Retrofitting of Reinforced Concrete Beams with CARDIFRC

Farshid Jandaghi Alaee1 and Bhushan Lal Karihaloo, F.ASCE2

Abstract: A new retrofitting technique based on a material compatible with concrete is currently under development at Cardiff Univer-
sity. It overcomes some of the problems associated with the current techniques based on externally bonded steel plates and FRP
共fiber-reinforced polymer兲 laminates which are due to the mismatch of their tensile strength and stiffness with that of the concrete structure
being retrofitted. This paper will describe briefly the technology necessary for preparing high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete mixes
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

共HPFRCC兲, designated CARDIFRC. They are characterized by high tensile/flexural strength and high energy-absorption capacity 共i.e.,
ductility兲. The special characteristics of CARDIFRC make them particularly suitable for repair, remedial, and upgrading activities 共i.e.,
retrofitting兲 of existing concrete structures. The promising results of several studies using CARDIFRC for retrofitting damaged concrete
flexural members will be presented. It will be shown that damaged reinforced concrete beams can be successfully strengthened and
rehabilitated in a variety of different retrofit configurations using precast CARDIFRC strips adhesively bonded to the prepared surfaces of
the damaged beams. To predict the moment resistance and load-deflection response of the beams retrofitted in this manner an analytical
model will be introduced, and the results of the computations will be compared with the test results to evaluate the accuracy of the model.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲1090-0268共2003兲7:3共174兲
CE Database subject headings: Retrofitting; Beams; Steel fibers; Bonding; Composite materials.

Introduction nique, including the occurrence of undesirable shear failures, dif-

Existing concrete structures may, for a variety of reasons, be
found to perform unsatisfactorily. This could manifest itself by
poor performance under service loading, in the form of excessive
deflections and cracking, or there could be inadequate ultimate
strength. Additionally, revisions in structural design and loading
codes may render many structures previously thought to be satis-
factory, noncompliant with current provisions. In the present eco-
nomic climate, rehabilitation of damaged concrete structures to
meet the more stringent limits on serviceability and ultimate
strength of the current codes, and strengthening of existing con-
crete structures to carry higher permissible loads, seem to be a
more attractive alternative to demolishing and rebuilding.
The performance of current techniques of rehabilitation and
strengthening 共the collective term retrofit, which implies the ad-
dition of structural components after initial construction, captures
both rehabilitation and strengthening兲 using externally bonded
steel plates and fiber-reinforced plastic 共FRP兲 laminates has been
extensively investigated 共Ahmed and Gemert 1999; El-Refaie
et al. 1999; Fanning and Kelly 1999; Yagi et al. 1999兲. The tech-
nique of retrofitting using externally bonded steel plates has
gained widespread popularity, being quick, causing minimal site
disruption, and producing only minimal change in section size.
However, several problems have been encountered with this tech-
1
PhD Candidate, School of Engineering, Cardiff Univ., Queen’s
Buildings, P.O. Box 925, Cardiff CF24 0YF, Wales, UK.
2
Professor, School of Engineering, Cardiff Univ., Queen’s Buildings,
P.O. Box 925, Cardiff CF24 0YF, Wales, UK 共corresponding author兲.
E-mail: karihaloob@cardiff.ac.uk
Note. Discussion open until January 1, 2004. 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 November 27, 2001; approved on July 2, 2002. This
paper is part of the Journal of Composites for Construction, Vol. 7, No.
3, August 1, 2003. ©ASCE, ISSN 1090-0268/2003/3-174 –186/$18.00.
ficulty in handling heavy steel plates, corrosion of the steel, and
the need for butt joint systems as a result of limited workable
lengths 共Jones et al. 1988; Ziraba et al. 1994; Hussain et al. 1995兲
共Fig. 1兲.
FRP materials as thin laminates or fabrics would appear to
offer an ideal alternative to steel plates. They generally have high
strength to weight and stiffness to weight ratios and are chemi-
cally quite inert, offering significant potential for lightweight, cost
effective and durable retrofit 共Nanni 1995; Büyüköztürk and
Hearing 1998兲. Retrofitting using FRP is also vulnerable to unde-
sirable brittle failures due to a large mismatch in the tensile
strength and stiffness with that of concrete 共Fig. 2兲.
The key advantage of CARDIFRC mixes for retrofitting is that
unlike steel and FRP, their tensile strength, stiffness, and coeffi-
cient of linear thermal expansion are comparable to that of the
material of the parent member.
Several studies have previously been undertaken at Cardiff
into the feasibility of using CARDIFRC for the rehabilitation and
strengthening of damaged RC flexural members 共Karihaloo et al.
2000, 2002; Alaee et al. 2001a,b兲. This paper, without repeating
the results reported in those papers, expands on those studies,
applying this technique on different types of beam 共with and with-
out shear reinforcement兲 and introducing an analytical model.
First, the material selection resulting from a rheological study,
conducted recently at Cardiff, is outlined, and the application of
these materials for retrofitting of beams is then discussed. Follow-
ing that, to predict the behavior of the beams retrofitted with this
technique, an analytical model is introduced. Finally, the results
of the computations are compared with the test results, and the
accuracy of the model is evaluated.
CARDIFRC
A rheological study was recently carried out in Cardiff to opti-
mize high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete mixes. The aim

