Engineering Structures 34 (2012) 447454

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

A new bond-slip model for adhesive in CFRPsteel composite systems

E. Dehghani, F. Daneshjoo , A.A. Aghakouchak, N. Khaji
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, P.O. Box 14115-397, Tehran, Iran

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 8 May 2011
Revised 29 August 2011
Accepted 29 August 2011
Available online 11 November 2011
Keywords:
Rehabilitation
Steel beam
Bond-slip model
Bonded connection
Adhesive
CFRP

a b s t r a c t
Debonding of CFRP from steel surface is an important issue in the eld of strengthening of steel structures. In this paper, a new method for analysis of bonded connections of CFRP and steel substrates is presented. This method simulates the connection via a series of equivalent discrete springs. In this approach,
simple closed-form solutions are derived to calculate total elastic stiffness as well as effective elastic
bond length of a plate bonded to a rigid substrate. Furthermore, a new bond-slip model is suggested
by adding a plastic part to the previous bond-slip curve. In this model, initial stiffness is determined from
elastic properties of adhesive. Two other parts are dened in such a way that the area under the curve is
equal to interfacial fracture energy. Comparison of results obtained from the proposed model and experimental data shows that ultimate debonding load may be accurately estimated by the proposed model. In
addition, loaddisplacement curve obtained by the present model is quite comparable to experimental
curves. Moreover, effective bond length shows good agreement with those determined from experimental tests. In this model, unlike some previous bond-slip models, ultimate debonding load is independent
from adhesive thickness.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
During last two decades, use of CFRP bers in rehabilitation of
concrete structures has shown promising results. Therefore, several manuals and guidelines (e.g., [1]), experimental [2], and analytical approaches [35] have been presented for strengthening
concrete structures with CFRP materials. However, use of these
materials has experienced limited development in steel structures.
Due to higher strength of steel relative to concrete, especially in
tension, more strong reinforcing materials are required to reach
an acceptable level of strengthening in steel structures. Nevertheless, for more strong material, critical bond stresses would be
larger. In this regard, few researches have been conducted on
bond-slip relationship between CFRP and steel substrate.
Analysis of a bonded connection is usually performed by analytical or nite element (FE) methods [610]. Since stress singularities
at the material interfaces are avoided in analytical bond models,
consistent results may be obtained quickly [11]. However, use of
these methods is limited to simple and specic cases; hence
various common complicated connections of steel structures are
almost impossible to be analyzed using this method. On the other
hand, analysis of bonded connections may be performed by FE
methods (see e.g., Refs. [1214] among others). In previous studies
of FE, solid and cohesive elements have been used for modeling of
adhesive layer. As the thickness of solid elements employed to
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 21 82883384; fax: +98 21 82883381.
E-mail address: danesh_f@modares.ac.ir (F. Daneshjoo).
0141-0296/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.08.037

model adhesive is considerably less than characteristic dimensions

of civil structures, the number of solid elements must signicantly
be increased to avoid large aspect ratios, which in turn results in
increasing computational costs. Adams [6] and Hildebrand [8]
noted that for modeling adhesives, four to six elements should
be used in thickness direction. Some researchers employed FE
method to study bond-slip relationship in CFRPsteel systems
[12,15,16].
In cohesive elements on the other hand, due to trivial adhesive
thickness, it could be assumed that normal and shear stresses show
uniform distribution in thickness direction. In this approach, total
thickness of adhesive is modeled by one element, whereas more
elements are implemented in tangential direction (see e.g., Ref.
[17]). Consequently, FE mesh size is reduced which results in considerable reduction of computational cost. Behavior of cohesive
elements is dened by a bond-slip model.
Several bond-slip models have been proposed for different
applications of bonded connection of concrete structures (see
e.g., Ref. [13] among others). In the eld of steel structures, a few
bond-slip models are proposed in previous researches for CFRP
delamination from steel substrate. Failure models (e.g., Von-Misses
failure criterion used in [12]) based on interfacial energy have provided much better results.
Yuan et al. [9] investigated full range behavior of bonded
CFRP to concrete with an analytical approach. Based on results
of their research, ultimate debonding load of CFRP from a rigid
substrate depends on axial stiffness of plate and fracture interfacial energy.

