ACI MATERIALS JOURNAL

TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 100-M8

Nondestructive Evaluation of Carbon Fiber-Reinforced

Polymer-Concrete Bond Using Infrared Thermography
by John M. Levar and H. R. (Trey) Hamilton III
Bonded carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites are
rapidly gaining acceptance as a feasible solution for repair and
strengthening of concrete structures. A reliable method of nondestructive evaluation (NDE) is needed to monitor the installation
quality and the long-term efficacy of the repair. This paper presents
research into the use of infrared (IR) thermography to evaluate
bonded CFRP composites used to strengthen concrete beams.
Reinforced concrete beams were constructed and then strengthened
with several configurations of wet layup or precured laminate
CFRP composites. Two beam configurations were used to force
either a shear failure mode or a flexural failure mode. IR inspections
were conducted on the CFRP composite systems before loading to
determine the extent of bond. The beams were then tested statically
to failure. Periodically during load testing, IR inspections were
conducted to determine the amount and characteristics of bond
damage. Results indicated that IR inspections were able to
consistently determine loss of bond as loading progressed.
Keywords: bond; concrete; fiber-reinforced polymer; strength.

INTRODUCTION
Strengthening of concrete members with carbon fiberreinforced polymer (CFRP) composites has become increasingly
popular in recent years. These systems are generally surface
applied, which prevents the visual inspection of the encapsulated
concrete member. Post-installation detection of unbonded,
debonded, and delaminated areas is critical in evaluating the
actual capacity and durability of the CFRP composite, as
well as the underlying concrete and reinforcing. Qualitative
infrared thermography (IR) can be used to detect unbonded,
debonded, and delaminated areas under the surface and within
the CFRP strengthening system.
Thermography is commonly used for a variety of industrial
applications including problems associated with bearing
lubrication, pipes, valves, seals, motor windings, motor
overloads, electrical circuits and components, and chemical
processes. Thermography has been used in buildings for
energy audits, moisture problems with roofs, and inspection
of reinforced masonry. IR thermography has also been
used for qualitative nondestructive evaluation (NDE) of
bridge piers wrapped with CFRP strengthening systems
(Jackson et al. 1999).
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
The Federal Highway Administration estimates that
230,000 of the nations 575,000 bridges are structurally
deficient or functionally obsolete (Witcher 1996). Many of
these bridges can be repaired or strengthened with CFRP
composites. Much work has been conducted on the structural
aspects of bonded repair systems. The long-term performance
characteristics of the system, however, are still largely
unknown. With the promise of increased use of CFRP systems
ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

in structural applications, it is imperative that a simple and

effective method for NDE be developed. IR thermography can
potentially be used to detect flaws in bonded repair systems,
including installation defects and long-term degradation.
The work presented in this paper provides fundamental
qualitative and quantitative data indicating IR inspection
to be a viable method for the NDE of bonded CFRP systems.
CFRP STRENGTHENING AND BOND
Bonded CFRP systems can add flexural strength, shear
strength, and/or confinement to an existing reinforced or
prestressed concrete element. Flexural and shear strengthening
are commonly applied to beam elements while confinement
is used to improve the ductility of concrete columns under
earthquake loads. When adding flexural strength, CFRP
sheets or laminates are placed so that the fibers are oriented
along the length of the beam in the region of high flexural
tensile stresses. Shear strength is added by orienting the fibers
perpendicular to the beams axis, thus providing a stirrup
configuration. Confinement is typically provided by wrapping
the element, usually a column, with CFRP. In some cases,
the column may be wrapped multiple times to ensure sufficient
confinement will be obtained.
Loss of bond in flexural or shear configurations can be
catastrophic. Bond is of lesser importance when considering
confinement, but it could be an indicator of other more
serious problems.
To avoid confusion, it is necessary to define the four types
of bond loss that will be discussed in this paper. The first
type is an unbonded area that is not a structural failure but
rather an initial lack of bond that occurred during application.
The second type is a debond, which describes the separation
that occurs between the CFRP composite and the underlying
concrete surface. This type of failure is structural and is
characterized by the fact that there is very little concrete
attached to the composite after pulling away from the concrete.
The third type is a delamination, which is the separation of
two layers of CFRP composite. This type of bond loss can
occur as a result of faulty installation or as a result of loading.
The final type is a substrate failure. The substrate failure is
structural and is characterized by a tensile rupture of the concrete
below the surface of the bond line. This is the preferred mode of
failure because the adhesive has performed adequately and
allows for the maximum transfer of stress between the CFRP
and concrete for that particular concrete strength.
ACI Materials Journal, V. 100, No. 1, January-February 2003.
MS No. 02-061 received February 7, 2002, and reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright 2003, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved,
including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion will be published in the November-December 2003 ACI
Materi als Journal if received by August 1, 2003.