174 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

 Table 1. Mix Proportions for Optimized CARDIFRC Mix I and
Mix II 共per m3兲
Constituents 共kg兲 Mix I Mix II
Cement 855.00 744.00
Microsilica 214.00 178.00
Quartz sand
9–300 ␮m 470.00 166.00
250– 600 ␮m 470.00 —
212–1,000 ␮m — 335.00
1–2 mm — 672.00
Water 188.00 149.00
Superplasticizer 28.00 55.00
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fibers
⫺6 mm 390.00 351.00
⫺13 mm 78.00 117.00

Water/cement 0.22 0.20

Water/binder 0.18 0.16

Fig. 1. Failure of beams retrofitted with steel plates: 共a兲 by plate

debonding and 共b兲 by ripping off of the concrete cover 共after Ziraba Table 2. Typical Material Properties of CARDIFRC Mix I and
et al. 1994兲 Mix II
Material properties Mix I Mix II
Indirect tensile strength 共MPa兲 24 25
was to achieve good workable mixes with a very low water/ Fracture energy 共J/m2兲 12,210 12,380
binder ratio and a high volume fraction of steel fiber, in order that Compressive strength 共MPa兲 207 185
the resulting material, in its hardened state, will be very ductile
with a relatively high tensile strength. As a result of many trial
mixes and testing, the mixes shown in Table 1 are the optimized
ones. Two different mixes 共designated CARDIFRC, Mix I and
Mix II兲 of high-performance fiber reinforced concrete differing
mainly by the maximum size of quartz sand used in the mix have
been developed using novel mixing and fiber dispersion proce-
dures. These procedures are described in the patent application
GB 0109686.6.
Brass-coated steel fibers diameter 0.16, 6, or 13 mm long are
used to prevent corrosion. The optimized grading of quartz sands
Fig. 3. Internal reinforcement and load configuration in Stage II
leads to a considerable reduction in the water demand without
loss in workability. All materials used in Table 1 are available
commercially.
at 20°C. Table 2 shows the material properties of the optimized
A volume fraction of 6% short and long fibers is used, com-
mixes. The Young modulus of CARDIFRC is around 50 GPa.
prising 5% short fibers and 1% long fibers for Mix I, and 4.5%
short fibers and 1.5% long fibers for Mix II. The specimens were
hot-cured at 90°C for seven days. The strengths attained have
Test Beams
been found to be the equivalent of standard 28-day water curing
Two types of beams differing only by the reinforcement were
used for Stages I and II of the experimental program. The beams
in Stage I were reinforced in flexure only with a single 12 mm
rebar, whereas in the beams tested in Stage II, stirrups—
consisting of 6 mm deformed steel bars placed at 65 mm
spacing—were also provided in the shear spans of the beams 共Fig.
3兲. As no shear reinforcement was provided in the beams tested in
Stage I, both modes of failure, i.e., shear and flexural were ex-
pected. However, the beams tested in Stage II were designed in
such a manner to fail in flexure. All the beams were made from a
Fig. 2. Failure modes in FRP retrofitted concrete beams: 共a兲 steel standard concrete mix and were 1,200 mm long, 100 mm wide,
yield and FRP rupture; 共b兲 concrete compression failure; 共c兲 shear and 150 mm deep. The beams were removed from their molds
failure; 共d兲 debond of layer along rebar; 共e兲 delamination of FRP
after one day and water cured at ambient temperature 共20°C兲 for
plate; and 共f兲 peeling due to shear crack 共after Büyüköztürk and
a minimum of 28 days. The mechanical properties of concrete and
Hearing 1998兲
steel can be found in Table 3.

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003 / 175

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

 Table 3. Parameters Assumed for Modeling the Behavior of Concrete and Steel
Concrete
In compression In tension Steel
Stage f cm 共MPa兲 E c 共GPa兲 E c1 共GPa兲 ␧ c1 共—兲 ␧ cu 共—兲 f ctm 共MPa兲 G F 共N/mm兲 W 1 共mm兲 W c 共mm兲 f y 共MPa兲 E s 共GPa兲
I 45 35.6 20.7 0.0022 0.00315 4.0 0.0725 0.017 0.128 544 205
II 47 36.1 21.4 0.0022 0.00330 3.5 0.0675 0.015 0.128 500 203

