redistributions of the bond
stress along the bond length occur as a result of changes in the
state of the bond. Microcracking at the strip–epoxy interface and
the consequent slip of the FRP strip tend to produce a more even
distribution of the bond stress. Figs. 4共b兲 and 5共b兲 show that,
while at low load levels the bond stress at the strip free end is
close to zero, as the load increases, the peak of the bond stress
gradually shifts towards the free end and the entire bond length is
mobilized to resist the pulling force. The presence of more than
one peak in the bond stress distributions of Specimen CS-250
during the last loading stages is probably related to the presence
of transverse concrete cracks which introduce local disturbances
共2a兲
to the “pure” bond behavior.

␶i = 冉
h f t f E f 1 ␧1 − ␧i−1 ␧i+1 − ␧i
+
h f + 2t f 2 xi − xi−1 xi+1 − xi
冊 with i = 1, . . . ,n 共2b兲

h f t f E f ␧ub − ␧n
␶n+1 = ␶共xn+1 = lb兲 = 共2c兲
h f + 2t f lb − xn
With the above equations, the bond stresses at the strain gauge
locations could be found. Local slips, defined as the relative Fig. 3. Symbols used in bond analysis

94 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006

 Fig. 4. FRP strains and bond stresses in Specimen CS-200: 共a兲 Strain distributions and 共b兲 bond stress distributions

Slips and bond stresses computed as explained above can
be combined to obtain the local bond-slip curves. The bond
stress-slip data plotted at the location of each strain gauge are
reported in Fig. 6. Note that even for tests conducted with load
control, strain measurements allow the descending branch of
the local bond-slip relationship to be obtained, provided that
sufficient bond stress redistribution occurs within the bond length
during the failure process. The descending branch of the bond-slip
relationship from Specimen CS-250 is more clearly defined,
as this specimen allowed for a greater extent of bond stress redis-
tribution due to its longer bond length. Despite the significant
degree of irregularity inherent to these strain gauge measurements
and the unavoidable nonuniformity of interfacial properties,
the local bond-slip behavior is reasonably consistent between
different locations on the same specimen and between the
two specimens, and suggests a peak bond stress between 10 and
12 MPa corresponding to a slip value between 0.2 and 0.3 mm.
Comparing these values to those found by Sena Cruz and Barros
共2004兲, namely, a local bond strength close to 20 MPa and a
corresponding slip of 0.25 mm, the local bond strength from the
present study is lower whereas the slip at peak bond stress is very
close. The shape of the bond-slip curve is very similar. However,
a direct comparison is hardly meaningful as the materials used are
different.
Flexural Tests
Specimens
A total of five, 3.2 m long RC beams with a rectangular
150-mm⫻300-mm cross section were tested. The tension and
the compression reinforcements consisted of two deformed
steel bars with 12- and 8-mm nominal diameters, respectively.
The shear reinforcement, designed to ensure that flexural failure
would control, consisted of double-legged closed steel stirrups
of 8-mm nominal diameter uniformly spaced at 100 mm. The
thickness of the concrete cover to the stirrups was 30 mm 共Fig. 7兲.
One beam 共B0兲 was tested without strengthening and served
as the control specimen. Four beams 共B500, B1200, B1800,
and B2900兲 were strengthened with one NSM strip installed
into an 8-mm wide, 22-mm deep groove in the tension
cover, the groove being along the midwidth of the beam and
symmetrically located about the midspan. The test variable
was the total 共embedment兲 length of the strip, being equal to
500, 1,200, 1,800 and 2,900 mm, respectively. One-half of
the beam starting from midspan was taken as the “test side,” and
within this test side, the NSM FRP strip was extensively gauged
as detailed later. On the other side of the midspan, the beam
was wrapped with a glass FRP 共GFRP兲 U jacket, with the fiber

Fig. 5. FRP strains and bond stresses in Specimen CS-250: 共a兲 Strain distributions and 共b兲 bond stress distributions

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006 / 95

 Fig. 6. Bond-slip responses: 共a兲 Specimen CS-200 and 共b兲 Specimen CS-250

direction being perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the beam,
to ensure that possible debonding of the CFRP strip would occur
in the test side.
Installation of the NSM reinforcement began by saw-cutting
the groove in the tension cover of the beam. Pressurized air was
used to remove debris and dust to ensure proper bonding between
the epoxy adhesive and the concrete. Each groove was then
partially filled with the epoxy adhesive, and the CFRP strip was
subsequently inserted and lightly pressed to displace the adhesive
and to force it to fill the space between the FRP strip and the sides
of the groove. The groove was then filled with more adhesive
and the surface was leveled by removing the excess adhesive.
The GFRP U jacket was formed by the wet lay-up technique.
Finally, the system was left for curing at room temperature for at
least 1 week before testing.
Test Setup and Instrumentation
The beams were simply supported and tested under four-point
bending, with a net span of 3.0 m and a shear span of 1.2 m
共Fig. 7兲. The applied load was monotonically increased approx-
imately by 2-kN steps up to yielding of the internal steel
reinforcement. Beyond this stage, the test was continued with
displacement control and the midspan deflection was increased
approximately by 0.5-mm steps up to failure.
Five LVDTs were deployed to measure the deflections at
midspan and at 300 and 750 mm from midspan on each side,
as shown in Fig. 7. Five strain gauges, at the top compression
fiber as well as four locations over the depth 共i.e., at 60, 120, 180,
and 240 mm from the top兲, were used to measure strains at a cross
section close to the midspan. One strain gauge was also attached
to each steel tension bar at the midspan location. Finally, a series

