SP 138-35

Flexural Behavior and Energy

Absorption of Carbon FRP
Reinforced Concrete Beams
by T. Kakizawa, S. Ohno,
and T. Yonezawa

Synopsis,
Research and development ofFRP bars and cables for reinforcements of
concrete structure has recently been carried out. The basic behavior of the concrete
members reinforced with these FRP bars has became well understood. However,
there are still debatable points in terms of the design concept such as the
recommended failure mode or required toughness and ductility. The authors
carried out loading tests of the 16 concrete beams reinforced with carbon FRP bars
and cables in order to discuss the both serviceability and ultimate limit states. The
specimens includes the RC, PC, PPC members. The main factors are bond
properties of the FRP reinforcements and prestress force. The experimental results
show that cracking and deformation behavior vary with the prestress force and
bond property of FRP bars, and that the reasonable serviceability condition will be
achieved by controlling these factors. Also, the failure mode were affected by
these factors and the reinforcing systems, despite these specimens have almost
same reinforcement ratio. In relation to the failure mode, the energy absorption,
which is defined as the area enclosed by load-deflection curve, was measured to
discuss the toughness and ductility for the ultimate limit state. The authors
recommend that the design should take into account the toughness based on the
energy absorbed before the maximum load.

Keywords: Absorption; beams (supports); cable; carbon; cracking

(fracturing); deformation; ductility; failure; fiber reinforced plastics; flexural
strength; prestressed concrete; reinforced concrete

585

586

Kakizawa, Ohno, and Yonezawa

Tadahiro Kakizawa, is a research engineer in Takenaka Research Laboratory. He

received an MS in civil engineering from the University of Tokyo. He is currently
working in the area of development of new structural materials.
Sadatoshi Ohno, is a senior research engineer in the advanced materials group in
Takenaka Research Laboratory. He received his Ph. D. from the University of Surrey, U.K. His research interests include fracture mechanism, alkali aggregate reaction, fiber reinforced composites, and new structural materials.
Toshio Yonezawa, is a chief research engineer in the concrete materials group in
Takenaka Research Laboratory. He received his Ph.D. from the University of
Manchester Institute University, U.K .. He has been extensively involved with research on corrosion problems of steel in concrete, high strength concrete, fiber
reinforced concrete and new materials in construction field.

INTORODUCTION
Substantial effort have recently been made to develop fiber reinforced
plastics (FRP) bars and cables for reinforcement of concrete structures. There is
great interest in the high-strength, rust-free, and non-magnetic properties of such
new materials. With regard to the design of structural members using FRP
reinforcement, it has been reported that flexural behavior can be predicted based
on conventional flexural theory for reinforced concrete. However, the members
reinforced with FRP bars or cables exhibit brittle failure prope11ies since FRP
materials have no plastic region, while conventional reinforced concrete and
prestressed concrete show a ductile failure behavior because of the yield of the
steel reinforcement. From this viewpoint, an appropriate design method for
ultimate limit states of concrete members reinforced with FRP still remains to be
investigated. In related discussion, it has also been reported that the compression
failure mode is preferable for such FRP reinforced concrete members, because the
failure of the member proceeds more gradually at the ultimate state compared with
failures of those governed by brittle FRP breakage( I). In contrast, another opinion
is that alternative design methods which can allow for brittle failure of members
due to FRP breakage should be considered for reasons of economy and rationality
(2).

FRP Reinforcement

587

On the other hand, various studies have worked to improve the ductility
of FRP reinforced concrete by controlling bond properties of the FRP
reinforcement or placing the FRP reinforcement in multiple stages (3). Also,
attempts on improving brittle behavior by constraining the compression zone of
the reinforced members have been reported (4),(5).
However, the important concern is to secure the required ductility both for the
members and the structures being designed, and in order to do this more thorough
discussion of the appropriate design needs to be undertaken.

