Materials and Structures

DOI 10.1617/s11527-009-9509-8

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Behavior of RC T-section beams strengthened with CFRP

strips, subjected to cyclic load
H. Murat Tanarslan Æ Sinan Altin

Received: 2 January 2008 / Accepted: 19 May 2009

RILEM 2009

Abstract This paper presents results of an experi- published design equations. This comparison and
mental investigation on T-section reinforced concrete validation of guidelines is one of the main objectives
(RC) beams strengthened with externally bonded of this work. The test results confirmed that all CFRP
carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) strips. Spec- arrangements differ from CFRP strip width and
imens, one of which was the control specimen and the arrangement, improved the strength and behavior of
remaining six were the shear deficient test specimens, the specimens in different level significantly.
were tested under cyclic load to investigate the effect
of CFRP strips on behavior and strength. Five shear Keywords RC beam
Strengthening

deficient specimens were strengthened with side Shear
CFRP
Cyclic load
bonded and U-jacketed CFRP strips, and remaining
one tested with its virgin condition without strength- List of symbols
ening. The type and arrangement of CFRP strips and a Shear span
the anchorage used to fasten the strips to the concrete d Effective height of the cross section
are the variables of this experimental work. The main fc Compressive strength of concrete
objective was to analyze the behavior and failure L Length of the beam
modes of T-section RC beams strengthened in shear Vexp Experimental shear forces of specimens
with externally bonded CFRP strips. According to test Vcal Calculated shear forces of specimens
results premature debonding was the dominant failure eCU Maximum strain of concrete
mode of externally strengthened RC beams so the / Diameter of reinforcement
effect of anchorage usage on behavior and strength
was also investigated. To verify the reliability of shear Conversion factors
design equations and guidelines, experimental results 1 mm 0.039 in
were compared with all common guidelines and 1 mm2 0.00152 in2
1 kN 0.2248 kips
1 MPa 145 psi
H. M. Tanarslan (&)
Department of Civil Engineering, Dokuz Eylul
University, Buca, Izmir 35160, Turkey
e-mail: murat.tanarslan@yahoo.com 1 Introduction
S. Altin
Department of Civil Engineering, Gazi University, Many existing reinforced concrete (RC) members are
Ankara, Turkey deficient in strength and in need of strengthening.

Construction faults or poor construction applications,
changes in standards, and reduction or total loss of
shear or flexural reinforcements due to corrosion are
some of the factors that cause deficiency. In order to
take the full advantage of ductility and hinder sudden
failure, it is desirable that flexure behavior governs
the ultimate strength rather than the shear. Shear
failure is brittle in nature and comes without adequate
warning. Therefore strengthening of shear deficient
structures is essential to prevent unwanted failure.
Strengthening can be in the form of rehabilitation of
structural members, repairing the damaged structures
or retrofitting the seismic deficiencies. Using exter-
nally bonded carbon fiber-reinforced polymer
(CFRP) for strengthening has become popular in
recent years due to its mechanical advantages. CFRP
sheets are both cost effective and durable, they are
tailorable, non-magnetic, have excellent fatigue
behavior, ease of handling and installation, minimal
disruption to the structure function, good corrosion
resistance and high strength to weight ratio.
The effect of CFRP for flexural strengthening has
been studied both experimentally and analytically [1,
2]. But there is still need to study the problem of shear
because of the interacted parameters; static scheme,
shear span-to-depth ratio (a/d), concrete strength,
interaction of internal reinforcements with strength-
ening material. Many of the earlier studies were
concerned with the proof of CFRP for shear strength-
ening [3–5]. These studies indicated that using CFRP
for shear strengthening is an effective method that
improves the member’s strength and/or stiffness [6–
9]. In these studies also the overall behavior and
failure modes of CFRP strengthened structures were
investigated [1, 10–16]. After proving the effect of
CFRP as strengthening material, researchers pursued
to improve the usage of CFRP. The developed
technique has to be more economical and easy usage
than wrapping. Using CFRP as strips cover in demand
features. After determination of the new technique,
using CFRP as strips, first the efficiency and than the
performance as shear reinforcement was investigated
[17]. Afterwards the behavior and failure modes were
observed. Nevertheless, monotonic loading was
applied in all these studies and performance of CFRP
strips was not investigated under earthquakes. Thus,
previous studies have to be supported by new studies
in which cyclic loads, which act like earthquake to the
structure, were exposed.
Materials and Structures
The bond between the CFRP and the concrete is
crucial in guaranteeing the effectiveness of strengthen-
ing when the structure is strengthened externally.
Previous tests subjected to monotonic loading indicated
that premature failure due to debonding was the major
problem for strengthened RC beams. Therefore, appro-
priate considerations must be given to hinder debond-
ing. Particularly to prevent debonding researchers used
conventional anchorages. Actually, in literature very
limited amount of studies were encountered about
developed anchorages [18]. Therefore a new anchorage
detail was developed for the experimental program.
Then the performance of developed anchorages was
tested to investigate if it can advance the behavior of
CFRP strengthened RC beam.
This paper presents results of an experimental
study conducted on shear strengthening of RC
T-section beams with CFRP strips under cyclic loads.
All seven beams except the flexural reference had no
internal shear reinforcements. Shear deficient speci-
mens were strengthened by using U-jacketed, and side
bonded CFRP strips while one of the shear deficient
specimen was tested with its virgin condition to serve
as a reference to shear deficiency. Developed mechan-
ical anchorage was applied to the U-jacketed speci-
men. The objective of this work was to investigate the
shear performance of strengthened specimens and to
determine the dominant factors that affect the behav-
ior and failure modes of the strengthened T-section
RC beams under cyclic load. The parameters were
selected as to bear to the objective; (a) CFRP
distribution (b) CFRP orientation and (c) anchorage
usage. To evaluate enhancement of test results, on the
behavior, strength, stiffness and failure mode, were
compared with the control beams and then with each
other. In addition, to verify the reliability of shear
design equations and codes, experimental results were
compared with all common guidelines and published
design equations. This comparison and validation of
codes is one of the main objectives of this work.
2 Experimental program
2.1 Specimens and material properties
Seven T-section RC beams with various CFRP
schemes were manufactured and tested under cyclic
load in the experimental program. The cross-sectional
Materials and Structures