448

E. Dehghani et al. / Engineering Structures 34 (2012) 447454

Nomenclature
bp
Ep
ft;a
Gf
Ga
K
Ka
Kp
Leff
P
Pult

width of CFRP plate

modulus of elasticity of CFRP
maximum tensile strength of adhesive
interfacial fracture energy
shear modulus of elasticity of adhesive
stiffness of CFRP plate that bonded to steel
stiffness of equivalent discrete springs for adhesive
stiffness of equivalent discrete springs for CFRP
effective bond length
load
ultimate delamination load of CFRP from substrate

Softening

Elastic

Sn
ta
tp
d
d0
df

sum of mathematical sequence

thickness of adhesive layer
thickness of CFRP plate
displacement
maximum elastic displacement of adhesive
fracture displacement of adhesive
maximum shear strength of adhesive
Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer

sf
CFRP

Debonding

Shear stress

Area under the curve = Gf

f
Slip

Fig. 1. Bilinear bond-slip model proposed by Xia and Teng [18].

Fig. 2. Comparison of elastic analysis with experimental bond-slip curves presented by Xia and Teng [18].

65
52

P (kN)

Based on analytical failure model of Ref. [9], Xia and Teng [18]
conducted a few tests on CFRP sheets attached to a relatively rigid
steel substrate and showed that the failure model of Ref. [9] could
also be extended in steel structures. Xia and Teng [18] proposed a
bilinear bond-slip model for simulation of adhesive behavior (see
Fig. 1) and noted the need for more studies to determine the
parameters of this model.
Following the results of Ref. [18], Fawzia et al. [19] proposed a
bond-slip model in which the values of d1 and df corresponding to
slip phase (see Fig. 1) depends on the thickness of adhesive layer.
Although bilinear bond-slip model has produced good results in
FRP-concrete system, some problems have been observed in steel
structures. For example, slope of elastic part of curves obtained
from experimental tests is smaller to the stiffness calculated from
elastic properties of adhesive [18,20,21]. A sample of these experimental curves is shown in Fig. 2 in conjunction with elastic stiffness
extracted from adhesive properties. It seems the cause of reduced
elastic stiffness in experimental results is nonlinear properties of
adhesive that has been ignored in bilinear models. If the slope of
elastic part be assumed based on elastic properties of adhesive,
loaddisplacement curve obtained from analysis will not be similar
to experimental results. Fig. 3 shows the difference between analysis and test. Also, effective bond length obtained by analysis is more
than experimental results, mainly due to assuming softer properties for adhesive. Effective bond length depends on adhesive shear
modulus. Furthermore, the area under the curve and ultimate load
in Fawzias model [19] are dependent on adhesive thickness. However, experimental results implied that ultimate load does not
change with adhesive thickness variations [18].
In this paper, analysis of bonded connection is performed by a
new method that simplies CFRP and adhesives by a series of

39
bilinear bond-slip

26

Experiment [18]

13
0
0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

(mm)
Fig. 3. Loaddisplacement curve by assuming elastic properties of adhesive for
ascending part of bond-slip curve.

discrete equivalent springs. Using this method, total elastic stiffness of bonded CFRP to rigid substrate and elastic effective bond
length are derived in a closed-form formulation. This method
may analyze any pre-dened bond-slip model and predict load
displacement curve of connection as well as stress distribution at
each loading step. Moreover, a new bond-slip model is proposed
in the present paper in which a plastic part is added to previous
bilinear models. With this modication, nonlinear properties of
adhesive may be taken into account much better than before. This
model is compared with results of experimental tests conducted in
previous researches.

