692

Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams

with externally bonded fiber-reinforced-plastic
plates: design guidelines for shear and flexure

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

O. Chaallal, M.-J. Nollet, and D. Perraton

Abstract: This paper presents a comprehensive design approach for reinforced concrete flexural beams and
unidirectional slabs strengthened with externally bonded fiber-reinforced-plastic (FRP) plates. The approach complies
with the Canadian Concrete Standard. The paper is divided into two parts, namely flexural strengthening and shear
strengthening. In the first part, analytical models are presented for two families of failure modes: classical modes such
as crushing of concrete in compression and tensile failure of the laminate, and premature modes such as debonding of
the plate and ripping off of the concrete cover. These models are based on the common principles of compatibility of
deformations and equilibrium of forces. They can be used to predict the ultimate strength in flexure that can be
achieved by such elements, given the FRP cross-sectional area, or conversely, the required FRP cross-sectional area to
achieve a targeted resisting moment for rehabilitated flexural elements. In the second part, design equations are derived
to enable calculation of the required cross-sectional area of shear lateral FRP plates or strips for four plating patterns:
vertical strips, inclined strips, wings, and U sheet jackets. A step by step procedure is also presented along with an
easy to use flow chart. Finally, a numerical design example is provided to demonstrate the applicability of the
approach. This study is believed to be timely and very useful for the practicing engineer.
Key words: reinforced concrete, beams, slabs, strengthening, FRP, plates, design, flexure, shear, mode of failure, adhesive.
Rsum : Cet article prsente une approche de calcul complte pour des poutres de flexion en bton arm et des dalles
unidirectionnelles renforces laide de plaques de plastique base de fibres (fiber-reinforced plastic, FRP). Cette
approche respecte les normes canadiennes pour le bton (Canadian Concrete Standard). Larticle est divis en deux
parties : le renforcement en flexion et le renforcement en cisaillement. Dans la premire partie, des modles
analytiques sont prsents pour deux familles de modes de rupture : les modes classiques, tels que la rupture en
compression du bton ou la rupture en tension du substrat (FRP), et les modes prmaturs, tels que la dsolidarisation
linterface de la plaque FRP ou larrachement du bton de recouvrement. Ces modles sont bass sur les principes
communs de compatibilit des dformations et dquilibre des forces. Ils peuvent tre utiliss afin de prdire la
rsistance ultime en flexion que peuvent atteindre de tels lments, connaissant laire de la section transversale de la
plaque FRP, ou inversement, laire de la section transversale de la plaque FRP requise pour atteindre le moment
rsistant vis par la rhabilitation de llment en flexion. Dans la deuxime partie, les quations de calcul sont
drives pour permettre le calcul de laire de la section transversale des plaques ou des bandes de FRP requise en
cisaillement latral pour quatre motifs de recouvrement : bandes verticales, bandes inclines, ailes et enveloppes en U.
Une procdure tape par tape avec un organigramme facile utiliser est galement prsente. Finalement, un exemple
de calcul numrique est fourni afin de dmontrer que cette approche est applicable. Cette tude savre opportune et
trs utile pour lingnieur en pratique.
Mots cls : bton arm, poutres, dalles, renforcement, FRP, plaques, conception, flexion, cisaillement, mode de rupture,
adhsion.
[Traduit par la Rdaction]

Chaallal et al.

704

Received April 1, 1997.

Revised manuscript accepted February 4, 1998.
O. Chaallal,1 M.-J. Nollet, and D. Perraton. Department of
Construction Engineering, cole de Technologie Suprieure,
Universit du Qubec, 1100 Notre-Dame Street West,
Montral, QC H3C 1K3, Canada.
Written discussion of this article is welcomed and will be
accepted by the Editor until March 31, 1999 (address inside
front cover).
1

Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed.

Can. J. Civ. Eng. 25: 692704 (1998)

Numerous papers dealing with structural applications

of fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP) have been published recently (Neale and Labossire 1992; Mufti et al. 1991;
Saadatmanesh and Ehsani 1996; El-Badry 1996; Nanni and
Dolan 1993; Clarke 1993; Tan 1997). In particular, many of
these papers deal with reinforced concrete (RC) beams and
slabs strengthened in flexure by bonding FRP plates or strips
to their soffits (e.g., Meier 1992; Meier and Kaiser 1991;
Meier et al. 1992; Ziraba et al. 1994; Heffernan and Erki
1998 NRC Canada

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

Chaallal et al.