geometries were same for all specimens and are
shown in Fig. 1. The web of the RC beams was
smoothed at the outer corners to ease the high stress
concentration in the CFRP at these locations.
Longitudinal reinforcements, three 20.0 mm dia-
meter deformed steel rebars in the compression zone
and three 20.0 mm diameter deformed steel rebars in
the tension zone, were chosen in a manner that no
flexural problem will be faced during test program.
For flexural reference 6.0 mm diameter closed stir-
rups, spaced at 75.0 mm spacing were used. The
remaining shear deficient beams do not include shear
reinforcements. However, stirrups were provided
outside the shear span to block local cracks that
might occur due to applied load. The support of the
beam specimens was reinforced with ten 16.0 mm
diameter deformed steel. Steel rebars of 10.0 mm
diameter were used as stirrups for the support. They
were spaced at 10.0 mm. Steel reinforcing rebars,
were used in the experimental program were also
tested in tension to obtain the mechanical properties.
Table 1 shows the mechanical properties of the
reinforcing rebars used in experimental program.
A single concrete mix was used for all specimens
to achieve similarity in strength. The concrete was a
mixture of water, cement, sand and aggregate with

Fig. 1 Reinforcement Ø 16
details of specimen beams Ø 10 Section A-A
110 110

225
75 75 75 120 120 120
Ø 20 A 3Ø 20

285 75
1200

d=335
360
Ø 20 Ø6 3Ø 20
B B A V
225 225
50 50

a=1675 320 320

400 1750 Stirrup: Ø6/75
Specimen-1

Ø 16
Ø 10 Section C-C
110 110

225
75 75 75 120 120 120
Ø 20 C 3Ø 20

285 75
1200

d=335
360

Ø 20 C Ø6 3Ø 20
B B V
a
d 5.0
a=1675
400 1750
Specimen-2 to 7
Section B-B
Longitudinal rebars: 10Ø16
350
7
7 325
500

7
325 7
350 Dimensions in mm.
400 Stirrup: Ø10/110
 Materials and Structures

Table 1 Material properties of reinforcements reinforcement. They were spaced at 60.0 mm. No
Reinforcements Yield Ultimate Elastic modulus
anchorage detail was performed to the specimen
strength strength 9103 (MPa) beam. U-jacketed CFRP strips of 50.0 mm wide were
(MPa) (MPa) used to strengthen Specimen-7. Strips were spaced at
30.0 mm. One anchorage for each strip was used at
6 mm bar 275.0 417.0 192
the top of the beam web, where the beam web and
10 mm bar 304.2 443.1 198
flange are crossed. The details of different ways of
20 mm 414.0 687.9 205
deformed bar strengthening scheme adopted are shown in Fig. 2.
Anchorages were constituted of ‘‘L’’ shaped
50.0 9 50.0 9 5.0 mm steel plates and 10.0 mm
the ratio of 0.68:1:2:3 by mass. Four cylinder
diameter threaded rods. Anchorage details are pre-
specimens were casted and tested at the same time
sented in Fig. 2. To perform anchorages following
of beam test to determine the compressive strength of
queue was followed. First, position of each strip was
concrete. The measured average cylinder compres-
designated. Then the location where threaded rods are
sive strengths of 28-day concrete cylinder were
going to be placed, were marked; top of each strip
approximately 30.0 MPa. Table 2 also summarizes
and corresponding point at the flange. Top marks at
strengthening scheme of specimens’.
beams’ web were drilled with 12.0 mm diameter
Specimen-2 was the reference of shear deficient
drills up to 50.0 mm depth. Corresponding point to
beam’s, was tested without strengthening, and used as
the top drilled hole were drilled with 12.0 mm
a baseline comparison to evaluate the enhancement in
diameter drills all throughout the flange. Later on,
strength provided by the CFRP strips. The remaining
all the drilled holes were cleaned with pressured air.
shear deficient RC beams were strengthened with
Threaded rods of 10.0 mm diameter were placed to
different arrangements of CFRP strips.
the top drilled holes during bonding of CFRP. While
Specimen-3 was strengthened with 50.0 mm wide
placing the threaded rods, extra care was conducted
CFRP strips, spaced at 60.0 mm. Strips were used on
not to damage the continuity of fiber directions. After
both sides of the beam symmetrically. Side bonded
curing at room temperature, developed anchorages
CFRP strips were also used to strengthen Specimen-
details were performed to the beam specimen. ‘‘L’’
4. CFRP strips of 50.0 mm width were spaced
shaped plates were anchoraged to beam’s flange by
30.0 mm, bonded to the beam web symmetrically.
using 10 mm diameter threaded rods.
Specimen-5 was strengthened with 100.0 mm wide
CFRP strips, spaced at 30.0 mm. No anchorage detail
was applied to specimen. Specimen-6 was strength- 2.2 Strengthening procedure
ened with U-jacketed, in which CFRP were bonded
on both the sides and the soffit, CFRP strips. CFRP The mechanical properties of CFRP and the epoxy
strips of 50.0 mm width were used as shear resin are presented in Table 3. The strengthening