449

E. Dehghani et al. / Engineering Structures 34 (2012) 447454

FRP plate

Adhesive

P
Reletively rigid substrate

(a)
1

n+1

(b)
1

Ka(1)

Kp

Kp

Ka(2)

Kp

Ka(3)

(c)
Fig. 4. (a) FRP plate bonded to a rigid substrate, (b) simulation of plate and adhesive with equivalent springs, and (c) details of CFRP and cohesive springs.

2. Proposed discrete method for bonded connection

Although cohesive elements have been developed in commercial
FE softwares, however, few bond-slip models are available in libraries of these softwares. In the present research, a new approach
is introduced for analysis of bonded connections. In this approach,
connection elements are modeled by discrete equivalent springs
for which any pre-dened bond-slip model may be considered.
Bond-slip relationship is obtained for the case of a plate glued
on a steel substrate when the plate is subjected to tension load.
In this test, all parts of adhesive are mainly under the shear stress.
If one neglects stress variation in thickness direction, one-dimensional analysis may offer plausible solution to the problem. The
CFRP plate and the adhesive are modeled by a series of discrete axial and shear springs, respectively. One end of shear springs is connected to joints of plate, while the other end is xed to simulate
boundary conditions of a plate glued on a rigid substrate (see
Fig. 4). Equivalent stiffnesses of innitesimal differential of adhesive and plate with a length of dx may be simply obtained using
principal rules of solid mechanics (see e.g., Ref. [22]) as:

Ga bp dx
Ka
ta

Ep bp tp
Kp
dx


K a 2 K p

K3 
K a 1K p
K a 2 K p
K a 1K p
K a 1K p
K a 1K p

Following this systematic method, equivalent stiffness in all

joints and whole system of plate and adhesive may be calculated.
Assuming sufcient bonded length, total stiffness calculated from
Eq. (4) approaches to a constant value. In other words, adding
new K p and K a i springs, does not change the value of total system
stiffness, because these springs lie outside the effective bonded
length. Therefore, one may write the following expression as an
alternative to Eq. (4):

K K a K p
K K a K p

or,

K2 KaK  KaKp 0

from which, total elastic stiffness of bonded plate may be given by

in which, p and a subscripts indicate plate and adhesive, respectively; Ga denotes the shear modulus of elasticity of adhesive; bp
and Ep indicate the width and modulus of elasticity plate, respectively; t a and t p are the thickness of adhesive layer and plate,
respectively.
The equivalent stiffness in joint 1, as shown in Fig. 4c, is denoted by K a 1. The spring Kp and the rst spring K a 1 are connected in series conguration. Therefore, the equivalent stiffness
in joint 2 may be easily obtained as:

K a 1K p
K2
K a 1 K p

The spring K a 2 and the previous spring combination (K 2 ) are

in parallel conguration. Moreover, all of these springs and next
CFRP spring (K p ) are in series conguration again. Consequently,
the equivalent stiffness in joint 3 may be given by:

q
K 2a 4K a K p  K a
2

Substituting Eqs. (1) and (2) into Eq. (7) and after some algebraic manipulations, elastic stiffness of whole system is obtained
as:

bp

q
G E t
G b dx
G2a
dx2 4 a tap p  a tap
ta
2

or

s
Ga Ep t p
lim K bp
dx!0
ta

450

E. Dehghani et al. / Engineering Structures 34 (2012) 447454

By removing terms containing innitesimal length dx, Eq. (9)

will be simplied as:

s
Ga Ep t p
K bp
ta

0:03
10

Eq. (10) predicts the limit value of total elastic stiffness of a

CFRP plate bonded to a rigid substrate. Furthermore, increasing
bonded length has no effect on total elastic stiffness obtained by
Eq. (10). For achieving this stiffness, bond length should be at least
equal to effective bond length [9]. In order to calculate the effective
bond length, let assume the total stiffness in joint n 1 is K n1 . The
stiffness in the previous joint may be calculated as:

Kn

K n1 K p
K p  K n1

11

Substituting K n1 from Eq. (10) into Eq. (11) and after simplication of the obtained results, Eq. (11) may be given as:

q
Kn

or

Ga Ep t p
Ep bp tp
ta

q
Ga Ep t p
Ep t p 
dx
ta

12

s !n
Ga
dx :
1
t a t p Ep

19

As a result, the number of springs that transfer 97% of the applied load on CFRP to steel may be calculated from Eq. (19) by

ln 0:03

q  :
ln 1  ta GtpaEp dx

20

The effective bond length can be calculated by multiplying n

into dx. Therefore,

Leff lim ndx

dx!0

ln 0:03dx
3:5dx


q  lim
q 
Ga
dx!0
ln 1  ta tp Ep dx
ln 1  ta GtpaEp dx

21

Using LHpitals rule, Eq. (21) is simplied as the following

expression

Leff

s
Ep tp ta
3:5
Ga

22

The ratio of displacements in two adjacent joints, dn and dn1 ; is

inversely proportional to the ratio of stiffnesses at those joints as:

Eq. (22) presents elastic effective bond length of CFRP bonded to

steel substrate.

dn
K n1

dn1
Kn

3. Proposed bond-slip model

13

By substituting K n1 from Eq. (10) and K n from Eq. (12) into Eq.
(13), and after some algebraic simplications, one may simply obtain the following equation

dn
1
dn1

s
Ga
dx
Ep tp t a

14

which shows the ratio of displacements of two adjacent joints in the

proposed system. Since the force in each spring is proportional to its
displacement, ratio of forces in two adjacent joints is similar to Eq.
(14). The list of adhesive spring forces can be expressed as a
descending geometric sequence that its common ratio is computed
by Eq. (14). The rst term of this sequence is:

a1 K a dn1

Ga bp dx
P
q P

G E t
ta
bp atap p

s
Ga
dx
t a t p Ep

15

Partial sum of n terms of this sequence is calculated by following equation:

a1 rn  1
Sn
r1

16

As already discussed in Section 1, previous bond-slip models

show non-conformities with experimental results, particularly in
elastic part and elastic properties of adhesive. In this paper, a
new model is proposed to resolve these problems.
As Xia and Teng [18] noted, since the strain gages are installed
on CFRP surface instead of adhesive surface, interfacial stresses and
strains show some errors. Considerable distances between adjacent strain gages may also cause inaccuracy in measured results.
Nevertheless, loaddisplacement curves and effective bond length
obtained from experimental tests represent true ones. Considering
these facts, the comparison of loaddisplacement curves and effective bond lengths are our rst priorities in this paper which leads
to the new proposed bond-slip model as shown in Fig. 5.
The maximum shear stress in the adhesive sf is estimated at
about 80% of maximum tensile strength [18]. This veried assumption is also considered in the proposed model of this paper:

sf 0:8f t;a

in which, ft;a indicates the maximum tensile strength of adhesive.

The slope of ascending part of the proposed bond-slip curve is
calculated based on elastic properties of adhesive. Regarding the

in which,

17

The length of the interface, which is mobilized to withstand the

applied load, is commonly referred to as effective bond length [9].
This effective bond length is dened in this paper as the bond
length over which the shear stresses give a total strength which
is at least 97% of the applied load for a joint with an innite bond
length. According to this denition, the parameter Sn is replaced by
0.97P in Eq. (17) which results in

q 0
s !n 1
P taGtpaEp dx
Ga
dx A
0:97P q @1  1 
Ga
t a tp Ep
dx
t a t p Ep

Debonding

Softening

Elastic

f
Shear stress

dn1
r
:
dn

23

Area under the curve = Gf

0
18

Slip
Fig. 5. The proposed bond-slip model of the present research.

451

E. Dehghani et al. / Engineering Structures 34 (2012) 447454

maximum shear stress of Eq. (23), the yield displacement d0 is simply given by

d0

sf
Ga

ta

24

where Ga and t a are modulus of elasticity and thickness of adhesive.