Stage I mately 75% of the failure load 共31 kN兲. To improve the flexural
behavior of the damaged beams three configurations of retrofit-
Of the 32 beams used in Stage I, four were tested to failure as
ting strips were investigated in this stage. Retrofitting with:
control beams to compare with the performance of those retrofit-
ted with CARDIFRC strips. They were loaded in three-point • One strip bonded on the tension face 关Fig. 6共a兲兴,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

bending over a span of 1,100 mm. Ten transducers 共five on each
side兲 were used to record the deflection of the beams at various
points along its span. The transducers were SOLATRON type
ACR-25 and DCR-15 LVDTs. An aluminum frame 共yoke兲 was
designed with two bars and a total of ten slots, to accommodate
the transducers. One bar was placed on each side of the beam at
midheight, as shown in Fig. 4. As expected, two control beams
failed in shear, one in flexure and the fourth in a combination of
shear and flexure modes. The average failure load was 29.48 kN.
The remaining 28 beams were preloaded to approximately
75% of the above failure load to induce flexural cracking. In
addition to parameters such as the material 共Mix I or II兲 and
thickness of retrofit strips 共16 or 20 mm兲, four different configu-
rations of retrofitting were investigated. Retrofitting with:
• One strip bonded on the tension face 关Fig. 5共a兲兴,
• Three strips 共one bonded on the tension face and the others on
the vertical sides兲 关Fig. 5共b兲兴,
• One strip bonded on the tension face and four rectangular
strips on the vertical sides 关Fig. 5共c兲兴, and
• One strip bonded on the tension face and four trapezoidal
strips on the vertical sides 关Fig. 5共d兲兴.
In total, ten different combinations of retrofitting were achieved
with the 28 damaged beams tested in Stage I, as detailed in Tables
4 and 5.
• One strip bonded on the tension face and four short strips on
the vertical sides covering the supports and the ends of the
tension strip 关Fig. 6共b兲兴, and
• One strip bonded on the tension face and four short and two
continuous strips on the vertical sides, fully covering the sup-
ports and the tension strip 关Fig. 6共c兲兴.
It should be mentioned that the last configuration 关Fig. 6共c兲兴 can
be realized by bonding a strip to the tension face and two longer
continuous strips on the vertical sides covering fully the supports
and the sides of the tension strip. The solution chosen here was
dictated by the fact that the precast strips were shorter 共1,030 mm
long兲 than the overall span of test beams 共1,200 mm兲.
Only Mix I was used as the retrofitting material in Stage II. As
in the previous stage, this material was used for retrofitting the
beams in two different thicknesses, i.e., 16 and 20 mm. In total,
six different combinations of retrofitting were achieved in this
stage, as detailed in Table 6.

Stage II
Of the 14 beams produced for Stage II, three were tested without
any repair as control beams. These beams were tested to failure
under four-point bending over a span of 1,100 mm 共Fig. 4兲. The
spacing between the applied loads was 400 mm. As expected, all
the control beams in this stage failed in pure flexure and their
average failure load was 42.03 kN. The remaining 11 beams were
preloaded in the same manner as the control beams to approxi-

Fig. 5. Configurations of retrofitting in Stage I: 共a兲 beam retrofitted

with one strip on tension side; 共b兲 beam retrofitted with one strip
underneath and two side strips; 共c兲 beam retrofitted with one strip
Fig. 4. Arrangement for testing beams: 共a兲 side view, 共b兲 cross underneath and four rectangular side strips; and 共d兲 beam retrofitted
section, and 共c兲 plan with one strip underneath and four trapezoidal side strips

176 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

 Table 4. Test Results 共Three-Point Bending兲 and Analytical Model Predictions of Stage I Beams
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003 / 177