Table 2 Properties of specimens

Specimen # fc (MPa) CFRP strip for strengthening
Wfa (mm) Sfb (mm) Anchorage Arrangements

Specimen-1 (Control) 33.0 – – – –

Specimen-2 (Control) 30.1 – – – –
Specimen-3 (Strengthening) 32.4 50 110 – Side bonding
Specimen-4 (Strengthening) 30.2 50 80 – Side bonding
Specimen-5 (Strengthening) 31.4 100 130 – Side bonding
Specimen-6 (Strengthening) 28.3 50 110 – U-jacketing
Specimen-7 (Strengthening) 31.6 50 80 Yes U-jacketing
a
Wf = CFRP strip width
b
Sf = center-to-center spacing between CFRP strips
Materials and Structures

1200

75

360
285
50 Sf
V

400 1675
Specimens with wf =50 mm (Specimen-3, Specimen-4,
Specimen-6)

50x50x5
75
1200

Steel plate
360
285
Ø12
Steel bolt
Ø10
100 Sf
V

25 25
400 1675
20 30
Specimens with wf =100 mm (Specimen-5) Ø12

DETAIL
CFRP A
50x50x5 L Shape Steel Plates 10 mm Dia. Bolt
75
1200

360
285

50 Sf
V
50x50x5 Steel Plates

400 1675 Dimensions in mm.

Specimens with wf =50 mm (Specimen-7), with Anchorage

Fig. 2 CFRP strip arrangements for specimen beams and anchorage detail

procedure includes surface preparation, application of
priming adhesive layer and bonding of the CFRP
sheets. First, the outer weak surface of the concrete
was removed with sand blasting. Afterwards, loose
particles on the surface of the specimens were
cleaned with compressed air. Once the surface has
been prepared for bonding, the epoxy resin was
prepared in accordance with manufacturer’s direc-
tions. The pores appearing on the concrete surface
was filled with pre-processed epoxy. Then epoxy
primer was coated at the designated places where
CFRP strips are going to be placed. Later on CFRP
sheets were placed on the coated epoxy primer and
constant pressure was applied on the sheet surface by
a roller to guarantee impregnation of the sheets by the
resin. Then another layer of epoxy was put on top of
the fabric and the extreme resin was cleaned. All
applications were performed at room temperature.
Specimen was cured for at least 15 days under
laboratory conditions before testing. The same
 Materials and Structures

Table 3 Properties of CFRP and resin strengthening procedure was carried out for all
Properties of CFRP Remarks
strengthened specimens.
and resin
2.3 Experimental setup
Fiber orientation 0 (Unidirectional)
Construction Warp: Carbon fibers (99% of total areal A schematic view of experimental set-up and the
weight), Weft: Thermoplastic heat-set
fibers (1% of total areal weight) arrangement of the measurement devices are shown
Areal weight 220 ± 10 g/m2 in Fig. 3. All specimens (cantilever beams) were
Fiber density 1.78 g/cm3
supported to the strong wall by the help of two
Fabric design 0.12 mm (based on total carbon content)
45.0 mm diameter high strength steel mounting rods.
thickness To perform cyclic load to the specimen, a loading
Tensile strength of 4,100 N/mm2 (nominal) column was designed with hinges by the beam’s free
fibers end. Loading column contained two hinges, a load
Tensile E modulus 231,000 N/mm2 (nominal) cell and a hydraulic jack. The capacity of the
of fibers hydraulic jack was 1000.0 kN while the load cell’s
Strain at break of 1.7% (nominal) capacity was 600.0 kN. Load was applied in cycles of
fibers
loading and unloading. Load cycles were selected as
Resin Two component (A and B)
they will help to evaluate the flexure and shear cracks
Resin mixture ratio A/B = 4/1 (Weight) propagations and their affect to behavior. Same
Resin tensile 30 N/mm2 loading cycles were applied to all specimens at the
strength
initial state. After couple of cycles in elastic region,
Tensile E modulus 3,800 N/mm2
of resin flexural and shear cracks were occurred. After the
appearance of these cracks, specimens’ behavior

Fig. 3 Test setup and

instrumentation
LVDT
Strain Gauge

Hinge
Load Cell

Hydraulic Jack
Rigid Wall

Hinge

Rigid Floor

Dimensions in mm.
Materials and Structures

Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
changed because of their distinct shear load carrying