63

John M. Levar is President and Co-founder of Advanced Structural Technologies, Inc.,

Minneapolis, Minn. He received his MSCE from the University of Wyoming. He is a
member of ACI Committee 440, Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement. His research
interests include the durability and inspection of fiber-reinforced polymer composites and
the effect of reinforcing steel corrosion on composite strengthening systems.
H. R. (Trey) Hamilton III is an associate professor of civil engineering at the
University of Florida. He is a member of ACI Committees 222, Corrosion of Metals in
Concrete, and 440, Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement; and Joint ACI-ASCE
Committee 423, Prestressed Concrete. His research interests include evaluation and
strengthening of existing structures.

Table 1CFRP composite properties

CFRP
type

Fabric
weight

System tensile
strength,
MPa (ksi)

Fabric

19.23 oz./yd 2

1034 (150)

69 (10,000)

1.0 (0.041)

Laminate

na*

2482 (360)

200 (29,000)

1.4 (0.055)

System modulus,
GPA (ksi)

Material
thickness,
mm (in.)

Fig. 1Detail of flexural load testing setup.

na = not available.

Table 2Flexural test matrix

Specimen

CFRP type

CFRP width,
mm (in.)

F1
F5

Fabric

102 (4)

CFRP layout

Single strip

F2
F3
F4

Fabric

406 (16)

50% U wrap

F6

Laminate

51 (2)

Single strip

CF1
CF2

None

na

na

*na = not available.

Current applicable limits for unbonded, debonded, and

delaminated areas are given by the ACI Committee 440 report
Guide for the Design and Construction of Externally Bonded
FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Structures (ACI
440.2R-02). These guidelines (hereinafter referred to as ACI
440.2R-02) recommend the following for general acceptance of
wet layup systems:
1. Inspection methods should be capable of detecting
delaminations of 2 in.2 (1300 mm2 ) or greater;
2. Small delaminations less than 2 in.2 (1300 mm 2) each
are permissible, as long as the delaminated area is less than
5% of the total laminate area and there are no more than 10
such delaminations per 10 ft2 (1 m2 );
3. Large delaminations, greater than 25 in. 2 (16,000 mm2), can
affect the performance of the installed FRP and should be
64

Fig. 2Detail of shear load testing setup.

repaired by selectively cutting away the affected sheet and
applying an overlapping sheet patch of equivalent plies; and
4. Delaminations less than 25 in. 2 (16,000 mm2) may be
repaired by resin injection or ply replacement, depending on
the size and number of delaminations and their locations.
There were four objectives determined at the outset of this
research. The first objective was to determine the overall
effectiveness of qualitative IR thermography for use in
inspecting CFRP strengthening systems for concrete. For IR
thermography to be effective, it must be capable of providing
quality control information for both initial application
and long-term performance. The second objective was to
determine the behavior of the CFRP systems as loading
progressed. Observations of debonded area progression
through failure can be useful in future research and field
detection of strengthening systems that have been overloaded
or otherwise damaged. The third objective was to determine
the installation quality that can be expected from the
strengthening systems. These data can be used to develop
guidelines for initial tolerances of unbonded areas in the
strengthening systems. The flexural and shear capacity of
strengthened beams are calculated based on the assumption
that a perfect bond exists between the composite and the
concrete. While this assumption is rarely attained in practice,
it is not clear what minimum area of bond is required to ensure
that there is a reasonably low risk of bond failure. The final
objective was to determine the ability of IR thermography
to detect the extent and characteristics of the debonding
surrounding flexural or shear cracks under the CFRP composite.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
Specimen construction
The specimens used for testing were 4.9 m (16 ft) long
concrete beams, 102 x 305 mm (4 x 12 in.) in cross section.
Two 12.7 mm (No. 4) bars with a yield strength of 414 MPa
(60 ksi) were placed in the bottom of the beam with an effective
depth of 250 mm (10 in.). A total of eight specimens were
ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

Table 3Shear test matrix

CFRP
width,
Specimen CFRP type mm (in.)

CFRP layout

S1
S2
S3
S4

Fabric

406 (16)

50% with fiber

longitudinal

S6
S7

Fabric

406 (16)

50% with fiber

longitudinal and
50% with
transverse

Fig. 3Fully integrated test setup.

S5
S8

Fabric

na

Strip with fiber

longitudinal and
50% with fiber
transverse

S9
S10

Laminate

51 (2)

Strip longitudinal
and stirrup
8@ 152 mm o.c.