Fig. 7. Test specimen and setup 共dimensions in mm兲

96 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006

Table 2. Results of Flexural Tests and Theoretical Predictions
Experimental Theoretical Maximum
Percent measured strain Ratio
NSM strip Peak Load at onset Peak increase in the NSM strip, of ␧max
total length Failure load of strain decrease Failure load Percent over B0 ␧max to ultimate
Beam 共mm兲 mode 共kN兲 共kN兲 mode/location 共kN兲 error 共experimental兲 共␮␧兲 tensile strain
B0 — a 48.4 — a 49.5 2.3 — — —
B500 500 b 47.8 45.4 before peak load a/u 49.5 3.6 −1 2,296 0.17
共FRP, along entire
bond length兲
B1200 1200 b 63.1 56.0 after peak load a/u 64.5 2.2 30 3,670 0.27
共FRP, starting from
cutoff region兲
B1800 1800 b 共+c兲 91.7 79.9 before peak a/u 96.8 5.6 90 7,315 0.53
load 共steel兲
B2900 2900 a 共+d and c兲 99.8 82.9 before peak a/s 100.1 0.3 106 9,707 0.71
load 共steel兲
86.2 before peak load
共FRP, at 300 mm
from midspan兲
97.9 before peak load
共FRP, at midspan兲
Note: a = concrete crushing after steel yielding; b = concrete cover separation starting from the cutoff section; c = debonding at the epoxy–concrete interface
and localized splitting of the epoxy; d = concrete cover separation close to the maximum moment region; s = strengthened region; and
u = unstrengthened region.

of strain gauges was installed on the test half-length of each NSM
strip. Their locations can be inferred from the plots of strain
distributions reported later.
Theoretical Analysis
A simple analytical model was developed for RC beams
with NSM FRP reinforcement to complement the experimental
investigation in the present study. In this analysis, the plane
section assumption is assumed to be valid for the original RC
section as well as the strengthened RC section, which also means
that no slip between any longitudinal reinforcement and concrete
is allowed. The steel reinforcement and the FRP reinforcement
are modeled as elastic-perfectly plastic and linearly elastic up to
failure by brittle rupture, respectively. The concrete is assumed to
resist no tensile stresses after cracking and its uniaxial compres-
sive behavior is described by the following parabolic stress-strain
curve:
yielding of the tension steel bars; and 共3兲 after yielding of the
tension steel bars up to failure. Finally, the load-deflection curve
of the beam is obtained by double integration with the simplified
trilinear moment-curvature curve.
When a simply supported beam is strengthened along a limited
portion of its span, its ultimate load may be controlled by either
the strengthened portion or the unstrengthened portion. An upper
bound prediction of the failure load is the theoretical ultimate
load found using the above analytical model and assuming that
the boundaries between the strengthened and the two unstrength-
ened portions are at the cutoff sections. The analytical model
delivers only an upper bound solution for two reasons: 共1兲 It is
assumed that debonding does not occur, and 共2兲 in reality, the first
effectively strengthened cross section is not at the cutoff point but
at a small distance into the strengthened region.
The theoretical ultimate load of Beams B0 and B500 共the latter
having the FRP strip within the constant maximum moment
region, so that two small portions of this region remained
unstrengthened兲 is clearly controlled by the unstrengthened

␴c = f ⬘c 冋 冉 冊册
2␧c
␧c0
−
␧c
␧c0
2
共5兲
portion in the maximum moment region and this ultimate load
共in terms of the total load P acting on the beam兲 was found to be
49.5 kN. For Beam B2900, the theoretical ultimate load is
where f ⬘c ⫽concrete cylinder compressive strength, taken as controlled by the strengthened portion and was found to be
0.8 times the cube compressive strength; ␧c and ␴c⫽concrete 100.1 kN. The theoretical ultimate loads of Beams B1200 and
compressive strain and stress; respectively, and ␧c0⫽strain at the 1800 are also controlled by the unstrengthened portion and are
peak stress and is assumed to be 0.002. 64.5 and 94.8 kN, respectively.
The cracking moment and curvature are computed by an
elastic analysis of the transformed cross section. The moment-
curvature diagram after cracking can be generated by increasing Flexural Test Results and Discussion
the strain in the extreme compression fiber of the concrete in
specified increments until failure. It is assumed that failure occurs Failure Modes and Ultimate Loads
when either the concrete strain at the extreme compression fiber
reaches 0.003 or the FRP reaches its ultimate tensile strain. The A summary of test results is given in Table 2 together with
resulting moment-curvature plots are simplified to a trilinear the theoretical predictions of the analytical model described
curve with the three linear segments corresponding to the follow- above. In Figs. 8–11, the load is shown against the displacement
ing stages: 共1兲 Before cracking; 共2兲 after cracking and before at midspan, the tensile strain in the steel bars 共average of the two