Shear (rupture)
capacities. Loading was increased up to yield load of

Failure mode
flexural reinforcements or until the fall of the

at ultimate

Flexure
specimen. For each increment of load, the strains

Shear
from strain gauges and vertical displacements from
LVDT’s were recorded by means of an automatic
data acquisition system. Four linear variable differ-

strengthening
ential transformers (LVDTs) were used to monitor

Increase in

(Vu,n/Vu,1)
load after
displacements. The LVTD’s are located at the end of

ultimate
the beam for maximum displacement, under the rigid

1.56
1.59
1.73
1.52
2.04
–
–
support to calculate the undesired displacement and
finally on the rigid support to calculate the rotation.

strengthening (du,n/du,1)
Measurement of strain is evident to designate the

Increase in ultimate
contribution of CFRP strips to shear capacity. Strain

displacement after
gauges also help to determine the shear cracks before
propagation by the help of increase at strains. As the
main aim was to designate the contribution of CFRP
strips, eight strain gauges were attached at the section

2.04
1.67
2.04
1.86
3.44
mid-height along the fiber direction. The number and

–
–
places of strain gauges were designated with consid-

ultimate load
eration where the shear cracks are expected to be
Stiffness at
developed, between 150.0 and 1000.0 mm apart from
the beam’s support [19]. (kN/mm)

2.96
3.62
3.33
3.30
3.01
3.10
2.93
3 Experimental results and evaluations
Initial stiffness

Forward loading step was considered for ultimate load and ultimate displacement
(kN/mm)

3.1 Observed behavior and failure modes

6.56
6.15
6.33
6.41
6.70
6.38
6.89
Experimental results are summarized in Table 4. All
the major cracks were visually examined at the
Failure disp.

experimental program. Control specimen showed

(du) (mm)

ductile flexural behavior as expected. Large dis-

8.70
70.60

17.75
14.56
17.73
16.20
29.89

placements were developed, and specimen reached

at an ultimate load value that was 11% greater than
the yield load. Also a plastic hinge was developed at
(Vu) (kN)

the maximum moment region. Specimen-2, which

Ultimate

96.92
39.52
61.63
62.94
68.48
60.01
80.67

was fabricated to designate the shear deficiency, was

load

failed in shear. As the load reached to 39.5 kN,

three main shear cracks were developed in shear
span and the beam failed in shear as can be seen
Side bonding
Side bonding
Side bonding
Table 4 Experimental results

U-jacketing
U-jacketing

from Fig. 4.
Control
Control

First crack always appeared as a flexural crack for

all specimens. A linear behavior was observed since
then. Due to the load increments, the initially
developed flexure cracks were advanced through the
Specimen #

Specimen-1
Specimen-2
Specimen-3
Specimen-4
Specimen-5
Specimen-6
Specimen-7

sides and caused shear cracks between the CFRP

strips. Besides, shear cracks were also developed at
the unstrengthened part of the specimen, between

Fig. 4 Failure mode of Specimen-1
CFRP strips. These cracks then propagated towards
the CFRP strips and advanced along the interfacial
concrete. As the interfacial concrete started to
weaken, the bond’s strength is reduced. Afterwards
the CFRP strips were separated from the concrete
surface. The same behavior was examined for all the
specimens that were failed because of debonding.
The failure mechanism of the debonded specimens
was presented in Fig. 5.
Because of debonding, all specimens except
Specimen-7 showed the same behavior until
50.0 kN load level. At about 20.0 kN, flexural cracks
appeared at the flange. Then, in the interval of 25.0
and 35.0 kN, shear cracks were occurred at the
unstrengthened part, between the CFRP strips. After
exceeding 35.0 kN load level, shear cracks started to
develop faster, widen, propagate and undertake to the
body of the beam. This behavior was continued until
Fig. 5 Failure mode, debonding
Materials and Structures
50.0 kN load level. After exceeding 50.0 kN load
level, dissimilar ultimate load levels were observed
due to the distinct load carrying capacities. However
the behavior and failure modes were exactly the
same. First some strips were separated from concrete
as can be seen from Fig. 6 (with a layer of concrete
adherent to them), then main shear crack was
propagated which is related to debonding. Hereafter,
specimens lost their load carrying capacities and
failed in shear consequently.
The behavior and failure mode of Specimen-7 is
totally different from formerly indicated specimens.
Specimen-7 strengthened in a manner similar to that of
Specimen-6. The main difference from the Specimen-
6 was the anchorage usage. The anchorage usage was
improved the behavior, therefore initial shear crack
propagation was delayed up to 80% when compared
with the specimens’ without anchorage. As the load
reached up to 80.7 kN and the deflection went up to
29.9 mm, 14th and 15th strips were compelled and
right after ruptured due to the stresses that were exceed
the limit that they can resist. As the strengthened part
lost its resistance against shear, a diagonal shear crack
was propagated abruptly at the decayed section as can
be seen from Fig. 7. The crack was advanced through
the top end of 10th strip and separated 11th, 12th and
13th strips from the concrete. Anchorage delayed the
strips from splitting at lower loads and also prevented
main shear crack propagation due to debonding.
According to test results, the developed anchorage
worked so fine that U-jacketing with anchorage
denoted the best performance up to then.
Fig. 6 Failure mode of Specimen-6
Materials and Structures

then with each other. Comparisons of specimens were

Fig. 7 Failure mode of Specimen-7
3.2 Evaluation of the test results
To acquire strengthening effect, all strengthened
beams were compared with the control beams and
done by using response envelopes. Response enve-
lopes were drown by connecting peak points of
loading cycles and presented on Fig. 8. CFRP
reinforced specimens exhibited significantly higher
load-carrying capacity than that of the unstrength-
ened specimen, Specimen-2.
To evaluate the contribution of strengthening
material strain activity of the strengthened specimens
was also evaluated. It must be point out that the strain
values, reported herein are not necessarily the max-
imum values. They are strictly related to the location
of the strain-gauges with respect to that of the shear
cracks. Actually, to be more realistic the largest strain
of the specimens’ is submitted here in Figs. 9 and 10.
It is obvious that maximum strain values that were
obtained from the specimens’ will give essential
information about the contribution of strengthening
material to the shear resistance. When the measured
maximum strain values approach to the ultimate