EXPERIMENTS
In this experiment, small beam specimens of rectangular section were
adopted as shown in Figure I and reinforced concrete (RC), prestressed concrete
(PC), and partially prestressed concrete (PPC) systems using FRP reinforcement
were tested. Cable strand of carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP) were used as
prestressing tendons, and two kind of tensile reinforcement- CFRP cable strands
and CFRP deformed bars- were used. Tables I and 2 give the physical propetties
of the reinforcing materials and the strength of the concrete used, respectively.
Loading tests were carried out on 16 types of specimens with different test
parameters - prestress force, reinforcement type, bonded or unbonded tensile
reinforcement, and prestressing cable -as shown in Table 3. The sectional areas
of FRP reinforcement given in this table are the nominal cross sectional area
including the resin. Specimen No. I is an ordinary reinforced concrete beam
incorporating deformed steel bars, specimen No. 2 is an RC beam using FRP
reinforcement, specimens No. 3 through 6 are PC beams without tensile
reinforcement, and all other specimens are PPC beams. Specimen No. 16,
although made of the same material as specimen No. 13, was made with a 5 mmthick permanent form reinforced with polypropylene fiber net to improve inservice propet1ies. Unidirectional loading was applied to all beams, which have a
span of 170 em and a moment span of 30 em. In the tests, load, deflection, strain in
the concrete and reinforcement, and crack width were measured.

RESULTS OF EXPERIMENT AND DISCUSSION

Cracking and Deformation Properties
Table 4 shows the results of the loading tests. Reasonably close
agreement was obtained between the measured and calculated values of cracking
load. Figure 2 illustrates the cracking patterns of the loaded beams. Provided that
the service load is about one third of the maximum load, no appreciable cracking
was recognized in the PC and PPC specimens and the cracking was very fine even

588

Kakizawa, Ohno, and Yonezawa

when it did occur. The cracks in specimen No.2 are very small, less than 0.1 mm,
at the service load and it is thought that no serious problems would arise in an
actual application as far as cracking is concemed. However, since the specimens
used here were small, it must be taken into consideration that cracks tend to be
smaller than in actual concrete members.
The distribution of the cracks along the beams differed according to the
specimen. When the specimen has no tensile reinforcement in the PC member
(specimens No. 3 through 6) or has a partially unbonded tensile reinforcement in
the PPC members, fewer cracks were observed. In the case of the unbonded PC
specimen (CPC58U), cracks were particularly concentrated in the moment span.
When the working load becomes high (over 13 kN) in this specimen, the
deformation is concentrated only at the center, as demonstrated by the deflection
distributions shown in Figure 3. This may cause local secondary stress at the
deformed area and/or frictional damage contacting with the sheath. These effects
are not desirable because FRP reinforcement may break earlier than expected.
On the other hand, specimens with CFRP deformed bars used as tensile
reinforcement show good crack distributions, and have closer crack spacing than
conventional RC members. However, longitudinal splitting cracks were found
along the reinforcement at the ultimate state. These cracks were related to the
dimensions of the specimen, the concrete cover, and the bond properties of the
reinforcement. The bond properties of FRP reinforcement are greatly affected by
their configuration of deformation, and this remains an area for further study.
In specimen No. 16 (CPRC38UB-NET), where the permanent form
reinforced with polypropylene fiber net was used, the cracks were finely
distributed at a spacing ranging from a few millimeters up to one centimeter,
although these cracks are not illustrated in this paper. This behavior is
advantageous when cracking in the application must be limited, and when the
design calls for a wider range of service conditions.

Ultimate Load and Failure Mode

Figures 4 (a)-(f) show load-deflection curves for the specimens. The
results for specimens reinforced with FRP differed depending on the type of
reinforcement and the differences in bonding. The obtained curves are not
basically different from those of earlier reports. When the results for CPRC24BBYY are compared with those for CPRC24- YR, CPRC38BB- YY with

FRP Reinforcement

589

CPRC38BB- YR, and CPRC38UB- YY with CPRC38UB, the ultimate load is

found to be 15 to 20% higher for specimens using CFPR deformed bars rather than
CFRP cables as the tensile reinforcement, in spite of the almost identical
reinforcement system and same reinforcement ratio. The reason for this difference
is thought to be due to be the bonding characteristics of the reinforcement. When
two kinds of reinforcement with different bond properties are used simultaneously
in the specimen, the actual working stress may be different from the prediction,
which is based on the assumption that plane sections before bending remain plane
after bending.
The calculated and experimental values of ultimate strength were
compared in Table 4. The calculated ultimate strength was derived from the
requirement of strain compatibility and equilibrium of force by repeating
calculation for the divided elements of the beam section. In this calculation, the
relationship between concrete stress and strain was assumed to be expressed by
Umemura's equation(6), as follows.