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006 / 97

 Fig. 8. Load versus midspan deflection
bars兲 at midspan, the maximum FRP tensile strain in the constant
moment region, and the concrete strain at the extreme compres-
sive fiber at midspan. Also shown are the theoretical curves
for the unstrengthened beam and for the fully strengthened
beam 共i.e., the FRP reinforcement extends over the entire span兲,
respectively. It should be noted that while steel strains were only
measured at midspan, FRP strains were measured at various
locations along the axis of the beam. The FRP strain readings
within the constant moment region could display significant
variations due to the presence of flexural cracks in the concrete,
and the maximum value was chosen for comparison with the
theoretical curve, as the latter is for a fully cracked cross section.
Figs. 12共a–d兲 show photographs of the failed beams. The data
from the strain gauges along the FRP strip and the deduced bond
stresses are shown in Figs. 13–16 for different values of the
applied load. The legend gives the load in kN to which each
particular curve refers. The curves pertaining to load levels
before and after the peak load are shown in two separate plots to
enable an easier identification of how the strain and bond stress
distributions evolve upon the attainment of the failure load.
Beam B0, with no external strengthening, failed at a load
of 48.4 kN by concrete crushing after yielding of the steel
tension reinforcement. The ultimate load, failure mode, and load-
deflection behavior are in close agreement with the predictions of
the theoretical analysis 共Fig. 8兲. Fig. 9 shows experimental and
Fig. 9. Load versus steel tensile strain at midspan
98 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006
Fig. 10. Load versus maximum FRP tensile strain in the constant
moment region
theoretical curves of load versus tension steel strain at midspan,
indicating a satisfactory agreement; the concrete compressive
strain was not measured in this beam.
Beam B500 failed at a load of 47.8 kN, which is slightly
lower than the ultimate load of the unstrengthened beam. Failure
occurred by debonding in the form of concrete cover separation
共Smith and Teng 2002a,b, 2003兲 starting in the vicinity of the
cutoff section 关Fig. 12共a兲兴, as explained in more detail in the
next section. No improvement in strength or stiffness over Beam
B0 was achieved 共Fig. 8兲. This is not surprising as, in Beam
B500, the NSM reinforcement was internal to the maximum
moment region, so that two small portions of this region remained
unstrengthened and could not bear any moment increase with
respect to the control beam.
The experimental failure load of Beam B1200 was 63.1 kN,
corresponding to a 30% increase in capacity over the control
beam. Also, the beam displayed a higher yield load and a larger
stiffness in the postcracking stage 共Fig. 8兲. Beam B1800 failed at
a load of 91.7 kN, which is 90% higher than the failure load of
the unstrengthened beam. The stiffness increase over the control
beam in the postcracking stage is also more pronounced than that
achieved by Beam B1200, due to the longer strengthened portion
Fig. 11. Load versus maximum concrete compressive strain
at midspan
Fig. 12. Failure modes of beams with NSM FRP: 共a兲 Beam B500; 共b兲 Beam B1200; 共c兲 Beam B1800; and 共d兲 Beam B2900