CS1
CS2

None

na

na

*na = not available.

constructed. The concrete strength at the time of testing was

35 MPa (5.0 ksi).
Two different bonded CFRP systems were applied to the
concrete specimens using a wet layup, unidirectional fabric and
unidirectional laminate, each from a different supplier. Each
system was applied using the manufacturers instructions. Shear
and flexural capacities under the test load configuration were
calculated using the guidelines presented in ACI 440.2R-02.
CFRP system and material properties were taken from the
manufacturers literature and are shown in Table 1.
Beams to receive the wet layup system (hereinafter referred
to as fabric) were prepared by rounding the edges in the
applic ation area to a 12.7 mm (0.5 in) minimum radius with
a handheld grinder. Beams receiving laminate and/or fabric
were lightly sandblasted using 20 grit silica sand in the contact
area. After sandblasting, the beams were cleaned with
compressed air to remove residual sand and laitance.
There were eight flexural specimens with varying configurations of CFRP composites as shown in Table 2.
Specimens F1 through F5 used a single layer of fabric for
each specimen. Fabrics used to form the composite were
unidirectional with the strong direction oriented parallel with the
length of the beam. Specimen F6 used a precured laminate
placed on the tension face of the beam. Shear specimens were cut
ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

from the flexural specimens after the completion of the flexural

tests. A total of 10 shear specimens were tested with varying
CFRP composite types and configurations as shown in Table 3.
Test setup and instrumentation
The flexural specimens were loaded in four-point bending
(Fig. 1). The shear test involved a much shorter span with a
single point load to ensure diagonal cracking and a shear failure
mode (Fig. 2). Both test setups were designed so that the
flexural tension face was oriented upward allowing convenient
access for IR inspection (Fig. 3).
The instrumentation included equipment for load-deflection
data collection and IR imaging prior to and during loading.
Instrumentation included two 44.5 kN (10 k) load cells, dial
gages, and a multimeter. The load cells were connected to
the multimeter to measure the output and confirm the
sup port reactions. The dial gages were placed at midspan
to monitor deflection.
The infrared thermometer, infrared camera, an 8 mm VHS
camcorder, and a television formed the IR inspection
equipment. The infrared thermometer was used to take
surface temperature readings for use in scaling the IR images,
and the camera was used to collect IR images during the test.
The IR images were recorded with the VHS camera to provide
the best selection of photos possible. The IR camera had
a 25 mm lens. This particular camera/lens combination
allowed for visualization of defects 320 mm 2 (0.5 in. 2)
and larger. The display was monochromatic. Detailed
specifications for the IR camera include: detector type/
format; uncooled ferroelectric (320 x 240), spectral response; 7
to 14 microns, thermal stabilization; thermoelectric cooler,
video update rate; 30 Hz-real time, time to operation (typical);
< 25 s at 25 C. The thermometer specifications included: 8:1
target size, back-lit LCD display, temperature range of 32 to
400 C (25 to 750 F), preset emissivity of 0.95, and accuracy
within 0.10 C.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
The experimental program consisted of flexure and shear
tests on the strengthened concrete beams. Control tests were
also conducted on beams that were not strengthened. The
beams were tested statically to failure. IR inspection was
conducted during the testing. The following sections describe
the testing details.
65

Fig. 4Lagging method of creating temperature gradient for IR inspection: (a) specimen
at ambient conditions; (b) heat application; and (c) hot spot development after heating.
IR inspection
Creating Temperature DifferentialThe IR inspections
were conducted using a lagging process to develop the
temperature differential as illustrated in Fig. 4. The specimen
starts with the concrete and CFRP composite at the same
temperature (Fig. 4(a)). When heat is applied to the CFRP
composite surface, its temperature rises (Fig. 4(b)). The underlying concrete is now cooler than the composite, creating a
thermal gradient and heat flow from the composite to the
concrete. The rate at which the heat flows is a function of the
intimacy of contact between the composite and the concrete.
In areas where the composite is not in contact, the heat transfer
from composite to concrete will be slower than in areas
where there is intimate contact. In the time following heat
application, this results in a higher temperature and resulting
emittance (or hot spot) at the debonded areas detectable with
the IR camera.
The heat sources that were tested included a heat gun, hair
dryer, kerosene heater, propane torch, and quartz lamp. Hair
dryers and heat guns were unable to heat the surface quickly
enough to create a gradient. The kerosene heater worked
well over large areas. This was especially useful in heating
the laminate stirrups, as it allowed for the inspection of more
than one stirrup at a time. The propane torch also worked
well on the laminate, but without modification it didnt provide
enough even coverage for use on the fabric. The most effective
66

and convenient heat source for the indoor inspection of the

CFRP fabric was the quartz lamp. In under 20 s, an area of
approximately 0.28 m2 (3 ft2 ) was heated evenly to 35 to
43.3 C (95 to 110 F). They also provided a significant
advantage when working indoors where combustion vapors
were a concern.
The specimen temperature was monitored during testing
using an infrared digital thermometer. Spot temperatures
were taken to aid in control of surface heating. Delays
caused by time-consuming reheating or waiting for the surface to cool after overheating were avoided using this technique. Monitoring the temperature during heating also
ensured that the CFRP composite temperature was kept well
below the glass transition temperature.
The temperature of the specimen relative to the ambient
temperature affected the heat flow from the CFRP composite.
IR inspection was conducted repeatedly on a single specimen
during load testing. Consequently, the average temperature
increased steadily as the test progressed, resulting in a less
effective IR inspection. The best results were obtained with
the following conditions:
Ambient temperature below approximately 23.9 C
(75 F);
Use a 500 W lamp at a distance of 152 mm (6 in.) from
the surface; and
Heat surface to 35 to 43.3 C (95 to 110 F).
ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