0"

= O"cu { 6.75 ( e (-0.819

where ~

~)- e ( -1.218 ~))}

= _L_
Ecu

cr: concrete stress,

<Jcu: concrete ultimate stress,

: concrete strain, cu: concrete ultimate strain

Also it was assumed that FRP reinforcement behaves elastically until failure. FRP
reinforced concrete was regarded as having reached its ultimate failure state when
either the prestressing cables, the tensile reinforcement, or the concrete reached
failure strain. For the specimens using unbonded tensile reinforcement or
prestressing cables, the ultimate load was calculated using the average value of
calculated strain over the unbonded region. Calculated values tended to be I 0 to
25% smaller than those measured in experiment, showing an almost similar
tendency. One reason for this may be that the nominal failure strength was adopted
as the strength value for the FRP reinforcement and prestressing cables.
In this study, the amount of reinforcement was planned for all specimens
except Nos. I and 5 such that the value of reinforcing index, q

= PrCcr;cr,k)*, came

to about 0.27-0.3, that is the failure mode became close to the balanced failure
state. As a result, the failure mode varied depending on the presence of bonding
* Pr: reinforcing ratio, crr: 0.87crru , crr": ultimate strength of FRP,
cr,k: concrete strength

590

Kakizawa, Ohno, and Y onezawa

and the arrangement of prestressing cables and reinforcement.

The failure modes predicted by calculation and the results observed from
the experiments are given in Table 4. Although they agree relatively well, there is
a difference between predicted and experimental results for PPC members with
unbonded prestressing cables. Although the reason for this is not clear, some local
stress may have been induced because the measured strain in the prestressing
cables was less than the nominal failure strain at the time of fracture.
According to earlier work, the compression failure mode is slightly
ductile compared with the reinforcement failure mode in FRP reinforced concrete.
However, in this experiment, no great difference could be seen even in the case of
a compression failure. This is because the FRP reinforcement failed during
compression failure when the reinforcement ratio was close to the balanced failure
state (CPC69B and CPC58B) (See Figure 4). Considering these points, additional
reinforcement over the amount required to obtain compression failure needs be
incorporated in order to ensure a compression failure without FRP failure.
However, this still presents problems in terms of economical design. It is also
difficult to specify the failure mode in the design, since this would mean taking
account of changes in the material properties over the whole lifetime and of the
scatter in fracture strength of the FRP reinforcement. In the case of PPC members
with CFRP cables as tensile reinforcement, on the other hand, the beam specimens
deformed by relatively large amounts even after failure of the prestressing cable.
This shows the possibility of designing FRP reinforced concrete members with
such deformation behavior by controlling the amount of reinforcement and the
bonding properties.
Energy Absorption
In terms of design, the ductility required of a structural member should
vary depending on its type, importance, service conditions and so on. In the design
for conventional reinforced concrete, the brittle failure of members has been
avoided considering safety. Therefore, normally designed reinforced concrete for
flexural members are ductile, because their energy absorption is due to the capacity
of the steel to deform; that is, they have adequate ductility and great energy
absorption.
In the case of FRP reinforced concrete members, avoidance of the brittle failure
may not be easy and economical. Also, the ductility factor which is usually
expressed as the ratio of the ultimate deformation to the deformation at first yield is
not considered to be proper to assess the characteristics of FRP reinforced