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006 / 99

 Fig. 13. FRP strains and bond stresses in Beam B500: 共a兲 FRP strain distributions and 共b兲 bond stress distributions
in Beam B1800. The behavior of the beam after yielding is typical
of FRP-strengthened flexural members: the load-deflection curve
features a reduction in slope as the NSM FRP reinforcement
alone resists the increments of the tensile force equilibrating
the additional external moment. Similar to Beam B500, Beams
B1200 and B1800 both failed by debonding in the form of
concrete cover separation starting from the cutoff region 关Figs.
12共b and c兲兴. In Beam B1800, debonding at the epoxy–concrete
interface and localized splitting of the epoxy cover were detected
after failure 关Fig. 12共c兲兴, as detailed in the next section.
Note that the experimental ultimate loads of Beams B1200
and B1800 are very close to their corresponding upper bound
theoretical predictions given in Table 2. This indicates that the
debonding failures starting from the end of the FRP strip were
triggered by the flexural failure of the unstrengthened section at
the strip cutoff point. However, the latter mode of failure alone
would have produced a plateau in the load-deflection curve at the
level of the ultimate load, corresponding to the yielding of the
most highly stressed 共or critical兲 unstrengthened cross section
with increasing deformation up to the crushing of concrete at
the same cross section. This behavior was, however, not observed
in these beams due to the occurrence of debonding. Due to the
presence of the NSM reinforcement, the adjacent cross sections
were unable to accommodate the large curvature increases and
the large displacements required by this failure mode, so that
debonding resulted.
Finally, the ultimate load of Beam B2900 was 99.8 kN,
corresponding to a 106% increase over the control beam. Failure
occurred by concrete crushing at a load level very close to the
prediction of the simple model described earlier, but was followed
100 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006
by concrete cover separation close to the maximum moment
region, accompanied by debonding at the epoxy–concrete
interface and localized splitting of the epoxy 关Fig. 12共d兲兴. The
load-deflection behavior of Beam B2900 is rather closely
predicted by the simple analytical model, although the yield loads
of both Beams B1800 and B2900 are slightly underestimated by
the theoretical predictions 共Fig. 8兲. The curves of load versus FRP
and concrete strains are reasonably accurately predicted. By
contrast, the curve of load versus steel strain is less accurately
predicted possibly because tension stiffening and occurrence of
slips are not accounted for in the model.
The last two columns in Table 2 provide the maximum
measured tensile strain in the NSM strip, and its ratio to the
ultimate tensile strain which indicates the efficiency of utilization
of the strengthening system. As the embedment length of the strip
increases from 500 to 2,900 mm, the tensile stress developed
in the strip varies from 17 to 71% of its tensile strength. Full
utilization of the NSM reinforcement 共i.e., failure by tensile
rupture of FRP兲 is not expected, as the theoretical failure mode
of the strengthened beam is by concrete crushing, even if the
possibility of debonding is excluded.
The maximum tensile strain measured in the NSM strip
in Beam B500 can be compared with the maximum tensile
strain reached by the NSM strip in the pull-out test with a
250-mm bond length 共see the section on bond tests兲. The latter
is equal to 6,623␮␧, which is larger than that measured in
Beam B500. This can be easily explained since failure of Beam
B500 was controlled by the unstrengthened portions, as further
discussed later in the paper.
 Fig. 14. FRP strains and bond stresses in Beam B1200: 共a兲 FRP strain distributions and 共b兲 bond stress distributions
Failure Processes of the Strengthened Beams
The failure processes of the strengthened beams can, to some
extent, be identified by analyzing the strains in the steel and
FRP reinforcement and the deduced bond stresses, which is
done in this and in the following section. Table 2 reports the load
at the onset of strain decrease in either the steel or the FRP rein-
forcement 共or both兲 for each beam. A strain decrease with an
increasing or constant load indicates the loss of composite action
of the corresponding reinforcement. It is, however, impossible to
identify from these strain readings which of several possible
phenomena is responsible for such loss. In the case of the NSM
reinforcement, this loss of composite action could be due to
debonding at the CFRP–epoxy or the epoxy–concrete interface, or
formation of bond cracks in the concrete. The term “bond cracks”
is used in this paper to refer to inclined cracks associated with the
stress transfer between the FRP strip and the concrete. The
evolution of the strain distributions and of the deduced bond
stress distributions is discussed in the next section.
For Beam B500, based on the measured steel strains, the onset
of tension steel yielding occurred at a load of about 43.2 kN.
Immediately afterwards, the strains measured along the entire
length of the FRP strip started decreasing simultaneously
关Fig. 13共a兲兴, whereas no strain decrease was observed on the steel
bars at midspan 共Fig. 9兲. This indicates that the steel bars were
well bonded to the concrete at midspan whereas the NSM strip
had started to debond. The load could still increase slightly up to
47.8 kN, after which a debonding crack, starting from a flexural
crack, appeared in the concrete close to the cutoff section of
the NSM strip in the test side and propagated horizontally at the
level of the steel tension reinforcement. Fig. 12共a兲 shows a picture
JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006 / 101