1996; An et al. 1991a, 1991b; Saadatmanesh and Ehsani

1990; Ritchie et al. 1991; Rostasy et al. 1992).
The strengthening of RC flexural elements with externally
bonded steel plates is a well-established technique which has
been used successfully in practice (e.g., Klaiber et al. 1987;
Maeda et al. 1980; Dussek 1980; Rostasy and Ranish 1981).
The success of this technique is due to its relative simplicity.
However, if correctly applied, the use of FRP plates for
strengthening RC flexural structures can result in significant
enhancements to both overall savings, including decreased
maintenance costs, and durability. It can improve serviceability (e.g., deflections and cracking) and the ultimate
strength of flexural members. Moreover, the plates can be
applied while the structure is in use with negligible changes
in the member dimensions. Other advantages include high
strength and stiffness-to-weight ratios, high degree of chemical inertness, controllable thermal expansion, damping characteristics, and electromagnetic neutrality. In engineering
practice, there may be many situations where flexural and
(or) shear upgrades are required. Improper initial design, increase in service loads, reduction of shear or flexural reinforcement areas due to corrosion, and damage to steel
reinforcement due to accidental impacts are examples of
such situations.
However, most of the studies on strengthening by external
bonding of FRP plates or strips are purely experimental.
Therefore, they do not lend themselves to a general design
procedure for at least two reasons. On the one hand, these
studies often fail to cover all influencing design parameters.
On the other, the design methods proposed in these papers
are scarce and quite often resort to calibration factors that
are only valid for those particular studies. Therefore, they
are not design oriented. To the authors knowledge, there exist no design guidelines that deal with different aspects of
engineering practice, such as shear and flexure, while taking
into account potential modes of failure.
To this end, this paper presents design guidelines within
the context of the Canadian Concrete Standard A23.3-94
(CSA 1994), hereafter called A23.3, for RC beams strengthened in flexure and in shear with FRP plates or strips. These
guidelines, aimed at the practising engineer, are based on
theoretical models which provide an insight into the different mechanisms of failure observed in experiments. Note
that the derivation of all the equations used for both flexure
and shear design is based on the following assumptions:
(1) small deformations, (2) no shear deformations, (3) no
tensile strength in concrete, (4) linear strain distribution
through the depth of the beam, and (5) full strain compatibility between the concrete and the FRP plates. It must be realized that the latter assumption cannot be achieved due to the
existence of the epoxy layer; however, this approximation
can be accepted for design purposes.
Before proceeding with FRP strengthening, it is essential
that the unstrengthened structure meet the following criteria
in order to preclude collapse in case of an accidental failure
resulting from fire, vandalism, or collision, or loss of
strengthening effectiveness:
[1]

M n 12
. (M D + M L )

[2]

. VD + 15
. VL
Vr 125

693

in case of strengthening for flexure only,

[3]

. M D + 15
. ML
M r 125

[4]

. (VD + VL )
Vn 12

in case of strengthening for shear only, and

[5]

. (M D + M L )
M n 12

[6]

Vn 12
. (VD + VL )

in case of strengthening for both flexure and shear; where

Mr and Vr are the factored moment and shear resistances of
the unstrengthened structure, respectively; Mn and Vn are the
nominal moment and shear resistances of the unstrengthened
structure, respectively; MD and ML are the moments due to
specified dead and live loads applied to the strengthened
structure, respectively; and VD and VL are the shear forces
due to specified dead and live loads applied to the strengthened structure, respectively. These criteria should ensure a
reasonable residual factor of safety of approximately 1.2 in
the event of a poststrengthening failure.

Experiments carried out on concrete beams strengthened

in flexure by external bonding of FRP plates have enabled
the identification of two general failure modes, namely classical and premature.
Classical failure modes
These failure modes are typically those encountered in
conventional concrete beams and unidirectional reinforced
slabs. They are usually attributed to either the tensile failure
of FRP plates or the crushing of concrete in compression before or after steel yielding. The criteria of these two modes
of failure are, respectively,
[7]

tbottom fuFRP

or tbottom uFRP

since the stressstrain curve of FRP laminates is linear and

elastic up to failure, and
[8]

c cu

where tbottom and tbottom are the tensile stress and corresponding strain at the outermost tensile fibers, respectively;
fuFRP and uFRP are the ultimate tensile strength and corresponding strain of the FRP plate, respectively; c is the compressive strain in the concrete at the outermost compressive
fiber; and cu is the ultimate compressive strain of concrete
(cu = 0.0035 according to A23.3). Note, however, that [7]
can only be true for very lightly reinforced sections. As a result, crushing of concrete will most likely occur before failure of the FRP strips.
Premature modes of failure
A close examination of a large number of observed modes
of failure showed that the plate peeling failure, originating
invariably at the end of the plate, is the mode occuring at the
earliest stage (Chaallal et al. 1997; Meier and Kaiser 1991;
Varastehpour and Hamelin 1996; Sharif et al. 1994). Again,
the plate peeling failure mode can be categorized into two
types of failure: (i) debonding of plate at the interface adja 1998 NRC Canada

694
Fig. 1. Different failure modes of a RC beam strengthened in
flexure with FRP plates: (a) debonding of FRP plate; and
(b) peeling off of concrete layer.