FRP Reinforcement

591

concrete. The ductility factor is a index to express the deformation capacity and
consequently shows the energy absorption. Therefore, evaluation of energy
absorption would be very important in the design of FRP reinforced concrete,
although a discussion of the proper safety factors has to be continued.
Table 4 and Figure 5 show the absorbed energy, which is defined to be
the area enclosed by the load-deflection curve for each specimen. The energy
absorbed before and after the maximum load is shown separately. The values of
the total energy absorption are unlikely to be affected by the failure mode within
the range of this experiment's conditions. PPC members tended to indicate
greater energy absorption than PC, despite having the same amount of
reinforcement. This may imply an advantage for PPC. When the absorbed energy
after the maximum load is compared, the PC members show no energy absorption
after failure of the FRP cable at the ultimate load because only prestressing cables
were placed in the PC members in this experiment.
On the contrary, the unbonded PC specimen CPC58U, which failed in
compressive mode, showed the same energy absorption before the maximum load
as after the maximum load. In PPC members, some energy is absorbed even after
the prestressing cables have failed, since FRP reinforcement could still sustains a
load; it thus allows for further deformation. Also in the case of PPC members
using FRP reinforcement and prestressing cable of different bond prope11ies, the
amount of absorbed energy after the maximum load tended to be higher when
CFRP cables were used as tensile reinforcement, while the energy absorbed before
the maximum load was higher when CFRP deformed rods were adopted as tensile
reinforcement. Thus it is possible to obtain various energy-absorption prope11ies
by controlling the reinforcing system. However, evaluating the energy absorption
after the maximum load is technically difficult (The theoretical calculation is
thought to be possible, but there are some problems in accuracy. ) If the concrete
members are such that energy absorption is not expected, i.e. only vertical loads
act and the member doesn't need resist the earthquake load, it may be meaningless
to evaluate the energy absorption over such a range in the design.
The energy absorption of FRP reinforced concrete beams and slabs
under the influence of vertical forces should be evaluated by the total energy
absorption up to the maximum load. In the case of the members where an
evaluation of repeated energy loads, such as earthquake loads, is required, fUI1her
detailed studies will be necessary.

592

Kakizawa, Ohno, and Y onezawa

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the cracking behavior and failure properties and the energy
absorption of FRP reinforced concrete have been investigated experimentally,
with the prestress force and bonding properties of the FRP reinforcement taken as
the experimental factors. The failure mode and deformation behavior are found to
change according to the reinforcing system. The absorbed energy is affected by the
reinforcing system, but little by the failure mode, within the range of these
experiments. PPC members absorb more energy than PC in spite of the same
amount of reinforcement. Based on these results, design criteria were discussed in
connection with energy absorption and failure mode. It is recommended that the
design should take into account the ductility evaluated for the energy absorbed
before maximum load.

REFERENCES
(I) H.Mutsuyoshi, A.Machida, and K.Uehara, "Mechanical properties and

design method of concrete members reinforced by Carbon Fiber Reinforced

Plastics," Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Institute, 12-1, pp. 1117-1122,
1990.
(2) H.Nakai, K.Mukae, H.Asai, and S.Kumagaya, "Analytical study on bending
ultimate state of prestressed concrete beams with FRP rods," Proceedings of the
Japan Concrete Institute, 13-2, pp. 749-754, 1991.
(3) Y.Yamamoto, H.Maruyama, K.Shimizu, and H.Nakamura, "Fractural
properties of concrete members with a multi-stage arrangement of CFRP," Japan
Society of Ci vii Engineering, Proceedings of the 46th Annual Conference, pp.
238-239, 1991.
(4) M.Odera, T.Maruyama, and Y.Ito, "Improvement in compression failure
mode of RC beams using CFRP rods," Japan Society of Civil Engineering,
Proceedings of the 46th Annual Conference, pp. 242-243, 1991.
(5) H.Taniguchi, H.Mutsuyoshi, A.Machida, and T.Kita, "A proposal of
Improvement in failure mode of PC flexural members using FRP," Japan Society
of Civil Engineering, Proceedings of the 46th Annual Conference, pp. 244-245,
1991.
(6) Umemura,"Uitimate strength and plastic behavior of reinforced concrete,"
Transactions of AIJ, 1951.