Fig. 8 Response envelopes 100

of specimen beams
Specimen #
80 1
2
3
4
60 5
6
7

40

20
Shear force, kN

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40

Displacement, mm
 Materials and Structures

(a) 100 (b) 100

80 Specimen-3 80 Specimen-4
60 60

Shear force, kN
Shear force, kN

40 40
20 245 20
985
0 0
50 60 50 60 50

-20 Strain in-2 is maximum -20

Strain in-8 is maximum
-40 -40
-60 -60
-80 -80

-100 -100
0,000 0,001 0,002 0,003 0,004 0,000 0,001 0,002 0,003 0,004
Strain, mm/mm Strain, mm/mm

(c) 100 (d) 100

Specimen-5 80
80 Specimen-6
60 60
Shear force, kN

Shear force, kN
40 40

20 20 795
1090
0 0
50 60 50 60 50

-20 Strain in-7 is maximum

-20 Strain in-5 is maximum

-40 -40

-60 -60

-80 -80

-100 -100
0,000 0,001 0,002 0,003 0,004 0,000 0,001 0,002 0,003 0,004
Strain, mm/mm Strain, mm/mm

Fig. 9 Load-maximum CFRP strain curves of Specimen-3, 4, 5 and 6

100
observed to occur less than the ultimate tensile strain.
80 Specimen-7
To preclude this mode of failure, ACI-440 committee
60
report limited the maximum strain and proposes to use
Shear force, kN

40
20
0.004 mm/mm as maximum strain for design. Besides
745

0 if the measured strains are below the ACI-440

-20
50 50 50
30 30 30 committee report’s expected value that indicates the
Strain in-6 is maximum
-40 expected contribution could not be obtained from the
-60 strengthening material. With respect to that, when the
-80 strain activity of the debonded specimens’ was
-100 evaluated, it was observed that strain values were
0,000 0,001 0,002 0,003 0,004 0,005 0,006 0,007 0,008
Strain, mm/mm
definitely below the ACI-440 committee report’s
expected value. Debonding, which cause premature
Fig. 10 Load-maximum CFRP strain curves of Specimen-7 failure, hinders to obtain the expected contribution
from the strengthening material.
tensile strain, 0.017, the expected contribution to the The concrete strength of the test specimens’ plays
shear resistance is definitely achieved. Furthermore, a great role especially when internal shear reinforce-
according to ACI-440 committee report, the effective ments were omitted. Therefore while fabricating the
strain is the maximum strain that can be obtained in specimens extra care was conducted to achieve
the CFRP system at the ultimate load stage and is similarity in concrete strength. Notwithstanding a
governed by the failure mode of the CFRP system. distinction with an interval of 6% less and 8% more
Loss of aggregate interlock of the concrete has been according to reference beam was materialized. While
Materials and Structures
evaluating the below comparisons the effect of
concrete strength was not separately considered but
it must be point out that it will affect the evaluations.
However the comparisons will still give enough
knowledge to the researchers about the effect of
selected variables to the behavior. Specimen-3 was
strengthened with 50.0 mm wide CFRP strips, which
were spaced at 60.0 mm, showed 57% less strength
than Specimen-1 and 56% more strength than Spec-
imen-2. Debonding was also affected the strain
behavior. The largest strain value of Specimen-3
was 0.002 mm/mm. That corresponds only to 50% of
the ACI-440 [20] committee report’s expected value.
The recorded CFRP strain was indicated that the
failure was occurred at an average effective stress
level below the nominal strength due to debonding.
Specimen-4 showed 54% less and 59% more
strength than the flexural control specimen and
unstrengthened shear deficient specimen, respec-
tively. The maximum vertical strain at the time of
failure was 0.0031 mm/mm (i.e. 78% of the ultimate
strain). By increasing the amount of strengthened area
(decreasing the spacing of CFRP strips from 60.0 to
30.0), an increase of 55% at contribution to the shear
resistance was obtained according to Specimen-3.
However debonding was still governing the behavior.
Debonding hindered to achieve the expected contri-
bution to the shear resistance as can be seen from the
recorded maximum CFRP strain value.
Specimen-5 had reached 68.5 kN load level in
forward loading step but failed in that cycle while
backward loading. Specimen showed 73% more
strength than Specimen-2 and 42% less strength than
Specimen-1. The maximum localized CFRP strain
was in the order of 0.0036 mm/mm, which corre-
sponds to 89% of the ACI-440 committee report’s
expected value. CFRP strips were contributed well to
the shear resistance, as be seen from the strain level.
Ultimate strain almost reached the ACI-440 commit-
tee report’s expected value. However, debonding
frustrated to get the accurate contribution from the
strengthening material.
Specimen-6 was strengthened with 50.0 mm width
U-jacketed CFRP strips which were spaced at
60.0 mm. While planning the strengthening scheme
of Specimen-6, the main aim was to prevent
debonding by the help of orientation. According to
studies, debonding is rarely faced in which
specimen’s strengthened with U-jacketed CFRP [3].
However, Specimen-6 was still associated with a
rapid, sudden, and unstable separation of the bonded
CFRP strips at the upper ends. Specimen showed
62% less strength than Specimen-1 and 52% more
strength than Specimen-2. The maximum localized
CFRP strain was in the order of 0.0016 mm/mm,
which corresponds to 40% of the ACI-440 committee
report’s expected value. U-jacketed specimen’s
behavior was not obtained as planned due to
debonding of the CFRP at the upper ends. If
debonding at the upper ends could be prevented a
better utilization can be obtained from CFRP and
consequently a higher increase in shear capacity
could be obtained.
Specimen-7 was strengthened with U-jacketed
CFRP strips with end anchors. End anchors showed
significant performance for preventing CFRP from
peel off. By preventing peel of CFRP strips was
subjected to higher loads and therefore some CFRP
strips were ruptured. Actually, specimen almost
reached its ductile behavior if we compare with the
yield load of Specimen-1. Specimen-7 showed an
increase in capacity of 104% over reference. Spec-
imen-7 also measured the largest strain up to then,
which was 50% larger than ACI-440 committee
report’s expected value, 0.006 mm/mm. Ultimate
load level and strain behavior clearly proved the real
effect of CFRP to shear capacity when debonding
was prevented.
In order to evaluate the contribution of CFRP
strips to shear capacity, initial and ultimate load
stiffness’ of the test specimens were also evaluated.
Initial stiffness’ were calculated by using the slope of
the lines that was connecting to origin and the load,
at which first flexural crack was occurred. When the
initial stiffness’ of CFRP strengthened specimens’
were observed, it was seen that the initial stiffness’
were shifted in an interval of 3% and 12% more than
that of the shear deficient reference specimen. If the
strengthening material provides less crack propaga-
tions until the ultimate load was reached, minor
decrease at ultimate load stiffness will be material-
ized. However as it was also visually examined,
many cracks were occurred at the shear span until the
fall of the specimens. Therefore the stiffness was
decreased to up to 25% less than that of the reference
specimen.