Moreover, according to experimental test results, the ultimate
debonding force does not change by adhesive thickness variations.
This fact implies that the area under the bond-slip curve should be
independent of adhesive thickness. This area should be equal to
interfacial fracture energy that could be calculated based on test
results.
According to Ref. [9], ultimate debonding load of CFRP from a rigid substrate depends on axial stiffness of plate and fracture interfacial energy as follows

Pult bp

q
2Gf Ep t p

25

In which, bp ; tp , and Ep denote the width, thickness, and modulus of elasticity of CFRP plate, respectively. In addition, Gf is interfacial fracture energy.

Since no clear relationship between Gf and other properties of

adhesive such as tensile strength has been reported in the literature, Gf is assumed to be an inherent characteristic of adhesive,
in this research. Inspecting test result curves reported in previous
studies, the displacement corresponding to the start of softening
part d1 , is assumed to be equal to one-third of fracture displacement df . Assuming area under the curve to be equal to Gf , the value
of df is given by

df

3Gf 3
d0
2sf 4

26

The proposed bond-slip model is shown in Fig. 5.

4. Debonding process analysis
Analysis is conducted by a monotonic nonlinear displacementbased method in which, target displacement is selected at the tip of
plate. Total stiffness of system and partial stiffness in each joint
may be obtained from shear and axial stiffness of springs in every
nonlinear step and by using systematic method presented in
Section 2. In every step of nonlinear analysis, an incremental

Start

Input adhesive &

FRP properties

Get d(i) from

previous step

d (i) > d 0

i=1

No

K a (i ) = K a
No

Yes

K a (i ) = 0

j>0

P = P + P( j )

Yes

[K + Ka (i)] K p
K=
[K + Ka (i)] + K p

j=j-1
Determination of P(j) due
to defined bond-slip curve

i = i +1

No

d ( j) = d ( j) + j

i>n
Yes
K>0

No

j 1 = j 1

End

Kj
Kp

Yes

n = inc

j=n

Fig. 6. The owchart of the proposed method for analysis of bonded connections.

452

E. Dehghani et al. / Engineering Structures 34 (2012) 447454

Fig. 7. Loaddisplacement curve.

nonlinear stiffness could be calculated based on dened bond-slip

formulation and its shear deformation. At the end of each step, total applied load could be obtained by summation of all adhesive
spring forces. Flowchart diagram of this systematic process is
shown in Fig. 6.
Although presented algorithm is proposed for a plate connected
to rigid substrate, however, it may be used for the cases that axial
stiffness of plate is much smaller than the substrate. In most cases
of civil engineering applications (e.g., rehabilitation of steel structures by CFRP sheets), the above conditions are met and therefore,
the presented formulation is applicable for them. For modeling
symmetric double strap joints by this method, it is recommended
to consider one-quarter of the connection as a CFRP plate bonded
to rigid substrate.
Based on the results obtained by using above algorithm for a
bonded connection, plate separation may have three general
phases:
1. Linear phase (OA part in Fig. 7).
2. Nonlinear phase (AB part in Fig. 7).
3. Separation phase (BC part in Fig. 7).
Distribution of shear stress along the plate in each point of Fig. 7
is shown in Fig. 8. These graphs have been obtained from the analysis of specimen A-1 tested in Ref. [18]. This specimen is a 50 mm
width CFRP plate which was bonded to a relatively rigid steel substrate along 350 mm. As may be seen from Fig. 8 in linear regime
(or point A), the maximum shear stress of adhesive appears at
loading side. By increasing the applied load in nonlinear regime,
the primary maximum shear stress gradually decreases and shifts
to the opposite side. When the maximum shear stress reaches to
the opposite side, debonding process has been completed.