Temperatures above this level heated the composite more

than was necessary for a satisfactory inspection. Caution
must be exercised when heating so the glass transition
temperature of the epoxy, usually 60 to 82.3 C (140 to
180 F), is not exceeded. Exceeding this temperature limit is
easy to do with available heating methods and can have an
adverse effect on the strengthening system.
Qualitative evaluationIR inspection can be either
quantitative or qualitative. Quantitative IR inspection uses
direct temperature measurement to detect actual temperatures
of an object and requires equipment with temperature
measurement capabilities. The results of quantitative inspections
are influenced by the objects surface emissivity and texture,
the reflected background, ambient air temperature, camera
resolution, camera accuracy, and operator experience.
Qualitative IR does not focus on obtaining the actual surface
temperature but rather the magnitude and configuration of
the temperature gradient. Qualitative IR inspection was used
in this research.
Defect identification and labelingThe need for identifying
and labeling defects is dependent on the intent of the IR
inspection. As briefly discussed in the objectives, the purpose of
using IR thermography for NDE is twofold. The first use for
this type of evaluation is quality control of the application
process. The second is continued monitoring of existing
repairs over time to evaluate long-term performance. In the
case of quality control, locating the defects is not necessary
unless continued inspection is required. When continued
inspection is required, debonding, delaminations, and unbonded
areas need to be located for future inspection.
Metallic paint pens were used to mark the boundaries
of the hot spots (Fig. 5). Chalk was used in initial testing
and was found to be ineffective. Chalk was convenient in
that it could be easily removed from a surface, but when
it was needed for longer durations, it was insufficient.
The metallic pens worked well for showing the boundaries
and were detectable in the IR camera and visible with the
naked eye. Nonmetallic pens were used for filling in the
areas of progress ion throughout the load steps. At the end
of the test, the areas outlined at each load step were measured
using a transparent 650 mm 2 (1 in2) square grid, resulting in
areas of initial defects as well as damage that occurred
during testing.
Flexural tests
It was impractical to monitor the entire beam with IR
inspection during loading. Consequently, the area of maximum
moment was selected on which to focus the IR inspection
(shown as the influence area in Fig. 1). During loading, heat
was applied for 15 to 20 s to an approximately 0.1 m2 (1 ft2 )
area on one face of the beam with a 500 W quartz lamp.
Immediately after heating, temperature readings were taken
with the infrared thermometer. The heat was removed and
the IR camera operator sketched the outline of the unbonded
or debonded area directly on the CFRP composite. IR inspection
was also conducted prior to loading to identify existing
unbonded areas and then after loading to 60, 80, and
100% of the calculated capacity. At each of the selected
load steps, the beam was unloaded and each face was inspected
with the IR camera.
Shear tests
The influence area for the shear specimens consisted of a
762 mm (30 in.) length encompassing the beam within the
ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

Fig. 5Outlines created by metallic paint pens representing

hot spots.
load points on the three sides reinforced with CFRP (Fig. 2).
The general IR procedures of inspection with the IR camera
were similar to those used for flexure. The shear specimens
were inspected initially with the IR camera to identify
unbonded areas. The test then progressed with load steps of
25, 50, and 75% of the ultimate capacity, and then ultimate
capacity after initial failure occurred. The ultimate capacity
was chosen over the calculated capacity in the shear tests due
to the variability in CFRP composite bond strength. The
beam was unloaded at each load step followed by IR inspection.
The 500 W quartz lamp was used for the fabric and a 79 MJ
(75,000 BTU) kerosene heater was used for the laminate. IR
images were recorded during loading to determine if significant
changes in damage could be detected. The boundaries of
unbonded and damaged areas were marked and measured as
in the flexure tests.
DEFECT VERIFICATION
The verification of the debonded, delaminated, and unbonded
areas of CFRP was done using several different approaches.
Prior to initiating the load tests and IR inspections, several
mockups were constructed with known unbonded areas. IR
inspection was conducted on these known defects to help in
distinguishing areas that have defects or damage. Surface
temperature variations can occur due to variations in the
thickness of the epoxy. The temperature differential for these
areas was much more subtle than for the areas that have
defects or damage.
A common form of FRP composite inspection is acoustic
sounding (coin tap). The surface is impacted or tapped while
the inspector listens for hollow sounds. Coin tap was conducted
occasionally during testing to verify results of the IR inspection.
It was found that an estimated 20 to 30% of the defects or
damage found with IR inspection were undetectable with the
coin tap. Unfortunately, it was not possible to verify these
areas following testing due to the destructive nature of the
testing. It was noted, however, that the areas detectable with
IR inspection but not with coin tap increased in size during
the course of the load test, indicating that the areas were
indeed defects and not variations of epoxy thickness or other
false sources.
The difficulty arises when trying to distinguish at what
depth the anomalies occur. All forms of damage can be
detrimental to the CFRP composite system, but the specific
failure mode is required to determine the capacity of an
existing structural member. Unbonded and debonded areas
appeared differently in the IR image than a delamination due
to the variation in depth between the three types of bond loss.
This difference is not obvious and is difficult to determine
67