FRP Reinforcement

593

TABLE 1 - MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF CFRP REINFORCEMENT

Type

Nominal Ultimate
Strength (kN)

Carbon FRP

96 ( tP 10.5}

Strand cable

57 ( tP 7.5)

Carbon FRP
deformed bar

31 ( <f5mm)

Elastic modulus
(GPa)
140
130

TABLE 2- MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE

Age

w/c

Compressive Elastic modulus

strength (MPa
(GPa)

28 days 55 /c

27.3

35.3

TABLE 3 -TEST SPECIMENS

Type of reinforcement

Name of
specimen
No.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

reinbt:ing
sySieiD

RCSD
RC
CRC
CPC69B
CPCSBB
PC
CPC38B
CPCSBU
CPRC24BBYY
CPRC24BIHR
CPRC24UBYR
CPRC38BBYY
CPRC38BB-YR PAC
CPRC38UBYY
CPRC38UBYR
CPRC38BUYY
CPRC38BUYR
CPRC38UB-NET

prestressilg

i:able

type

CFR~

strand
cable

Crs

I~
-

reilforoement
type
06(8000)

ratio
Cross

~
26.7

CF deformed bals 78.6

-30.4
55.7

strand 30.4

(%)

1.13
0.69
0.56

55.7

CFRP
cable

Reinfon:ilg

Tensile

CFRPcable

30.4

CFRP
deformed bals

39.3

0.58

30.4
39.3
-CFRPcable 30.4
CA'iPdeicnned bars 39.3
CFRP cable
30.4

0.54
0.58
0.54
0.58

CFRPdebmed IBs 39.3

0.58

CFRPcable

PS

Tensile

Prestress

foroe
load

cable

bars

(kN)

bond

bond

'0-:30
0.56
0.54

c:FRP deformed bars

Bond
propel1ies

68

0.7

lrilond

57
37
57

o:6

bond

24

0.4

37

0.65

IJ'tlOI1d

bond

ratio

to 0"""

0.4
0.6

lllbOIId

bond
bond
l.rtloR!

0.~- bond
lllbolld

The tensile reinforcement was unbonded in the region of 110cm at the center
of the beam.

paltially
lfilond

bond

594

Kakizawa, Ohno, and Yonezawa

TABLE 4 -TEST RESULTS

Name of
No

specinens

Ctacking
load (kN)

~ Calc.

MaxinJm
load (kN)
llliiiiSII8d
Calc.
value

Defteldion

(mm)

load

I !&SO

5.1

4.2

14.6

12.3

49.91

2CA::
3 CPC69II
4 IXS8B

4.1
12.4
12.3

4.2
13.4
11.9

35.3
28.9
29.5

26.0
.25.7

25.8

21.99
29.36

s a>c3llll

9.2
11.9

7~YY

9.5
10.4
7.4

20.3
15.3
31.0

15.7
18.0
26.5

23.76
21.36
35.56

s~m

7.5

36.1

27.1

9~m

7.1

7.4

31.6

IO~yy

9.5

9.2

31.4

up.am.m

9.5

9.2

12 Cl'fCB.B.YY
8.4
13 Cl'fCB.B.m
8.0
14 CPfCllllli.YY
8.5
IS CPfCllllll.m
9.1
16,..,...,........., 11.5

9.2

6 CPQi8U

7.4
7.4

9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2

Failure mode

Enelgy absorption
(lctkm)