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

 Table 5. Test Results 共Four-Point Bending兲 and Analytical Model Predictions of Stage I Beams
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Casting of Strips
The retrofit materials, CARDIFRC Mix I and Mix II were cast as
flat strips in 1,030 mm long and 100 mm wide steel molds with a
well-oiled base and raised border whose height could be adjusted
to give 16 or 20 mm thick plates. The molds were filled on a
vibrating table at 50 Hz frequency and smoothed over with a
float. To ensure a uniform thickness 共within 1 mm兲 a glass panel
was located on top of the raised border. The strips were left to
cure in the molds for 24 h at 20°C before demolding. The retrofit
strips were then hot-cured at 90°C for a further nine days 共includ-
ing one day for raising and one day for lowering the temperature兲.
Fig. 6. Configurations of retrofitting in Stage II: 共a兲 one strip bonded
on tension face; 共b兲 one strip bonded on tension face and four short
strips on vertical sides covering supports and ends of tension strip;
and 共c兲 one strip bonded on tension face and four short and two
continuous strips on vertical sides, fully covering supports and
tension strip sides
178 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003
J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.
The short rectangular and trapezoidal side strips, were cut from
the long cast strips to the required size using a diamond saw.
Adhesive Bonding
To improve the bond between the retrofit strips and the damaged
beams, all contacting surfaces were carefully cleaned and rough-
ened. An angle grinder was used to create a grid of grooves ap-
proximately 3 mm deep at a spacing of 50 mm on the contacting
surfaces of the damaged beams.
The retrofit strips were bonded to the prepared surfaces of the
damaged concrete beams with a commercial thixotropic epoxy
adhesive. The two parts of the adhesive were thoroughly mixed
and applied to the tension side of the damaged beam with a ser-
rated trowel to a uniform thickness of 3 mm. The strips were
placed on the adhesive and evenly pressed. To ensure good adhe-
sion, pressure must be applied to the strips during the hardening
of the adhesive 共24 h兲 in accordance with the manufacturer’s rec-
ommendation.
For the retrofitted beam with more than one strip, the beam
was turned on its side to which the strip was bonded in the same
manner as above. After another 24 h, this procedure was repeated
on the other side of the damaged beam. In practice, to ensure
good adhesion between the strips and the damaged beam pressure
can be applied using G-clamps.
Test Results
Stage I
Of the 28 beams retrofitted in Stage I, 22 beams were tested in the
same manner as the corresponding control beams, i.e., in three-
point bending over a span of 1,100 mm. The remaining six beams,
i.e., the beams retrofitted with one continuous and four 20 mm
thick rectangular strips were tested over the same span, but in
four-point bending. The spacing between the applied loads was
400 mm. In all cases, the load was controlled by the movement of
 Table 6. Test Results 共Four-Point Bending兲 and Analytical Model Predictions of Stage II Beams
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the actuator 共stroke control兲. The rate of loading was 0.01 mm/s at
the beginning of all tests, but it was increased to 0.02 mm/s when
the midspan deflection exceeded about 3 mm. In some cases, the
beams were deliberately unloaded after the attainment of the
maximum load and then reloaded. Therefore, the stiffness of the
beam during reloading could be compared with the initial stiff-
ness and the damage accumulated in the beam could be evaluated.
Tables 4 and 5 show the test results of control and retrofitted
beams.
Of the seven beams retrofitted with one strip only on the ten-
sion face, four beams failed in flexure, two in shear, and one in a
combination of flexure and shear. All the beams failed at loads at
least equal to the average failure load of the control beams. The
six beams retrofitted with three 16 mm strips all failed in pure
flexure. Their failure was characterized by the formation and
opening of a single flexural crack around the midspan of the beam
关Fig. 7共a兲兴. This configuration of retrofitting not only increased
the load carrying capacity by more than 60% over that of the
control beams, but also improved significantly the serviceability
Fig. 7. Flexural cracking in beam retrofitted with: 共a兲 three 16 mm
of the beams in terms of a significant reduction in the number and
thick strips and 共b兲 four trapezoidal strips on sides and continuous
the width of the cracks. For instance, the midspan deflection of
strip on tension face
the retrofitted beams at a load level of 20 kN was only about 14%

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003 / 179

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

 Fig. 8. Typical load-deflection response of beams retrofitted with
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

three continuous strips, compared with that of control beams

of that of the control beams. Fig. 8 compares the typical load-

deflection response of the beams retrofitted with three continuous
strips with that of the control beams.
Only one beam was retrofitted by three 20 mm thick strips.
Due to the over-strengthening of the midspan by the retrofit strips,
this beam failed suddenly in shear. The energy released by crack-
ing was so large that the beam split into two parts.
To prevent shear failure of the beams retrofitted with three 20
mm strips, two systems of repair with one continuous strip and
four rectangular/trapezoidal strips 关Figs. 5共c and d兲兴 were
adopted. As with the other retrofitting configurations, the continu-
ous strip was bonded to the tension face, whereas the rectangular/
trapezoidal strips partly covered the sides of the beam closest to
the supports. The main objective of using trapezoidal strips was to
check whether or not the gradual change in the cross section of
the side strips improves the behavior of the beams and decreases
the stress concentration. Two damaged beams were repaired using
one continuous and four trapezoidal 20 mm thick strips. These Fig. 9. Load-deflection response of retrofitted beams: 共a兲 Stage I
beams failed in flexure with the opening of a flexural crack in the beams retrofitted with one continuous and four rectangular 16 mm
middle of the beam 关Fig. 7共b兲兴. thick strips under three-point bending and 共b兲 Stage II beams retro-
Of the 12 damaged beams retrofitted by one continuous and fitted with only one 20 mm thick strip on tension face under four-
four rectangular strips, six beams 共with 16 mm thick strips兲 were point bending
tested in three-point bending and the remaining six 共with 20 mm
thick strips兲 in four-point bending. The typical load-deflection
response of the beams tested in three-point bending can be found ration of loading, five beams failed in pure flexure with opening
in Fig. 9共a兲. It should be noted however, that these beams will of pre-existing cracks and the appearance of some vertical cracks
have a deflection capacity of only 3 mm under an accidental in the middle third of the beams. Only one beam failed in shear at
overload. The dominant cracks in four of these beams were nearly its left support where there was no side strip to strengthen the
vertical and formed in the middle of the beams. These observa- section in shear.
tions are typical of a flexural failure. In the other two beams, the
dominant crack formed in the middle third of the beams, initiating
Stage II
where the side retrofit strip stopped and extending up to the point
of loading. There were signs that the flexural and shear stresses The beams retrofitted in Stage II were tested in the same manner
influenced the dominant crack, so that the beams failed in a com- as their corresponding control beams, i.e., in four-point bending
bined shear-flexure mode. In three-point bending, the shear force over a span of 1,100 mm. The four beams that were retrofitted
in all the sections of a beam is the same as at the supports. If the with one strip only on the tension face all failed in flexure. How-
failure under the influence of the shear stress occurs in the middle ever, in most of the beams 共three out of four兲 some signs of shear
third of the beam, then the failure will be ductile. However, if it distress in the form of tiny diagonal cracks were observed at the
occurs at the supports where there are no retrofitting strips, then it end of the strips near the supports. These cracks propagated to-
will be a brittle failure. The difference between the behavior of wards the nearest loading point and caused a local drop in the
the beams retrofitted with trapezoidal and rectangular strips was load. The load-deflection response of the beams retrofitted with
found to be negligible. 20 mm thick strips can be found in Fig. 9共b兲. It should be noted
To confirm that the shear-flexural failure of the two beams again, that these beams will have a deflection capacity of around
retrofitted with one continuous and four rectangular 16 mm thick 3 mm under an accidental overload.
strips was because they were tested in three-point bending, the To overcome this problem, the anchorage area of the tension
beams retrofitted with the same configuration but with 20 mm strip was strengthened in shear by covering the sides of the beams
thick strips, were tested in four-point bending. For this configu- at the supports and near the ends of the strip by additional short