Fig. 6Orientation of unbonded area aligned with fiber direction.

Table 4Bonded area of CFRP for flexural
test specimen

remaining concrete substrate looked very similar to the

CFRP and did not provide verification of specific unbonded
or debonded areas.

Bonded area (% of total composite area)

Specimen

Initial

F1

na

F5

90

F2

na

F3

83

F4

82

F6

92

Average
na*

100% of
capacity
na
80

Average

Decrease

na

10

69.5

10

na

na
82.5

78
67

na

86

* na = not available.

Table 5Bonded area of CFRP for shear

test specimen
Bonded area (% of total composite area)
Specimen

Initial

S1

80

S2

81

S3

77

S4

84

S5

83

S8

78

S6

86

S7

84

S9

92

S10

90

Average

75% of
capacity

Average

Decrease

66.8

13.7

49

31.5

73

12

85.5

5.5

66
80.5

64
63
74

80.5
85
91

50
48
75
71
86
85

correctly due to the variability of layer thickness, system

composition, and heating methods. By studying the behavior
of single-layer systems of unidirectional fabric, it was possible
to verify the signatures when layers were combined in different
orientations. In this way, the characteristics of delaminations
in exterior layers were separated from debonding at the
concrete CFRP interface. The more CFRP layers a system
has, the more difficult it is to distinguish between the different
types of defects.
The final approach for verification came from physical
removal of the CFRP from the specimen in an attempt to
observe the debonded/unbonded areas. The CFRP laminate
provided evidence of unbonded areas by a lack of epoxy
residue on the interior surface of the laminate. The fabric did
not provide an obvious indication of subsurface voids when
removed from the concrete. Upon removal from the concrete
surface, the CFRP was covered uniformly with concrete
fragments. The concrete fragment also splintered off the
fabric as it was peeled from the concrete substrate. The
68

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Unbonded areas
The results of the initial IR inspections prior to load testing
are shown in Table 4 and 5 for the flexure and shear specimens,
respectively. Note that the table gives areas as a percentage
of the area covered by composite. In addition, the table
gives loss of bond during load test, which will be discussed
subsequently. For the flexural specimens that had a single
layer of fabric on the tension face (F1 and F5), the bonded
area was found to be 90% while the wrap around configuration
(F2-F4) was less at 82.5%, indicating additional installation
difficulty when wrapping corners. This is true even with the
fiber direction parallel with the beam axis. Note that both of
these measurements exceed the 5% allowed by ACI 440.2R-02.
The laminate (F6) has a somewhat better bond coverage
(92%) than the fabrics. The shear specimens using the fabric
with the longitudinal orientation had similar bond coverage
as that of the flexural specimens. Somewhat surprising is the
80.5 and 85% bond coverage for the shear specimens with
transverse fiber orientation (S5-S8). It is expected that
there would be a reduction in a bond area caused by having to
wrap the fabric around the corners of the beam, but none
was apparent.
Unbonded areas in fabrics were oriented along the principal
fiber direction regardless of the orientation of the fabrics
with respect to the beam. Figure 6 shows Specimen S1 with
the defects oriented parallel to the beam axis. Figure 5 shows
Specimen S6 in which the fiber direction of the top layer is
oriented perpendicular to the beam axis. This pattern of
unbonded areas is believed to be due to the tension required
to stretch the fabric to provide a smooth application. This
tension does not allow the fabric to conform to uneven areas
on the surface of the concrete. The fibers tend to pull away
from the uneven areas on the concrete surface after application
but before the epoxy cures. IR inspection was performed on
several specimens immediately after CFRP application but
before full cure was reached. It was found that the detectable
unbonded areas increased as the epoxy cured.
Unbonded areas under the laminate were also somewhat
elongated following the axis of the strip (Fig. 7). The laminate
is applied by placing a ridge of fresh epoxy along the centerline
of the laminate. As the laminate is pushed into the concrete,
the ridge is flattened and the epoxy is supposed to squeeze
out to the edge of the laminate to cover the entire width. If
insufficient epoxy is used, the epoxy is overly viscous, or
inadequate pressure is used, then the entire width may not be
ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