of the constant moment region of the beam 共photograph on the
left side兲, and a close-up of the vicinity of the cutoff section
共photograph on the right side兲 after failure. The formation of
the debonding crack did not alter the subsequent behavior of
the beam with respect to the control beam: the tension steel
strains and the deflections of the beam continued to increase
with negligible variations of the external load until compressive
crushing of concrete occurred 共Figs. 9 and 10兲.
For Beam B1200, strain and deflection readings indicate that
yielding of the steel tension bars started at an applied load of
60.7 kN 共41% larger than the load at the onset of yielding in
Beam B0兲, after which the load could increase, although at a
reduced rate, up to the peak value of 63.1 kN. The subsequent
behavior featured small fluctuations in the load with increasing
deflections. In this phase of deformation, two inclined main
cracks formed in the vicinity of the cutoff section and propagated
horizontally at the level of the internal steel reinforcement.
Fig. 12共b兲 shows, on the left side, the vicinity of the cutoff section
and, on the right side, a view of the beam soffit, after failure. The
inclined main cracks started as bond cracks at the bottom of
the beam, and as such were inclined at approximately 45° with
respect to the beam axis. Upon reaching the edges of the beam
soffit, they propagated upwards on the beam sides maintaining
a 45° inclination and then horizontally, along the weak link of
the steel bar–concrete interface. These cracks, together with
the preexisting flexural and flexural-shear cracks, led to the
formation of triangular or trapezoidal concrete wedges. Following
the attainment of a load of 62.9 kN 共with a corresponding
midspan deflection of 23.0 mm兲, the load dropped to about
56 kN, accompanied by decreases in the steel and FRP strains
 Fig. 15. FRP strains and bond stresses in Beam B1800: 共a兲 FRP strain distributions and 共b兲 bond stress distributions
共Figs. 9 and 10兲. Subsequently, the FRP strains in the cutoff
region kept decreasing at an approximately constant load 关Fig.
14共a兲兴, which indicates the onset and propagation of debonding,
while no such decreases were observed in the steel strains 共Fig.
9兲, indicating an intact steel-to-concrete interface at midspan. The
load dropped further to about 54 kN, a value about 12% larger
than the capacity of the virgin beam, and the strain decrease
started from the cutoff region extended to the maximum moment
region while the deflection kept increasing. The concrete wedge
between the two major bond cracks was finally expelled, and the
test was stopped. It is evident from Fig. 9 that the maximum
strain reached in the steel bars is rather limited, given the large
deflection reached by the beam at failure. This could have partly
been the result of the strain gauge being at some distance away
from the closest wide flexural crack. It should, however, be noted
that debonding failure was initiated immediately after steel
yielding and the deflection increases of the beam are likely to
have been due to slips of the FRP reinforcement. Had the test
been continued to larger deformations, the steel bars would have
experienced larger steel strains at a load approximately equal to
the failure load of the control beam.
For Beam B1800, strain and deflection readings indicate
that yielding of the steel tension bars started at an applied load of
70.7 kN which is 64% larger than the yield load of Beam B0.
At a load of 79.9 kN, the steel strain at midspan started to
decrease, indicating the occurrence of slip of the tension steel
bars, whereas no strain decreases were observed in the FRP at
any location 关Fig. 15共a兲兴. The situation is thus reversed compared
with what was observed for Beams B500 and B1200. This is
because in Beam B1800, the FRP strip had a larger anchorage
102 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006
length, and at the same time, the larger load attained was such
that some deterioration of the steel-to-concrete interface occurred.
During this phase of deformation, a bond crack inclined at
approximately 45° to the beam axis started from the vicinity
of the cutoff section and propagated horizontally at the level
of the steel tension reinforcement. Small load drops then appeared
as a result of the onset of steel bar slips, but the load could
nevertheless still be significantly increased. With further loading,
additional bond cracks formed both in the shear span and in
the maximum moment region, widened and propagated, isolating
concrete blocks in between 关Fig. 12共c兲, top-left photograph兴.
The opening up of the inclined bond cracks was restrained by
the dowel action of both the steel and the NSM reinforcement,
which in turn tended to cause the detachment of the NSM system
from the beam. Visual inspections after failure revealed that the
prism consisting of the CFRP strip and surrounding epoxy had
extensively debonded from the concrete, taking with it a thin
concrete layer of variable thickness on the sides 关Fig. 12共c兲,
photograph on the bottom兴. This indicated that a strong epoxy–
concrete bond had been developed. Moreover, the epoxy cover
had been expelled at localized spots, exposing the CFRP strip
关Fig. 12共c兲, top-right photograph兴. Strain decreases in the FRP
occurred only when the load decreased after failure.
Steel yielding in Beam B2900 initiated at an applied load of
70.6 kN, and the slope of the load-deflection curve decreased
accordingly. At a load of 82.9 kN, the strain in the steel at
midspan started to decrease, indicating the occurrence of slips
of the tension bars. Note that this load level is close to that at
which steel slips were first observed in Beam B1800. At a load of
86.2 kN, strain decreases were recorded in the FRP at 300 mm