4 Comparison of test results and design equations
The use of CFRP composites for shear strengthening
is a widely preferred method in recent years.
Therefore, almost all design standards have propa-
gated provisions to calculate the contribution of
CFRP. Additionally, due to lack of design standards,
several researchers have also developed new analyt-
ical models to predict the nominal shear resistance for
CFRP.
In general, truss analogy was considered to find the
contribution of CFRP to shear capacity which is
similar to determine the contribution of steel shear
reinforcement. While predicting the CFRP contribu-
tion, tensile strength of CFRP, strain distribution in the
CFRP along the shear crack and the shear crack angle,
were considered as the effective parameters. Accord-
ing to these models all CFRP strips, intersected by the
main shear crack, are assumed to contribute the same
average stress. The differences from one method to
other lies on how much effective stress developed at
ultimate state. Furthermore, shear crack angle gener-
ally assumed to be 45 in all provisions.
To predict the shear resistance due to CFRP,
Concrete Society [21] and ACI 440 are based on
work of Khalifa et al. [22], and fib [23] and Canadian
Standards Association (CSA-S806-02) [24] are based
on the work of Triantafillou [11]. Apart from them,
Chen and Teng [25, 26] developed a strip model,
combined with the shear friction approach, based on
the bond mechanism observed from the tests. The
model used empirical expressions based on curve-
fitting of test results to define the effective stress of
CFRP. Analytical model made also clear distinction
between rupture failure and debonding, and devel-
oped two separate models.
Table 5 Comparison of experimental and analytical results
Specimen # Calculated strengths
ACI 440 fib Concrete CSA
(kN) (kN) Society (kN) (kN)
Specimen-3 Side bonding 55.9 49.7 62.7
Specimen-4 Side bonding 57.6 48.0 66.6
Specimen-5 Side bonding 61.7 48.7 59.7
Specimen-6 U-jacketing 56.9 47.4 81.8
Specimen-7 U-jacketing 64.5 53.0 100.8
CSA Canadian Standards Association, CSA-S806-02
Materials and Structures
For all these methods, total shear resistance of a
strengthened RC section is found as the sum of the
three components.
Vn ¼ Vc þ Vs þ Vf ð1Þ
where Vc is the contribution of concrete, Vs is the
contribution of internal steel shear reinforcement and
finally Vf is the contribution of CFRP at Eq. 1. In this
study only the concrete was contributed to shear force
carrying capacities because specimens do not include
internal shear reinforcements.
The analytical shear contributions of known models
and design standards were compared with the test
results and presented in Table 5. As can be seen from
Table 5, shear resistance due to CFRP, which were
calculated by CSA-S806-02, performed well with the
experiments except Specimen-7. As the predicted
shear resistances of all codes were compared, Chen
and Teng’s method produced the closest result to the
experimental results for specimen with anchorage.
Analytical shear resistance of the strengthened
specimens with respect to ACI-440 was found in the
interval of 5% and 11% less than the experimental
results. Concrete Society’s analytical results were not
well-matched to the experimental values. Neverthe-
less, analytical shear load carrying capacities for fib
TG9.3 were denoted the biggest difference with the
range of 24% and 41% from experimental results. A
significant deviation between experimental and
guidelines values for all predictions were observed
for Specimen-7 except Chen and Teng’s proposal. To
prevent premature failure, anchorage was applied.
Due to the measures, specimen reached its maximum
shear capacity. The positive influence of anchorages
to shear capacity was not included in the ana-
lytical equations that were suggested by guidelines.
Experimental Experimental/calculated
strengths (kN)
Chen and
Teng (kN)
62.3 68.6 61.63 1.10 1.24 0.98 0.99 0.91
62.94 71.8 62.94 1.09 1.31 0.95 1.00 0.88
68.48 76.2 68.48 1.11 1.41 1.15 1.00 0.90
58.71 69.8 60.01 1.05 1.27 0.73 1.02 0.86
65.9 78.2 80.67 1.25 1.52 0.80 1.22 1.03
Materials and Structures
Therefore, the experimental results and analytical
provisions were not brought out close results. Con-