Fig. 7Typical unbonded area alignment on laminate specimens.

covered, leaving unbonded areas at the edge of the laminate
as shown in the figure.
Load tests
Flexural specimens were tested with three different CFRP
composite configurations. There were several failure modes
exhibited as indicated in Table 6. The failure load of each
flexural specimen is also given in Table 6. The failure load
given in the table is the total load applied to the beam (the
sum of the two-point loads). There was only one test in
which the failure mode was debonding (F3). The remainder
of the tests failed by CFRP rupture, concrete crushing, or
shear. When comparing the capacity of the flexural specimen
with the unbonded area of CFRP, the influence of the unbonded
area is not evident. There is a decrease in the experimental
capacity associated with higher debonding during loading.
This may be attributed in part to the unbonded area. The
crushing failure mode exhibited by the strengthened flexural
specimen, however, discredits this relationship. The overreinforced sections failed in compression prior to CFRP
rupture and prevented a comparison with the calculated
capacity. For an adequate comparison to be made, the
specimen must be designed such that the failure mode is
CFRP rupture with little chance of compression or shear
failures. The focus of this experimental work was to test
the IR inspection rather than the improvement in capacity
provided by the CFRP.
Although the load test results appear to indicate that larger
unbonded areas did not adversely affect the flexural capacity
of the strengthened beams, there is some doubt cast by the
failure modes. Other work (Jackson et al. 1999) has indicated
high unbonded areas in field applications in which field tests
using infrared inspection on CFRP fabric wrapped bridge
columns showed a total unbonded area after application of
8190 mm2 (12.7 in2 ) out of 31,940 mm2 (49.5 in2) or 26% of
the total CFRP area evaluated.
The load test results for the shear specimens are shown in
Table 7. In general, the shear specimens exhibited far more
debonding and delamination than their flexural counterparts.
This is likely due to the lack of shear reinforcement in the
beams, allowing excessive cracking to take place. The
improvement provided by the CFRP composite does not appear
to have been affected by the large unbonded areas. It should
be noted that the shear test configuration provided a rather
short shear span, likely resulting in a shear failure dominated
by compression rather than diagonal tension.
ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

Table 6Flexural test results

Calculated
Failure load
capacity Pn ,
Designation Pexp , kN (kips)
kN (kips)
F1

36.0 (8.1)

F5

48.0 (10.8)

F2

57.8 (13.0)

F3

48.5 (10.9)

F4

45.8 (10.3)

F6

52.9 (11.9)

CF1

28.0 (6.3)

CF2

29.4 (6.6)

51.9 (11.7)

51.9 (11.7)
53.4 (12.0)
26.2 (5.9)

Pexp / Pn

Failure mode

0.69

CFRP rupture

0.92

Shear failure

1.11

Concrete crushing

0.93

CFRP debond

0.85

Concrete crushing

0.99

Shear failure

1.07

Steel yield

1.12

Steel yield

Table 7Shear test results

Failure load
Pexp ,
Designation
kN (kips)

Calculated
capacity Pn ,
kN (kips)

P Vexp/ P Vn

Failure mode

1.70

CFRP debond

1.60

CFRP debond

1.66

CFRP debond

165.9 (37.3)

1.09

CFRP debond

S5

234.4 (52.7)

2.31

CFRP debond

S8

201.0 (45.2)

1.98

CFRP debond

S6

162.8 (36.6)

S7

173.5 (39.0)

S9

188.2 (42.3)

S10

162.4 (36.5)

CS1

155.2 (34.9)

CS2

146.8 (33.0)

S1

257.6 (57.9)

S2

242.9 (54.6)

S3

251.8 (56.6)

S4

151.8 (34.1)

101.5 (22.8)
na
157.0 (35.3)
71.2 (16.0)

na

CFRP debond
CFRP debond

1.20

CFRP debond

1.03

CFRP debond

2.18

Shear failure

2.06

Shear failure

na = not available.

Debonding and delamination

The IR inspections revealed that delamination and debonding
occurred during loading on both the flexural and shear
specimens. In general, debonding and delamination are
manifested as unbonded area growth rather than the appearance
of new areas. This characteristic was common among all of
the fabric and laminate specimens.
One of the objectives of this research was to determine if
flexural cracks under the CFRP composite could be located
and tracked with IR inspection during load testing. It was
thought that the flexural crack would cause local delamination
immediately adjacent to the crack of sufficient size that the
IR inspection could detect. This capability would be a useful
tool in evaluating the CFRP system, particularly to determine if
the system had been overloaded. Unfortunately, cracking
69

Fig. 8Crack transverse to fiber direction in flexural specimen.