 Fig. 16. FRP strains and bond stresses in Beam B2900: 共a兲 FRP strain distributions and 共b兲 bond stress distributions
from midspan 关Fig. 16共a兲兴. At a load of approximately 97.9 kN,
strain decreases were also observed in the FRP at midspan.
These debonding phenomena were, however, localized, as the
FRP strain readings of all the remaining locations were still
increasing. Also in this case, bond cracks formed on the soffit
of the beam. However, only one of them, situated at a distance
of about 500 mm from midspan, propagated up to the sides. As
mentioned in the previous section, failure occurred by concrete
crushing at a load level close to the prediction of the analytical
model. In addition, a secondary debonding failure was observed
involving the detachment of a concrete wedge formed by a bond
crack and an adjacent flexural-shear crack. Fig. 12共d兲 shows a
lateral view of the beam 共top-left photograph兲 where the detach-
ment of this concrete wedge is visible. The top-right photograph
in the same figure is a close-up of the space left by the expelled
concrete wedge. The detached NSM strip is visible in this photo-
graph, with a thin layer of concrete attached at some spots.
Furthermore, debonding of the NSM system from the side
concrete and localized splitting of the epoxy cover were found
after failure 关Fig. 12共d兲, photograph on the bottom兴. It may be of
interest to note that a similar secondary debonding failure was
observed in previous flexural tests on beams strengthened with
NSM round bars 共De Lorenzis 2002兲.
Note that the debonding failures observed in the flexural tests
differ greatly from those found in the bond tests, as debonding in
the beams is related primarily to concrete cracking in the cover
region rather than pull-out failure along the NSM strip–epoxy
interface. The same observation applies to previous experimental
studies on the bond behavior of NSM round bars and strips
共De Lorenzis 2002; Barros and Fortes 2004兲. There are several
JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006 / 103
reasons for this difference: the presence of flexural and flexural-
shear cracks altering the bond stress distribution, the curvature
of the beam, and the dowel forces generated by the opening up
of the bond cracks, phenomena which are all absent in a bond test
specimen. This difference between bond tests and beam tests
means that results from the former such as local bond-slip curves
cannot be directly transferred into predictive models of the latter.
The same problem exists, although to a lesser degree, for exter-
nally bonded FRP systems. Lu et al. 共unpublished兲 showed that
the local bond-slip curve from a bond test cannot be directly used
for predicting the interfacial behavior of the major flexural-crack
zone of a beam flexurally strengthened with externally bonded
FRP reinforcement.
FRP Strain and Bond Stress Distributions
In Beams B1200 to B2900 共Figs. 14–16兲, for all load levels
before the peak load, the axial strains of the FRP strip generally
follow the overall distribution of a constant value within the
maximum moment region and a linearly decreasing value in the
shear span, in accordance with the variation of the bending
moment in the beam. Similarly, the shear bond stresses follow
the overall distribution of a zero value within the constant
moment region and a constant value throughout the shear span,
in accordance with the variation of the shear force in the beam.
The actual strain and bond stress values oscillate around these
average trends, due to the presence of cracks and the consequent
nonuniform transfer of stresses between concrete and FRP. In the
cutoff region, high shear bond stresses are seen, particularly in
Beams B1200 and 1800, as can be expected from interfacial stress
analysis of beams strengthened with an externally bonded plate
共Smith and Teng 2001兲. In Beam B500, the entire bond length is
located in the development region and the FRP strains at all load
levels decrease from the midspan towards the cutoff point.
Fig. 13共a兲 shows that, in Beam B500, the FRP strains along
the entire bond length decrease with load increases for load levels
between the yield load and the peak load, as already mentioned
in the previous section. In this stage, the strain distribution
approaches a linear variation. Correspondingly, the bond stress
distribution becomes nearly uniform along the bond length 关Fig.
13共b兲兴. After the peak load, the strains first decrease close to the
midspan but increase close to the cutoff section 关Fig. 13共a兲, load
levels between peak and 46.1 kN兴; later, they decrease in the
cutoff region and increase again at the midspan. Correspondingly,
the peak bond stress moves first towards the cutoff point, reaching
therein a maximum 共absolute兲 value of about 6 MPa, and later
moves back towards the midspan section 关Fig. 13共b兲兴. These
variations are consistent with the propagation of debonding
from the cutoff point towards the midspan in the final stage
following the attainment of the peak load. Note that the maximum
bond stress of 6 MPa is lower than the local bond strength found
from the bond tests reported earlier in the paper 共see Fig. 6兲.
This is easily explained as the debonding failure in the beams
is triggered by flexural failure of the unstrengthened portion and
is of a different nature from that in a bond specimen.
No FRP strain decrease was recorded in Beam B1200 in
the prepeak loading stage 关Fig. 14共a兲兴. Starting from a load of
51.4 kN, the strain reading closest to the cutoff point shows a
sharp increase, perhaps due to the formation of a crack at the
gauge location. This anomalous reading is responsible for both
the positive and the negative 共very large兲 peak values of the bond
stress close to the cutoff point 关Fig. 14共b兲兴. It is interesting to
analyze the curves corresponding to the postpeak load levels in