180 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 10. Stress-deformation diagrams assumed in model for: 共a兲 steel; 共b兲 concrete in compression; 共c兲 concrete in tension; and 共d兲 CARDIFRC
in tension. Constant A depends on aspect ratio and volume fraction of fiber and fracture toughness of cementitious matrix.

strips. As mentioned before, two types of retrofitting strips were
investigated. Four beams were retrofitted with one strip bonded
on the tension face, and four short strips on the vertical sides,
covering the supports and the ends of the tension strip 关Fig. 6共b兲兴;
and three beams were retrofitted with one strip bonded on the
tension face and four short and two continuous strips on the ver-
tical sides, fully covering the supports and the tension strip sides
关Fig. 6共c兲兴. In fact in the second configuration, further improve-
ment in flexural behavior of the beams was also expected. All
seven beams failed in pure flexure with the opening of a pre-
existing crack after it had penetrated into the retrofit strip in the
middle third of the beam. No shear cracks or drop in the load
were observed thus confirming the usefulness of the covering the
sides of the beams.
Analytical Model
To predict the moment resistance and the load-deflection behavior
of the control and retrofitted beams an analytical model has been

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003 / 181

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

 Table 7. Parameters Assumed for Modeling the Tensile Behavior of In fact, the strain over the effective length of retrofit strip (L eff)
CARDIFRC is released in the form of a local crack. To determine L eff , the
CARDIFRC in tension length of the strain-free part of the retrofit strip should be calcu-
lated. If the tensile stress carried by the cracked strips is ignored
ft f tp E GF w1 in comparison with the tensile stress transferred by the reinforce-
Stage 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共GPa兲 共N/mm兲 共mm兲 ␧ max 共—兲
ment, the shear stress at the interface is dependent on the shear
I and II 18 7.2 50 13 0.5 7.6⫻10⫺4 stress applied by the reinforcement, as shown in Fig. 11共b兲. As-
suming the shear stress at the level of reinforcement is distributed
at 45°, a length of retrofit strip (L eff) is stress-free and conse-
developed. In this model the strain hardening as well as tension quently strain-free. The deformation of this length of strip is lo-
softening of both concrete and CARDIFRC in tension have been calized in the crack opening. Therefore, to calculate the crack
taken into account. The stress-strain relationships of materials opening of the tension retrofit strip, the strain at this level (␧ f )
were assumed to be according to the test results or the proposed can be multiplied by this effective length (L eff), i.e., twice the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