Fig. 9Bond damage progression for Specimens F3 to F6.

generally shows up as the enlargement and eventual connecting

of adjacent unbonded areas as the load is increased.
There was one occasion when a flexural crack caused
debonding of the adjacent CFRP without the aid of unbonded
areas. Figure 8 shows the tension face of Specimen F3. Note
that this specimen failed by CFRP rupture at the location
indicated by the IR inspection. The IR signature was noted
during testing as unusual because it was perpendicular to the
direction of the fabric.
Specimens F1 and F5 had composite applied to the tension
face only, leaving the sides exposed. Visible flexural cracks
on the sides were traced to confirm the location of the cracking
under the CFRP. The IR signatures for these flexural cracks,
however, were not as distinct as on Specimen F3.
Specimen F6 was reinforced with a single strip of laminate
along the tension face. By having the faces of the beam
exposed, cracking could be tracked to the laminate and
signature locations could be readily anticipated and identified.
However, there was no associated IR signature detected
prior to failure.
Specimens S1 through S4 displayed behavior similar to F2
through F4 in that debonding resulted in the enlargement of
unbonded areas as the load was increased. When 65 to 75%
of the capacity was reached, the debonded areas increased
significantly at the diagonal cracks.
Shear Specimens S6 and S7 were reinforced with two
layers of CFRP fabric. The inner layer was oriented with the
principal fiber direction parallel to the beam axis. This allowed
for IR inspection of the multilayer systems during load
progression. During load application, most of the damage was
debonding with little delamination noted. This was verified by
the lack of growth in the vertically oriented signatures in
the external layer of fabric. On further inspection, it was
discovered that there were cloudy signatures in some areas
that were not associated with the exterior layer. This cloudy
area was thought to be debonding of the internal layer of
CFRP. This was not evident until failure occurred. Once
failure occurred, the area surrounding the failure displayed
the same cloudy signature that was seen during the load
progression. The status of the cloudy area was unverified as
removal of the fabric layers destroyed the appearance of the
concrete/CFRP interface.
Shear Specimens S5 and S8 were reinforced with a single
strip of fabric on the tension face and then a perpendicular
wrap encompassing half of each side. Debonding initiated at
the boundaries of unbonded areas. The debonded areas

continued to grow in the principal fiber direction until

failure occurred.
Shear Specimens S9 and S10 used the carbon fiber laminate
in a stirrup configuration. Because of its stiffness, the
laminate did not conform to inconsistencies in the concrete
substrate as well. The increased thickness and density of the
laminate and epoxy substrate also changed the IR signature
from that of the fabric. Initial debonding started at unbonded
signatures near the edge of the laminate. The debonded
area usually extended immediately to the top of the stirrup.
Intermediate load levels showed moderate progression of
debonding through the stirrup, but most debonding occurred
at the edges. This reinforcing configuration provided capacity
beyond the expected value. The epoxy did not perform well,
however, and with better materials and surface preparation
the system may have provided a higher shear capacity. The
stirrup configuration engaged the 45 degree crack as expected.
It is evident that the interfacial bond is critical in areas directly
affected by shear.

70

Area analysis
Unbonded, debonded, and delaminated areas were measured
and recorded during the construction and load testing of the
flexure and shear specimens. The IR inspection procedure
was somewhat subjective in that the thermographer identified
and sized the defect while viewing the specimen with the IR
camera. Furthermore, the measured areas were totaled
manually. Even with this low-tech procedure, it was possible
to perform the inspections with remarkable repeatability.
This section presents the results of the area analysis.
Figure 9 shows the loss of CFRP bond as a function of the
applied load for flexural Specimen F3 to F6. The figure
shows the loss of bond as a function of the applied load. The
loss of bond is the sum of unbonded, debonded, and delaminated
areas. Hence, at zero load, the loss of bond is equal to the
unbonded area determined before the test was initiated. All
of the flexural specimens displayed a gradual increase in the
amount of damage. Specimens F3 and F4 (side wrap specimens)
are clustered above F5 and F6 (fabric and laminate strips,
respectively). The close match among the plots is an indication
of good repeatability and may also indicate that bond
characteristics can be categorized with the configuration of
the CFRP composite. No flexural specimen had more than
35% loss of bond at failure.
Table 4 compares the total area bonded at initial inspection
and at 100% of the calculated capacity for the flexural
ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

Fig. 10Bond damage progression for Specimens S1 to S4.

Fig. 12Bond damage progression for Specimens S6 and S7.

Fig. 11Bond damage progression for Specimens S5 and S8.