sequently, the proposed design equations can conser-
vatively predict the experimental test results. But the
influence of the ratio a/d and interaction of internal
shear reinforcement to shear capacity due to CFRP
was not included in the guidelines. The proposed
design results will be more realistic if the parameters
that affect behavior have captured by the guidelines.
5 Conclusions
In this study, the shear performance of T-section RC
beams with shear deficiencies (without stirrups)
strengthened with different configurations of CFRP
strips were investigated. The test results indicated
that the shear strengthening effectiveness with CFRP
strips on the RC beams varies in function of the
spacing of CFRP strips, CFRP strips’ widths, strip
orientation and anchorage usage. But all in all an
increase in strength was seen in every specimen to
which CFRP applied, regardless of CFRP application.
• The arrangement of CFRP strips was among the
effective parameters directing the strength of the
specimens. Experimental results of the Specimen-
3 and Specimen-4 showed that the ultimate
strength increased 3% when the spacing of CFRP
strips was decreased from 60.0 mm to 30.0 mm.
Specimen-4’s ultimate shear capacity was
62.9 kN, corresponding to an increase of 59%
over the control beam. By increasing CFRP strips
width from 50.0 to 100.0 mm, a gain of 14% over
Specimen-4 was obtained. Increasing the strength-
ened area on the shear span delayed the initial
shear cracks propagations and a better utilization
was obtained from the strengthening material.
• The effect of CFRP orientation to shear capacity
can be evaluated by investigating the behavior of
Specimen-3 and Specimen-6. Specimen-3’s ulti-
mate shear capacity was 61.6 kN that corresponds
to an increase of 56% over the control beam.
Although it is expected to obtain a better contri-
bution from Specimen-6, strengthened by U-
jacketed CFRP, only an increase of 56% over
the control beam was obtained.
• Side-bonded and U-jacketed specimen beams,
without anchorage, were collapsed with brittle
shear failure because of debonding. In addition,
the recorded CFRP strain was also indicated that
the failure was occurred at an average effective
stress level below the nominal strength due to
debonding. This is one of the main problems of
CFRP strengthened RC structures. To overcome
debonding, a new mechanical anchorage was
developed in the experimental program. New
developed mechanical anchorage was behaved
efficient under cyclic load. Although there were
no shear reinforcements in the specimens that tied
the beam web and flange together, top anchorages
prevented the separation of beam flange and web.
Top anchorages were also prevented peeling of
the CFRP strips from concrete. In addition, the
function of the end-anchors was to prevent the
premature peeling of the CFRP strips and it was
enormously prosperous under cyclic load.
• Anchorage application increased the ultimate
strength by 52% according to experimental results
of the Specimen-6 and Specimen-7. It also
prevented debonding at initial state and changed
the failure mode from debonding to rupture. It is
obvious that anchorage usage is the dominant
parameter to achieve the required strength and
behavior from the shear strengthened RC beam.
• Shear resistance due to CFRP, which were
calculated by CSA-S806-02, performed well with
the experiments except Specimen-7. As the
predicted shear resistances of all codes were
compared, Chen and Teng’s method produced the
closest result to the experimental results for
anchoraged specimen. All analytical results from
guidelines indicated that the used expression to
estimate the contribution of CFRP strips to the
shear capacity is acceptable.
• The initial and ultimate load stiffness of Speci-
mens’ was up to 12% and up to 19% which more
and less than that of the shear deficient control
specimen, respectively. As the strength of spec-
imen was increased specimens’ initial stiffness
was also increases. However, because of the
propagated cracks at the beam web, ultimate load
stiffness’s were decreased when compared with
the unstrengthened specimen, Specimen-2.
The tests performed in the presented series should
be the starting point for designating the behavior and
strength of strengthened RC beams with CFRP strips