5. Verication of the proposed model

In this section, some samples tested by other researchers, are
modeled by proposed model and the outputs are compared by
available experimental results. For this purpose, ve samples of
Xia and Teng research [18] which are made using two adhesive
types and two adhesive thicknesses are modeled. Samples are CFRP
plates whose width and thickness are 50 and 12 mm, respectively.
The CFRP plates are connected to a steel substrate along the
350 mm in length. These plates are subjected to a monotonic tension loading applied at the end of CFRP plates. Adhesives specications are shown in Table 1. Figs. 9 and 10 show the results obtained
from the proposed model for loaddisplacement curves in comparison with the available experimental results of Ref. [18]. As may be
observed from these two gures, there are good agreements between the results of the present model and the experimental tests.
In order to provide more validation for the proposed model, further comparisons are performed with the available experimental
results in Refs. [12,18,19,23]. Selected specimens of the mentioned
references are listed in Table 2. As a sample of these analyses,
Fig. 11 depicts the loaddisplacement curve of specimen NM200
of Ref. [19] which is obtained by the proposed model of this research. This curve is not actually available in Ref. [19] to be compared with the results of the present model; however, the
Fig. 8. Shear stress distribution along the plate: (a) elastic load level (point A), (b)
ultimate load level (point B), and (c) debonding stage (point C).

displacement is applied to the end joint (joint n 1). Displacement

of previous joints may be calculated using Eq. (14). Deformation of
each shear spring is equal to displacement of the joint to which it is
connected. Corresponding force of each adhesive spring and its

Table 1
Adhesives properties.
Adhesive

Tension
strength (MPa)

Modulus of
elasticity (MPa)

Poissons
ratio

Ultimate
strain (%)

A
B
M

22.53
20.48
24.8

4013
10,793
1700

0.36
0.27
N.A.

0.5614
0.1898
1.46

E. Dehghani et al. / Engineering Structures 34 (2012) 447454

Fig. 9. Comparison of loaddisplacement curve with the test results of Ref. [18], for
specimen A-2.

453

Fig. 11. Loaddisplacement curve derived from the proposed model of this paper
for specimen NM200 in Ref. [19].

6. Conclusion
In the present study, a new bond-slip model has been proposed
by adding a plastic part to the conventional bilinear model. As it
was shown, this model is able to consider initial stiffness of connection, and to estimate ultimate debonding load and effective
bonded length with good accuracy.
Analysis of bonded connection was performed by simulation of
plate and adhesive in a new form of equivalent springs. Using this
approach, total elastic stiffness of a plate bonded to a rigid substrate and effective elastic bond length were derived in a simple
closed-form formulation.
Analysis of bonded connection with the proposed model showed
that the ultimate debonding load is independent from adhesive
thickness as expected. This load depends on adhesive type and axial
stiffness of bonded plate as conrmed by previous works.

Fig. 10. Comparison of loaddisplacement curve with the test results of Ref. [18],
for specimen A-1.

Table 2
Comparison of proposed model results with experimental data.
Specimen

Ultimate
experimental
load (kN)

Ultimate
analytical
load (kN)

Ratio

Effective
bonded
length
(mm) from
experiment

Effective
bonded
length
(mm)
from
analysis

Ratio

A-1
A-2a
B-1
B-2a
B-2b
NM200

60.5
61.7
39.4
42.4
38.8
88.2

60.2
60.2
38.6
38.6
38.6
84.4

1.005
1.025
1.021
1.098
1.005
1.045

100

95
100
70
75
75
65

1.05

80

1.14

ultimate debonding load is compared with the analytical values of

the present model (see Table 2). It should be noted that this sample
is a symmetric double strap joint [19]. Consequently, only onequarter of the original specimen is modeled by the proposed method, and therefore the calculated ultimate load should be multiplied
by two.
Furthermore, the ultimate fracture loads of experimental tests
are compared with those obtained from analysis using the present model (see Table 2). As may be seen, the experimental and
analytical results agree very well. In addition, the effective
bonded length of CFRP is determined by measuring the zone affected by shear stress and is compared with experimental data
where available.