Fig. 13Bond damage progression for Specimens S9 and S10.

specimen. It is interesting to note that the decrease in bonded

area was 10% or less. This indicates that small changes in
bond, when considering flexure, can be an indication that a
beam has seen or is under significant load.s
Figure 10 shows the loss of bond for shear Specimens S1
to S4. The initially unbonded area for each of the specimens was
very near 20% of the total CFRP area. The repeatability of the
inspection method is confirmed by the lack of variation among
these similarly reinforced specimens. In addition, the loss of
bond increases at a relatively constant rate up to 75% of the
load. There is a drastic increase in debonding and delamination
from 75 to 100%. This is due primarily to the explosive release
of energy at failure of the system in shear, which causes a rapid
and complete loss of bond on one side of the shear crack.
Figure 11 shows the loss of bond for Specimens S5 and S8.
Specimens S5 and S8 exhibited consistent changes in the
debonded area as the applied load increased. The two curves
reflect the repeatability of the inspection method. Once
again, the consistency of material and application are also
evident. The increase in the debonded area at 65% of the
actual capacity is also evident in the S5 and S8 specimens.
This configuration provided the highest capacity combined
with the highest amount of debonded area at failure. This
supports the theory that a higher unbonded area at failure
does not necessarily mean a decreased capacity.
Figure 12 shows the loss of CFRP bond as a function of the
applied load for the S6 and S7 shear specimens. Specimens
S6 and S7 maintained the consistent behavior between

con figurations and show a sharp increase in debonded area

near 65% of the actual beam capacity. This configuration
provided multiple layers of CFRP with multiple signature
types in the thermogram. The consistency displayed here can
be attributed to the development of signatures in single-layer
systems with variable fiber orientation. Due to the subjective
nature of the inspection process, the ability to eliminate false
signatures is critical in performing an accurate inspection.
Figure 13 shows the loss of CFRP bond as a function of the
applied load for the S9 and S10 shear specimens. The IR
inspection of the specimens reinforced with CFRP laminate
showed initially unbonded areas of 8% of the total CFRP
area for flexural members and 8 to 10% for the shear specimen.
Specimens S9 and S10 displayed behavior consistent with
the other shear specimens. The debonded area increases at
approximately 70% of the capacity for the shear specimens
reinforced with the CFRP laminate. The small, unbonded
area at failure displays a lack of redundancy in the strengthening
system. If significant cracking occurs between the stirrups, a
small percentage of the CFRP is engaged, whereas the fabric
encapsulates the surface and engages all of the shear cracks
that occur in the member.
Table 5 summarizes the change in the bonded area when
the load is taken to 75% of the capacity. It is unclear why the
double-layer system of S5 and S8 have such a large change
in bond area (31.5%) compared with that of S6 and S7.
Perhaps there are more delaminations on S5 and S8 than
were detected due to the double layer.

ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003

71

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Reinforced concrete beams were strengthened with bonded
CFRP composites and tested to failure in both flexure and
shear failure modes. The beams were IR inspected for initial
application quality and periodically during load testing to
record loss of bond with load increase. Inspection procedures
were developed and damage signatures were defined for the
various reinforcing configurations. The following conclusions
have been supported by this research:
Infrared thermography can be used effectively for
nondestructively evaluating CFRP strengthening
systems for concrete;
Initially unbonded areas of CFRP composite on concrete
substrates can exceed 20% of the total CFPR area;
Shear controlled failures can exhibit up to twice as much
CFRP debonding as predominately flexural failures;
The amount of unbonded area present immediately
after CFRP application can be significantly lower than
after curing of the CFRP has taken place;
Manual methods of acoustic sounding can leave up to
25% of the voids under the CFRP composite undetected.
Acoustic sounding is inadequate for detecting small
irregular voids and clearly defining defect and damage
boundaries; and
Quality control inspections need to be performed on

72

these systems to establish a baseline for unbonded

areas. Routine inspections must be performed to determine
the status of the bond between the CFRP and the concrete
and prevent unexpected failures.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the National Science
Foundation (CAREER Grant CMS-9734227) for funding this project. They
would also like to thank Tom Hurley of Hurley and Associates, Inc., for his
expertise and input regarding infrared thermography. The views expressed in
this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the sponsor.

REFERENCES
ACI Committee 440, 2002, Guide for the Design and Construction of
Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Structures
(ACI 440.2R-02), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
Mich., 45 pp.
Jackson, D. R.; Islam, M.; Hurley, T. J.; and Alvarez, F. J., 1999,
Feasibility of Evaluating Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Wrapped
Reinforced Concrete Columns Using Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)
and Infrared (IR) Thermography, Demonstration Project No. 84-2, U.S.
Department of Transportation-Federal Highway Administration,
Washington, D.C.
Mack, J. K., and Holt, E. E., 1999, The Effect of Vapor Barrier
Encapsulation of Concrete by FRP Composite Strengthening Systems,
44th International SAMPE Symposium and Exhibition , Long Beach, Calif.
Witcher, D., 1996, Application of Fiber Reinforced Plastics in New
Construction and Rehabilitation of the Infrastructure, International
Con ference on Composites in Infrastructure 1996, (ICCI 96), pp. 774-779.

ACI Materials Journal/January-February 2003