stress-deformation diagrams of the Model Code CEB-FIP 共1993兲. distance between the reinforcement and the tension strip. It can be
Based on this code, steel is assumed to be perfectly elasto-plastic seen that by using this method the stress distribution in the repair
关Fig. 10共a兲兴, whereas a parabolic relation is used for concrete in material can also be worked out from the strain distribution. Due
compression 关Fig. 10共b兲兴. Table 3 shows the values of the relevant to the fact that the crack opening displacements 共i.e., crack
parameters assumed in the model. For concrete, the compressive widths兲 of the test beams were too small for accurate measure-
strength was measured experimentally, and the remaining param- ment, the crack openings calculated from the above method could
eters were calculated from the relations proposed by CEB-FIP. not be compared directly with measured values. However, the
The yield stress f y and the modulus of elasticity E s of steel were consequences of the above assumptions to the calculation of the
obtained from tension test on rebars. moment resistance and the load deflection response of the beams
Tensile failure of concrete and CARDIFRC is always a dis- will become clear when we compare the model and test results
crete phenomenon. Therefore, to describe this behavior a stress- later in this paper.
strain and a stress-crack opening relation should be used for the To evaluate the moment resistance of the control beams and
uncracked and cracked sections, respectively. For normal concrete the beams retrofitted with different configurations of CARDIFRC
in tension the stress-deformation behavior proposed by CEB-FIP strip, which fail in flexure, a program was written. Fig. 12 illus-
was assumed 关Fig. 10共c兲兴, whereas the behavior of CARDIFRC in trates the flowchart of this program. First, a strain in the top
tension was modeled based on the theory of fracture mechanics concrete fiber and a neutral axis depth are assumed. Then, the
and a few available test results 关Fig. 10共d兲兴. The parameters as- linear strain distribution along the height of the beam is defined in
sumed for modeling the behavior of concrete and CARDIFRC in terms of these assumed values. The depth between the top com-
tension can be found in Tables 3 and 7, respectively. For concrete, pression fiber and the neutral axis is divided into ten sections. The
the direct tensile strength f ctm was estimated from the splitting average strain over each section is calculated assuming piecewise
test results and the remaining parameters were again calculated linear fiber strain. The compressive stress can now be found using
from the relations proposed by CEB-FIP. For CARDIFRC the the concrete stress-strain relation. Multiplying this by the area of
tensile strength of the matrix f tp was estimated from the splitting the section gives the compressive force. A similar calculation is
test results of the mix without fibers. However, the specific frac- made to determine the tensile forces in the concrete in tension, in
ture energy G F and the modulus of elasticity E were directly the retrofit strips, and in the reinforcing steel. As mentioned be-
measured using the notched beam and prism specimens, respec- fore, to determine the tensile stress of cracked concrete and ret-
tively. The remaining parameters in Table 7 were obtained from a rofit strips the crack opening should also be calculated.
few direct tension tests on dog-bone shape specimens.
The moment resistance of a section retrofitted by CARDIFRC
can be calculated based on the distribution of stresses caused by
bending. To determine the strain distribution along the height of
the section the following assumptions are made:
• Plane sections remain plane after bending. In other words, the
distribution of strain through the full height of the beam is
linear 共Bernoulli hypothesis兲 and
• The bond between the retrofit strips and the original beam is
perfect and there is no sliding at the interface 共deformation
compatibility兲. This assumption was fully validated by tests.
The stress distribution in concrete and CARDIFRC strips cannot
be assessed directly from the value of strain after cracking, as the
constitutive relations are expressed in terms of stress-crack open-
ing rather than stress-strain. Using the following assumptions, the
evaluation of the crack opening from the strain distribution be-
comes possible:
• The crack opening at the tension retrofit strip 共w兲 is the prod-
uct of the strain at this level (␧ f ), and an effective length of
retrofit strip (L eff) and
Fig. 11. 共a兲 Modeling of flexural crack in middle of beam strength-
• The dominant flexural crack tip is located at the level of the
ened with three strips and 共b兲 effective length of strip for calculation
neutral axis. The faces of this crack open in a linear manner
of crack opening
关Fig. 11共a兲兴.

182 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 12. Flowchart of program for calculating moment resistance of beams

Having calculated all the forces the neutral axis is adjusted
until the sum of the compressive forces equals the sum of the
tensile forces. When this is achieved, the moment is determined
by summing the compressive and tensile forces times their mo-
ment arms about a single point. In addition, the curvature of the
beam can also be easily worked out using the strain in the top
concrete fiber and the neutral axis depth. This process is repeated
for different assumed strains in the top fiber of concrete. The
maximum moment resistance of the section occurs when either
the moment reduces for an increase in the top fiber strain, or the
top fiber concrete strain exceeds the ultimate strain of concrete in
compression (␧ cu). Fig. 13 shows the relation between the mo-
ment resistance of the section and the curvature of the beam for
the beams in Stage I.
Due to the fact that all the beams tested are statically determi-
nate, their bending moment diagrams at any stage of loading are
uniquely defined. This information can be combined with the
moment-curvature diagram of sections to produce the curvature

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003 / 183

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 13. Relation between moment resistance of sections and

curvature in Stage I

diagram of the beam at different load levels by dividing the beam

span into a number of intervals. The moment-area method is then
used to compute the slope and the deflection of any point of the
beam.

Model Results

Stage I
Tables 4 and 5 compare the maximum moment resistance of the
beams predicted by the analytical model with the three- and four-
point bend test results of Stage I, respectively. This comparison is
also made in Fig. 14. It should be emphasized that the present
model is only applicable to beams which fail in flexure.
The load-deflection response of the control beams is compared
in Fig. 15 with three model predictions. In the first model predic-
tion 关Fig. 15共a兲兴, the tensile capacity of concrete is completely
ignored. As a result the initial stiffness of the test beams is much
higher than the predicted value. In the second model prediction
关Fig. 15共b兲兴, the tensile capacity of concrete up to the peak load is
taken into account but its postpeak tension softening is again
ignored. As a result the predicted initial response is much closer
to the recorded response, but there are still some differences be-

Fig. 15. Comparison of load-deflection response of control beams

predicted by model with test results in three cases: 共a兲 when tensile
capacity of concrete is completely ignored; 共b兲 when strain hardening
of concrete is taken into account while tension softening is ignored;
and 共c兲 when tension softening and strain hardening of concrete are
considered

tween the test and model results after the concrete has cracked but
before the steel has yielded. In the third model prediction, the
complete tensile response of concrete including the tension soft-
ening is considered. Fig. 15共c兲 shows that the entire load-
deflection curve predicted by the model is now very close to that
recorded in the tests. It can be seen that the load-deflection re-
sponse of the beams is not accurately predicted, unless the full
constitutive behavior of all the contributing materials, including
Fig. 14. Comparison of moment resistance of Stage I beams with
the tension softening behavior of normal concrete is properly
predictions of analytical model
taken into account.