under cyclic loads. It is hoped this study also helps to
understand the shear mechanism of a RC beam
strengthened with externally bonded CFRP strips.
Still further tests and more in depth study are needed
for confirming the degree of effectiveness of each
orientation and arrangement.
References
1. Kachlakev D, McCurry CC (2000) Behavior of full scale
reinforced concrete beams retrofitted for shear and flexural
with FRP laminates. Composite B 31:445–452. doi:10.
1016/S1359-8368(00)00023-8
2. Norris T, Saadatmanesh H, Ehsani MR (1997) Shear and
flexural strengthening of R/C beams with carbon fiber
sheets. J Struct Eng 123(7):903–911. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-9445(1997)123:7(903)
3. Teng JG, Lam L, Chen JF (2004) Shear strengthening of
RC beams with FRP composites. Prog Struct Eng Mater
6:173–184. doi:10.1002/pse.179
4. Ritchie P, Thomas D, Lu L, Conneley G (1991) External
reinforcement of concrete beams using fiber reinforced
plastics. ACI Struct J 88(4):490–500
5. Chajes MJ, Januska T, Mertz D, Thomson T, Finch W
(1995) Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams
using externally applied composite fabrics. ACI Struct J
92(3):295–303
6. Sato Y, Ueda T, Kakuta Y, Tanaka T (1996) Shear rein-
forcing effect of carbon fiber sheet attached to side of
reinforced concrete beams. In: El-Badry MM (ed)
Advanced composite materials in bridges and structures.
The Canadian Civil Society for Civil Engineering, Mon-
treal, pp 621–627
7. Arduini M, Nanni A, DiTommaso A, Focacci F (1997)
Shear response of continuous RC beams strengthened with
carbon FRP sheets. In: Non-metallic (FRP) reinforcement
for concrete structures, vol 1. Proceedings of the third
symposium, Japan, pp 459–466
8. Sato Y, Ueda T, Kakuta Y, Tanaka T (1997) Ultimate
shear capacity of reinforced concrete beams with carbon
fiber sheets. In: Nonmetallic (FRP) reinforcement for
concrete structures, vol 1. Proceedings of the third sym-
posium, Japan, pp 499–506
9. Sato Y, Katsumata H, Kobatake Y (1997) Shear strength-
ening of existing reinforced concrete beams by CFRP
sheet. In: Nonmetallic (FRP) reinforcement for concrete
structures, vol 1. Proceedings of the third symposium,
Japan, pp 507–514
Materials and Structures
10. Meier U (1995) Strengthening of structures using carbon
fibre/epoxy composites. Constr Build Mater 9(6):341–351.
doi:10.1016/0950-0618(95)00071-2
11. Triantafillou TC (1998) Shear strengthening of reinforced
concrete beams using epoxy-bonded FRP composites. ACI
Struct J 95(2):107–115
12. Swamy RN, Mukhopadhyaya P, Lynsdale CJ (1999)
Strengthening for shear of RC beams by external plate
bonding. Struct Eng 77(12):19–30
13. Li A, Diagana C, Delmas Y (2001) CFRP contribution to
shear capacity of strengthened RC beams. Eng Struct
23:1212–1220. doi:10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00035-9
14. Khalifa A, Nanni A (2002) Rehabilitation of rectangular
simply supported RC beams with shear deficiencies using
CFRP composites. Constr Build Mater 16:135–146. doi:
10.1016/S0950-0618(02)00002-8
15. Taljsten B (2003) Strengthening concrete beams for shear
with CFRP sheets. Constr Build Mater 17:15–26. doi:
10.1016/S0950-0618(02)00088-0
16. Khalifa A, Nanni A (2000) Improving shear capacity of
existing RC T-section beams using CFRP composites. Cem
Concr Compos 22:165–174. doi:10.1016/S0958-9465(99)
00051-7
17. Diagana C, Li A, Gedalia B, Dlemas Y (2003) Shear
strengthening effectiveness with CFF strips. Eng Struct
25:507–516. doi:10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00208-0
18. Khalifa A, Alkhrdaji T, Nanni A, Lansburg A (1999)
Anchorage of surface mounted FRP reinforcement. Concr
Int ACI 21(10):49–54
19. Tanarslan HM, Altin S, Ertutar Y (2008) The effects of
CFRP strips for improving shear capacity of RC beams. J
Reinf Plast Compos 27(12):1287–1308
20. ACI Committee 440 (1996) State-of-the-art report on fiber
reinforced plastic (FRP) reinforcement for concrete struc-
tures. American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 68 pp
21. Concrete Society (2000) Design guidance for strengthening
concrete structures using fibre composite materials. Tech-
nical Report 55, UK
22. Khalifa A, Gold WJ, Nanni A, Aziz A (1998) Contribution
of externally bonded FRP to shear capacity of RC flexural
members. J Compos Constr ASCE 2(4):195–203
23. fib-TG9.3 (2001) Design and use of externally bonded fiber
polymer reinforcement (FRP EBR) for reinforced concrete
structures. Bulletin 14, 138 pp
24. Canadian Standards Association (2002) Design and con-
struction of building components with fiber-reinforced
polymer. CSA-S806-02, Rexdale, Ontario, Canada, 2002 pp
25. Chen JF, Teng JG (2003) Shear capacity of FRP
strengthened RC beams: FRP rupture. J Struct Eng 129(5):
615–625. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2003)129:5(615)
26. Chen JF, Teng JG (2003) Shear capacity of FRP
strengthened RC beams: FRP debonding. Constr Build
Mater 17(1):27–41. doi:10.1016/S0950-0618(02)00091-0