Figs. 14共a and b兲. As mentioned in the previous section, after
a decrease of the load from the peak level to about 56 and then
54 kN, the FRP strains start decreasing at an approximately
constant load. Fig. 14共a兲 shows that this decrease starts in the
cutoff region and gradually propagates towards 共and within兲
the maximum moment region, leading to the inward shifting of
the strain distributions. Accordingly, the peak bond stress moves
in the same direction 共neglecting the anomalous reading兲. As for
Beam B500, these data clearly reflect the progression of debond-
ing from the cutoff point to the maximum moment region. If
the anomalous reading is neglected, the maximum bond stress
attained is again close to 6 MPa.
In Beam B1800, the strain readings give no evidence of the
propagation of FRP debonding 关Fig. 15共a兲兴. The FRP strains
decrease only when the applied load decreases. As the load
reduces from 91.5 to 81.3 kN, more pronounced strain decreases
are, however, observed in the region within 300 mm from the
cutoff point than in the rest of the beam, indicating the occurrence
of debonding in this region. The strain distributions in this region
at further stages of loading are not available as some of the strain
gauges ceased functioning. The bond stress distribution attains a
maximum 共absolute兲 value of about 10 MPa 共close to the local
bond strength obtained from the bond tests兲 near the cutoff point,
corresponding to a load of about 49.6 kN. The intact concrete
cover near the cutoff point at this load level is believed to be
responsible for the maximum bond stress to approach those from
the bond tests. With further loading, this peak bond stress first
decreases to about 8 MPa and then stabilizes around this value,
with its location remaining unchanged. As the load decreases
from 91.5 to 81.3 kN, this peak value decreases to about 6 MPa
104 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006
and a second bond stress peak appears at about 270 mm from the
cutoff point, again indicating debonding in the cutoff region.
For Beam B2900, decreases in the FRP strains with increasing
loads are identified at two isolated locations 共midspan and
300 mm from midspan兲 prior to the attainment of the peak load
共Fig. 16兲, which might indicate localized debonding of the FRP
strip. Despite the large bond stresses generated 共larger than the
local bond strengths found from the bond tests兲, this localized
debonding seems to have had no adverse effect on the remainder
of the NSM reinforcement, which is seen to have remained well
bonded up to the peak load level. Excluding the localized regions
of peak bond stresses, the bond stress values along the bond
length prior to the attainment of the peak load are lower than
those in the previous beams. Furthermore, the maximum bond
stress is no longer found in the cutoff region. Upon the attainment
of the peak load 共corresponding to the crushing of concrete in
compression in the maximum moment region兲, debonding started
close to the maximum moment region and gradually propagated
towards the support, as is indicated by the outward shifting of
the strain distribution in Fig. 16共a兲. Fig. 16共b兲 shows a sudden
increase in the bond stress whose peak 共with an absolute value
reaching about 8 MPa兲 gradually moves towards the cutoff point
in accordance with the direction of debonding. Due to the shorter
distance between the cutoff point and the beam support, the
direction of the propagation of debonding in this beam is thus
reversed with respect to all other beams. This debonding failure
mode bears considerable similarity to the intermediate crack-
induced debonding failure mode in RC beams strengthened with
an externally bonded FRP plate 共Teng et al. 2003b; Yao et al.
2005b兲.
Conclusions
The paper has presented an experimental study in which 4 RC
beams with a span of 3 m were each strengthened with a NSM
FRP strip of a different length and loaded to failure; a control
beam without FRP strengthening 共Beam B0兲 was also tested for
comparison. The strip lengths 共i.e., embedment lengths or bond
lengths兲 employed in these tests were 500 mm 共Beam B500兲,
1,200 mm 共Beam B1200兲, 1,800 mm 共Beam B1800兲, and 2,900
mm 共Beam B2900兲, which are, respectively, 17, 40, 60, and 97%
of the span of the beam. In addition, two related bond tests have
been described and discussed. Apart from providing test data
that should be useful for comparison with future numerical and
analytical models, the results and discussions presented also allow
the following conclusions to be drawn:
1. The debonding failure mode of NSM CFRP strips in bond
tests was interfacial debonding at the FRP–epoxy interface.
Based on the strain readings, the local bond-slip relationship
was identified.
2. The flexural tests showed that large increases in the ultimate
load and significant increases in the postcracking stiffness
can be achieved with NSM FRP reinforcement.
3. The failure mode of beams with an FRP strip of intermediate
length 共Beams B1200 and B1800兲 was concrete cover
separation starting at the cutoff section. The beam with an
FRP strip extending over 97% of the span 共Beam B2900兲
failed by concrete crushing followed by secondary debond-
ing in the form of concrete cover separation close to the
maximum moment region. In Beams B1800 and B2900,
debonding was also observed at the epoxy–concrete interface
 and in the epoxy cover, due to dowel forces arising from the
opening up of the bond cracks.
4. The failure loads and the entire load-deflection curves of the
control beam and of Beam B2900 are very close to those
predicted by a simple analytical model based on the plane
section assumption for the unstrengthened and strengthened
cross sections. The failure loads of Beams B1200 and B1800
were controlled by the unstrengthened portion and were also