References
[1] ACI Committee 440. Guide for the Design and Construction of Externally
Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Structures, USA; 2008.
[2] Lau D, Pam HJ. Experimental study of hybrid FRP reinforced concrete beams.
Eng Struct 2010;32:385765.
[3] Mohamed Ali MS, Oehlers DJ, Grifth MC, Seracino R. Interfacial stress transfer
of near surface-mounted FRP-to-concrete joints. Eng Struct 2008;30:18618.
[4] Colotti V, Swamy RN. Unied analytical approach for determining shear
capacity of RC beams strengthened with FRP. Eng Struct 2011;33:82742.
[5] Cornetti P, Carpinteri A. Modelling the FRP-concrete delamination by means of
an exponential softening law. Eng Struct 2011;33:19882001.
[6] Adams RD. Design of adhesively-bonded lap joints: modelling considerations.
In: Proceedings of 46th International SAMPE Symposium and Exhibition. Long
Beach, California; May 2001.
[7] Zhao X-L, Zhang L. State-of-the-art review on FRP strengthened steel
structures. Eng Struct 2007;29:180823.
[8] Hildebrand M. Non-linear analysis and optimization of adhesively bonded
single lap joints between bre-reinforced plastics and metals. Int J Adhes
Adhesives 1994;14(4):2617.
[9] Yuan H, Teng JG, Seracino R, Wu ZS, Yao J. Full-range behaviour of FRP-toconcrete bonded joints. Eng Struct 2004;26(5):55364.
[10] Youssef MA. Analytical prediction of the linear and nonlinear behaviour of
steel beams rehabilitated using FRP sheets. Eng Struct 2006;28:90311.
[11] Benachour A, Benyoucef S, Tounsi A, Adda bedia EA. Interfacial stress analysis
of steel beams reinforced with bonded prestressed FRP plate. Eng Struct
2008;30:330515.
[12] Fawzia S, Zhao XL, Al-Mahaidi R. Experimental and nite element analysis of a
double strap joint between steel plates and normal modulus CFRP. Compos
Struct 2006;75:15662.
[13] Lu XZ, Teng JG, Ye LP, Jiang JJ. Bond-slip models for FRP sheets/plates bonded to
concrete. Eng Struct 2005;27(6):92037.
[14] Niroomandi A, Maheri A, Maheri MR, Mahini SS. Seismic performance of
ordinary RC frames retrotted at joints by FRP sheets. Eng Struct
2010;32:232636.
[15] Cognard JY. Numerical analysis of edge effects in adhesively-bonded
assemblies application to the determination of the adhesive behavior.
Comput Struct 2008;86:170417.
[16] Zhang L, Teng JG. Finite element prediction of interfacial stresses in structural
members bonded with a thin plate. Eng Struct 2010;32:45971.

454

E. Dehghani et al. / Engineering Structures 34 (2012) 447454

[17] Chengye Fan PY, Ben Jar JJ, Roger C. Cohesive zone with continuum
damage properties for simulation of delamination development in bre
composites and failure of adhesive joints. Eng Fract Mech 2008;75:
386680.
[18] Xia SH, Teng JG. Behaviour of FRP-to-steel bonded joints. In: Proceedings of
the international symposium on bond behaviour of FRP in structures. Hong
Kong; 2005.
[19] Fawzia S, Zhao X-L, Al-Mahaidi R. Bond-slip models for double strap joints
strengthened by CFRP. Compos Struct 2010;92:213745.
[20] Dawood M, Rizkalla S. Bond and splice behaviour of high modulus CFRP
materials bonded to steel structures. In: Proceedings of third international

conference on FRP composites in civil engineering (CICE 2006). Miami, Florida;

December 2006.
[21] Fawzia S, Zhao XL, Al-Mahaidi R, Rizkalla S. Bond characteristics between CFRP
and steel plates in double strap joints. Adv Steel Construction
2005;1(2):1728.
[22] Popov EP. Engineering mechanics of solids. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall;
1990.
[23] Fawzia S, Zhao XL, Al-Mahaidi R. Bond-slip model for CFRP sheets bonded to
steel plate. In: Proceedings of third international conference on FRP
composites in civil engineering (CICE 2006). Miami, Florida; December 2006.