184 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003

J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 16. Comparison of typical load-deflection response of retrofitted
beams with that predicted by model 共Stage I兲: 共a兲 beams retrofitted
with one continuous and four rectangular 20 mm strips under four-
point bending and 共b兲 beams retrofitted with three continuous 16 mm
strips under three-point bending
Fig. 15 also shows that the model slightly under-estimates the
load carrying capacity of the control beams. It can be due to the
under-estimation of the yield stress of steel. Sensitivity analysis
on the model shows that if the yield stress of steel is increased by
10%, the moment resistance of the beam is increased by 9.5%.
Fig. 16共a兲 compares the typical load-deflection response of the
beams retrofitted with one continuous and four rectangular 20 mm
strips 关Fig. 5共c兲兴 with the model predictions. The same compari-
son is made in Fig. 16共b兲 for the beams retrofitted with three 16
Fig. 17. Comparison of load carrying capacity of Stage II beams
with that predicted by analytical model
JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003 / 185
J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.
Fig. 18. Comparison of load-deflection response of Stage II beams
with model predictions: 共a兲 control beams and 共b兲 retrofitted beams.
Of four beams tested, two 共1-16-S-1 and 1-16-S-2兲 were retrofitted
with only one 16 mm strip on tension face, while remaining two had
additionally short retrofit strips bonded on each vertical side near
supports.
mm continuous strips 关Fig. 5共d兲兴. It can be clearly seen that the
model predictions are in very good agreement with the test re-
sults, especially before the attainment of the maximum load.
Stage II
Table 6 and Fig. 17 compare the maximum load carrying capacity
of the Stage II beams 共with shear reinforcement兲 with the model
predictions. It can be seen that the model predictions are again in
good agreement with the test results. Of course, the failure load of
some beams retrofitted with 20 mm strips is lower than that pre-
dicted by the model. This is likely to be the result of the poor
quality of some 20 mm strips used for retrofitting the beams.
The load-deflection response of the control beams in Stage II
is compared in Fig. 18共a兲 with the model predictions. It can be
seen that up to the load level corresponding to the cracking of
concrete in tension, the response predicted by the model and that
recorded in the test are identical. However, when concrete cracks
in tension, the model predicts a larger deflection than the mea-
sured value. This is because the model assumes the cracked sec-
tion condition for all sections in the region of the maximum mo-
ment. Although this local increase in the deflection was not
observed in the tests, the stiffness of all control beams had de-
 creased considerably at this load level. As the load is increased,
the model predictions again approach the test results, and finally a
ductile failure with the yielding of steel is observed in both the
model and the test results. The maximum load carrying capacity
of the control beams is slightly higher than the predicted value. In
addition, a local drop in the load is observed just after the attain-
ment of the maximum load. This is due to the local instability
induced by the yielding of steel across the existing flexural cracks
which is not included in the model.
Fig. 18共b兲 compares the load-deflection response of the Stage
II beams with model predictions. Of the four beams tested, two
共1-16-S-1 and 1-16-S-2兲 were retrofitted with only one 16 mm
strip on the tension face, while the remaining two had additionally
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Heriot-Watt University on 03/07/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
short retrofit strips bonded on each vertical side near the supports
关see, Figs. 6共a and b兲兴. It can be seen that the load-deflection
predicted by the model is close to the test results, especially be-
fore the maximum load is reached.
Conclusions
The new technique using the CARDIFRC strip bonding system is
a promising method for improving the flexural and shear behav-
ior, as well as the serviceability of damaged concrete beams. It
does not suffer from the drawbacks of the existing techniques,
which are primarily a result of the mismatch in the properties
between the concrete and the repair material.
The mechanical properties of CARDIFRC Mixes I and II are
very similar, therefore there is no real difference in the behavior
of the beams retrofitted with either of these mixes.