very close to the predictions of this analytical model which
are upper bound estimates of the failure loads as debonding
is not considered.
5. In Beams B500 and B1200, the FRP strain and bond stress
distributions clearly indicate the propagation of debonding
from the cutoff section towards the maximum moment
region. The maximum absolute value of the bond stress is
significantly lower than the local bond strength obtained
from the bond tests. In Beam B1800, there is also evidence
of debonding starting from the cutoff region. In Beam
B2900, the FRP strains and bond stresses clearly indicate the
propagation of debonding from the maximum moment region
towards the cutoff section. Localized debonding was also
detected in the maximum moment region but had no adverse
effect on the beam behavior. The bond stresses attained in
these last two beams are close to 共or even larger than兲 the
local bond strength found from the bond tests.
6. No simple or direct relationship exists between the debond-
ing failure mode observed in the bond tests and that observed
in the beams, for reasons stated in the paper. Consequently,
results from the former such as local bond-slip curves cannot
be directly transferred into predictive models of the latter.
This observation, in agreement with observations made by
previous researchers, is probably the greatest challenge
facing researchers in their search for accurate theoretical
models for RC beams strengthened in bending with NSM
FRP. Therefore, extensive further investigations, both
theoretical and experimental, are needed.
Acknowledgments
The work presented in this paper has received financial
support from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong
SAR 共PolyU 5173/04E兲 and The Hong Kong Polytechnic
University 共G31 YD 61兲. The writers are grateful to both
organizations for their financial support.
References
American Society for Testing and Materials 共ASTM兲. 共1993兲. “Standard
test method for tensile properties of plastics 共metric兲.” ASTM D638M-
93, ASTM, Philadelphia.
Barros, J. A. O., and Fortes, A. S. 共2004兲. “Flexural strengthening of
concrete beams with CFRP laminates bonded into slits.” Cem. Concr.
Compos., 27共4兲, 471–480.
JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MARCH/APRIL 2006 / 105
Blaschko, M. 共2003兲. “Bond behaviour of CFRP strips glued into slits.”
Proc., Sixth Int. Symposium on FRP Reinforcement for Concrete
Structures (FRPRCS-6), K. H. Tan, ed., World Scientific, Singapore,
205–214.
De Lorenzis, L. 共2002兲. “Strengthening of RC structures with near
surface mounted FRP rods.” Ph.D. thesis, Department of Innovation
Engineering, Univ. of Lecce, Lecce, Italy.
De Lorenzis, L. 共2004兲. “Anchorage length of near-surface mounted
fiber-reinforced polymer rods for concrete strengthening-analytical
modeling.” ACI Struct. J., 101共3兲, 375–386.
De Lorenzis, L., and Nanni, A. 共2002兲. “Bond between near-surface
mounted fiber-reinforced polymer rods and concrete in structural
strengthening.” ACI Struct. J., 99共2兲, 123–132.
El-Hacha, R., and Rizkalla, S. H. 共2004兲. “Near-surface-mounted
fiber-reinforced polymer reinforcements for flexural strengthening
of concrete structures.” ACI Struct. J., 101共5兲, 717–726.
Hassan, T., and Rizkalla, S. 共2002兲. “Flexural strengthening of
prestressed bridge slabs with FRP systems.” PCI J., 47共1兲, 76–93.
Hassan, T., and Rizkalla, S. 共2003兲. “Investigation of bond in concrete
structures strengthened with near surface mounted carbon fiber rein-
forced polymer strips.” J. Compos. Constr., 7共3兲, 248–257.
Li, R., Teng, J. G., and Yue, Q. R. 共2005兲. “Experimental study on bond
behaviour of NSM CFRP strips.” Ind. Constr., 35共8兲, 31–34
共in Chinese兲.
Nanni, A., Di Ludovico, M., and Parretti, R. 共2004兲. “Shear strengthening
of a PC bridge girder with NSM CFRP rectangular bars.” Adv. Struct.
Eng., 7共4兲, 297–309.
Nordin, H., and Taljsten, B. 共2003兲. “Concrete beams strengthened
with prestressed near surface mounted reinforcement.” Proc. Sixth Int.
Symposium on FRP Reinforcement for Concrete Structures
(FRPRCS-6), K. H. Tan, ed., World Scientific, Singapore, 1077–1086.
Sena Cruz, J. M., and Barros, J. A. O. 共2002兲. “Bond behavior of carbon
laminate strips into concrete by pull-out bending tests.” Proc., Int.
Symposium Bond in Concrete—From Research to Standards,
Budapest, Hungary, 614–621.
Sena Cruz, J. M., and Barros, J. A. O. 共2004兲. “Modeling of bond
between near-surface mounted CFRP laminate strips and concrete.”
Comput. Struct., 82共17–19兲, 1513–1521.
Smith, S. T., and Teng, J. G. 共2001兲. “Interfacial stresses in plated
beams.” Eng. Struct., 23共7兲, 857–871.
Smith, S. T., and Teng, J. G. 共2002a兲 “FRP-strengthened RC beams. I:
Review of debonding strength models.” Eng. Struct., 24共4兲, 385–395.
Smith, S. T., and Teng, J. G. 共2002b兲. “FRP-strengthened RC beams-II:
Assessment of debonding strength models.” Eng. Struct., 24共4兲,
397–417.
Smith, S. T., and Teng, J. G. 共2003兲. “Shear-bending interaction in
debonding failures of FRP-plated RC beams.” Adv. Struct. Eng., 6共3兲,
183–199.
Teng, J. G., Chen, J. F., Smith, S. T., and Lam, L. 共2002兲.
FRP-strengthened RC structures, Wiley, New York.
Teng, J. G., Chen, J. F., Smith, S. T., and Lam, L. 共2003a兲. “Behaviour
and strength of FRP-strengthened RC structures: A state-of-the-art
review.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., Struct. Build., 156共1兲, 51–62.
Teng, J. G., Smith, S. T., Yao, J., and Chen, J. F. 共2003b兲. “Intermediate
crack-induced debonding in RC beams and slabs.” Constr. Build.
Mater., 17共6-7兲, 447–462.
Yao, J., Teng, J. G., and Chen, J. F. 共2005a兲. “Experimental study on
FRP-to-concrete bonded joints.” Composites, Part B, 36共2兲, 99–113.
Yao, J., Teng, J. G., and Lam, L. 共2005b兲. “Experimental study on inter-
mediate crack debonding in FRP-strengthened RC flexural members,”
Adv. Struct. Eng., 8共4兲, 365–396.
View publication stats