allhe
before altar
miXilun load
II1IICirun I1111Xi1Tur taal

load

65.7>

Experimental
observation

Calcurated
prediction
Yeild of steel bals

65.7> Yeild ol steel bals

79.3 Failn d IBnSie ban;
57~2 B8iiiiiced iiiiiure
64.4 PS cable failure

Fabe d Tensile IJus

Failure d PS cabl8-

79.3
50.3
64.4

0.0
6.9
0.0

36.4
29.0

0.0
30.2

40.27

71.7
89.9

29.5
3.9

101.2 ~laiure
Failure ollensile bals
93.9 & CQIIllf8SSion lalure

25.5

38.01

74.9

12.1

ol PS cable
87.1 Failure
ancllonsie bals

~laiure

24.5

32.70

70.6

39.8

110.4 Failure ol PS cable

FaiUe of PS cable

36.5

25.5

36.24

87.3

0.0

87.3 Failure ol PS cable

24.3
31.4
25.8
30.8
33.5

25.5

26.29
38.41
25.32
25.33
36.23

44.6 109.5
80.0
10.9
45.0
48.8
84.5
0.0
90.4
4.5

25.5
22.5
24.5
25.5

Balanced laiure

a11ar <Xlrl1> lalure

36.4 Failure d PS cable

59.2 ~laiure

Failure d PS cable
~laiure

~flib&
CorTpession falJre

and lansile bals

Balanced laiure

ancllansile bals

154.1
90.9
93.8
84.5
94.9

~laiure

Falun! of PS cable
Balanced laiure
Faiure of PS cable
Failure of PS cable
Faiure of PS cable

~laiure

Failure d PS cable
FaiUa of PS cable
~laiure

I I -1 I I
I

150

700
1000

100

.j

PC strand

(CFRP cable)

Fig. 1-Details of test specimens

FRP Reinforcement
No.9 CPRC24UB-YR

No.1 RC-SD

zs

595

Yl (d{lliafj [\ \

No.2 CRC

I zs mrCwJh\2Y zs I

zs

No.10 CPRC38BB-YY

I zs )J

arr1 r

l\1-\\ r zs

No.11 CPRC38BB-YR

I zs

1r~\ zs I

No.12 CPRC38UB-YY

zs

r!r) t\\

No.6 CPC58U

I zs
zs

I zs
zs

zs

No.7 CPRC24BB-YY

zs r r 1

ccb rflliYr'\

No.8 CPRC24BB-YR

li

crhj 1\ \\1-\J/ zs I

No.13 CPRC38UB-YR

cJdi~\)\ zs

No.14 CPRC38BU-YY

Fig. 2-Crack patterns of loaded beams

596

Kakizawa, Ohno, and Yonezawa

__

10

15

E
(J)

20

(J)

()

Q_

-------~-------- -~---'-----..

25

. . . . . . . . . . . . . +. . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.......... =:

-CFRC

30
35

40

...........................

T"""'"""'

~:~~~~

"'('"""' -"*- CPRC38BB-YY

L_~~~J_~~~-L~~~~~~~~

42.5

85

127.5

170

Location (em)

Fig. 3-Distribution of displacement at the load of 15 kN

FRP Reinforcement

40r----------------------,

z~30

40r----------------------,

CRC

CPC69B

20

20

/"/

-o
c

I'

..

... --:~

-----~-<

_;;----

.3 10

RC-50

CPC58B

~/ / _.. ~-- CPC38B

~30

----~--

597

--~---..--,

CPC58U
OL---~--~--~~~~--~

10

20
30
40
50
Deflection
(mm)

60

10

20
30
40
50
Deflection
(mm)

(b)

(a)

40r----------------------,
CPRC24BB-YY
CPRC24BB-YR
--.../\
/

~30

60

z~30

//_.

/. .r

20
'

~/~
CPRC24UB-YR

Ok---~~~~--~--~--_J

10

20
30
40
50
Deflection
(mm)

OL---~--~~~~--~--~

60

10

20
30
40
50
Deflection
(mm)

(c)

60

(d)
40r----------------------,

z~30

CPRC38UB-YY

~30

20

20

CPRC38BU-YY~~
OL-~~--~~~~~~~~

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Deflection
(mm)

CPRC38UB-YR
o~~~~~~--~--~~

10

20
30
40
50
Deflection
(mm)

(f)

(e)

Fig. 4--Load-deflection curves

60

598

Kakizawa, Ohno, and Yonezawa

20

40

60

80

100

120

Energy Absorption (kN-cm)

Fig. 5-Comparison of energy absorption

140

160