The moment resistance and load-deflection response of the
beams retrofitted using this technique can be predicted analyti-
cally, providing that the strain hardening and tension softening
response of concrete and CARDIFRC are properly taken into ac-
count.
The technique described in this paper may be used when there
is a need to improve the durability of existing concrete structures,
as CARDIFRC mixes are very durable because of their highly
dense microstructure. Research is currently being undertaken to
study the fatigue, shrinkage, and creep properties of CARDIFRC
and the performance of concrete structures retrofitted with
CARDIFRC under dynamic, thermal, and hygral loads.
Acknowledgment
This work is supported by U.K. EPSRC Grant No. GR/R11339.
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
E ⫽ modulus of elasticity;
E c ⫽ modulus of elasticity of concrete;
E c1 ⫽ secant modulus of elasticity of concrete;
E s ⫽ modulus of elasticity of steel;
f cm ⫽ compressive strength of concrete;
f ctm ⫽ tensile strength of concrete;
f t ⫽ tensile strength of CARDIFRC;
f tp ⫽ tensile strength of CARDIFRC matrix 共i.e., mix
without fibers兲;
f y ⫽ yield stress of steel;
G F ⫽ specific fracture energy;
186 / JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / AUGUST 2003
J. Compos. Constr. 2003.7:174-186.
L fmax ⫽
maximum fiber length in CARDIFRC;
P ⫽
load;
Pu ⫽
maximum load;
␦ ⫽
deflection;
␧ ⫽
strain;
␧ c1 ⫽
strain of concrete at maximum stress;
␧ ct ⫽
strain of concrete in tension;
␧ cu ⫽
ultimate strain of concrete in compression;
␴ ⫽
stress;
␴ ct ⫽
stress of concrete in tension;
␴ cu ⫽
ultimate compressive stress of concrete in
compression;
␻ ⫽ crack opening;
␻ 1 ⫽ crack opening of concrete at knee of tension
softening diagram; and
␻ c ⫽ maximum crack opening.
References
Ahmed, O., and Gemert, D. V. 共1999兲. ‘‘Behaviour of R.C. beams
strengthened in bending by CFRP laminates.’’ Proc., Structural Faults
and Repair—99:8th Int. Conf., London, Engineering Technics Press,
Edinburgh, U.K. 共CD-Rom兲.
Alaee, F. J., Benson, S. D. P., and Karihaloo, B. L. 共2001a兲. ‘‘Strength-
ening of RC beams with high-performance cementitious composites.’’
Proc., Int. Conf. Civil Engineering, Technical Committee ICCE-2001,
eds., Interline Publishing, Bangalore, India, 1–13.
Alaee, F. J., Benson, S. D. P., and Karihaloo, B. L. 共2001b兲. ‘‘High-
performance cementitious composites for retrofitting.’’ Int. J. Mater.
Prod. Technol., 17共1/2兲, 17–31.
Büyüköztürk, O., and Hearing, B. 共1998兲. ‘‘Failure behavior of pre-
cracked concrete beams with FRP.’’ J. Compos. Constr., 2共3兲, 138 –
144.
Comité Euro-International du Béton-Féderation International de la Pré-
contrainte 共CEB-FIP兲 Model Code. 共1993兲. Lausanne, Switzerland.
El-Refaie, S. A., Ashour, A. F., and Garrity, S. W. 共1999兲. ‘‘Flexural
capacity of R.C. beams strengthened with external plates.’’ Proc.,
Structural Faults and Repair—99:8th Int. Conf., London, Engineering
Technics Press, Edinburgh, U.K. 共CD-Rom兲.
Fanning, P., and Kelly, O. 共1999兲. ‘‘Shear strengthening of R.C. beams:
An experimental study using CFRP plates.’’ Proc. of Structural Faults
and Repair—99:8th Int. Conf., London, Engineering Technics Press,
Edinburgh, U.K. 共CD-Rom兲.
Hussain, M., Sharif, A., Basenbul, I. A., Baluch, M. H., and Al-
Sulaimani, G. J. 共1995兲. ‘‘Flexural behavior of precracked reinforced
concrete beams strengthened externally by steel plates.’’ ACI Struct.
J., 92共1兲, 14 –22.
Jones, R., Swamy, R. N., and Charif, A. 共1988兲. ‘‘Plate separation and
anchorage of reinforced concrete beams strengthened by epoxy-
bonded steel plates.’’ Struct. Eng., London, 66共5兲, 85–94.
Karihaloo, B. L., Alaee, F. J., and Benson, S. D. P. 共2002兲. ‘‘A new
technique for retrofitting damaged concrete structures.’’ Proc., Inst.
Civ. Eng., Build. Struct., 252共4兲, 309–318.
Karihaloo, B. L., Benson, S. D. P., Didiuk, P. M., Fraser, S. A., Hamill,
N., and Jenkins, T. A. 共2000兲. ‘‘Retrofitting damaged RC beams with
high-performance fibre-reinforced concrete.’’ Proc., Concrete Com-
munication Conf., British Cement Association, Birmingham, U.K.,
153–164.
Nanni, A. 共1995兲. ‘‘Concrete repair with externally bonded FRP rein-
forcement: examples from Japan.’’ J. Concr. Int., 97, 22–26.
Yagi, K., Tanka, K., and Otaguro, H. 共1999兲. ‘‘Durability of carbon fibre
sheet for repair and retrofitting.’’ Proc., Structural Faults and
Repair—99:8th Int. Conf., London, Engineering Technics Press, Ed-
inburgh, U.K. 共CD-Rom兲.
Ziraba, N., Baluch, M. H., Basunbul, I. A., Sharif, A., Azad, A. K., and
Al-Sulaimani, G. J. 共1994兲. ‘‘Guidelines toward the design of RC
beams with external plates.’’ ACI Struct. J., 91共6兲, 639– 646.