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 25, 1998

zero in the equations; and (ii) beams with tension and compression reinforcement.
With reference to Fig. 2, the four internal force components related to concrete, steel reinforcement in compression, steel reinforcement in tension, and FRP plates are,
respectively,
[9]

C c = 1 c fc (1c) b

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

[10a] C s = As (s fc 1c fc )
which can be written neglecting the term As (1c fc ) as
[10b] C s = As s fs
[11a] Ts = ss Es As
[11b] Ts = s fy As
[12]

if s < y
if s y

TFRP = FRP(FRP EFRP ) AFRP

where c and s are material resistance factors for concrete

and steel reinforcement, respectively, which can be found in
A23.3; FRP is the material resistance factor for FRP; Es and
s are the modulus of elasticity and the strain of the steel reinforcement, respectively; fy and y are the steel tensile yield
stress and corresponding strain, respectively; As and AFRP are
the cross-sectional areas of steel and FRP plate, respectively;
EFRP and FRP are the modulus of elasticity and the strain of
the FRP plate, respectively; fc is the maximum compressive
strength of concrete; s and fs are the compressive steel
strain and stress, respectively (fs = Ess if s < y and fs =
fy otherwise); 1 is the ratio of the uniform stress in the rectangular compression block to the maximum compressive
strength, given by
cent to the glue line (Fig. 1a), and (ii) ripping off of concrete cover (Fig. 1b). Debonding generally occurs when
the bonding adhesive is weak or not properly applied. On
the other hand, ripping off of concrete generally occurs
when adhesion is strong enough to prevent plate debonding, and originates at the plate curtailment. This type of
failure is far more common and occurs at the level of bottom reinforcement. It is induced by the formation of flexural shear cracks at strip ends (see Fig. 1b). It must be
noted that many anchoring schemes for flexural
strengthening, such as the use of anchor bolts and
wrap-around pieces, were developed and successfully
tested in an effort to delay or circumvent such failures
and thereby ensure ductile behaviour (e.g., Meier et al.
1992; Sharif et al. 1994; Deblois et al. 1992).

In this section, simplified analytical methods are developed to predict the resisting moments corresponding to classical failure modes described earlier. Figure 2 shows the
cross section of the rectangular beam that was used in the
analysis. Two cases can be encountered in practice:
(i) beams with tension reinforcement only, in which case the
value of the compression reinforcement, As, is to be set to

[13]

1 = 085
. 0.0015 fc 06
.

and 1 is the ratio of the depth of the rectangular compression block to the depth to the neutral axis c, given by
[14]

.
1 = 0.97 0.0015 fc 06

The material resistance factor for the FRP, FRP, may be

estimated based on the draft of CSA Standard
CAN/CSA-S806-96 (CSA 1996), clauses 6.2.6.2 and 6.2.6.3,
which specify a basic resistance factor of 0.85 for FRP. A resistance factor of 0.8 can then be obtained taking the 5th
percentile characteristic strength of the FRP plate to calculate the factored resistance.
With reference to Fig. 2, the strains s and s can be computed in terms of cu as
d c
[15a] s =
cu
c
c d
[15b] s =
cu
c
Neglecting the thickness of the FRP plate, tFRP, the strain in
the plate FRP in terms of cu is given by
h c
[16a] FRP =
cu
c
1998 NRC Canada

Chaallal et al.

695

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

Fig. 2. Stressstrain relationship in a strengthened beam with tension and compression steel reinforcement.

However, since FRP plates behave elastically and linearly up

to failure,
[16b] FRP

c
[18a] M r = C s(c d ) + C c c 1
2

fuFRP
= uFRP
EFRP

+ Ts(d c) + TFRP (h c)

It is desirable that the internal reinforcing steel As yield

before the ultimate strength is reached, that is, before concrete crushes. The steel tensile stress is therefore taken as fy.
Equating the compressive and tensile forces (see Fig. 2), and
taking into account [9][4], [15a], [15b], and [16a], results
in a quadratic equation in terms of c, that is
[17a] 1c fc 1bc2

or

c
[18b] M r = C s(c d ) + (Ts + TFRP C s) c 1
2

+ Ts(d c) + TFRP (h c)
noting that

+ [s As Escu s fy As + FRP AFRP EFRP cu ]c

[ s As Esd cu + FRP a FRP EFRP hcu ] = 0
if s < y
and
[17b] 1c fc 1bc2 + [ s fy( AsAs) + FRP AFRP EFRP cu ]c
FRP AFRP EFRP hcu = 0

[19]

Since it is assumed that the steel reinforcement As yields

before the ultimate strength is reached, the balanced reinforcement ratio ( FRP + s)bal and hence the balanced FRP
bal
ratio FRP
corresponding to c = cu and s = y may be of
interest. Under those conditions (see Fig. 2),
[20]

c
700
=
d
700
+ fy
bal

[21]

TFRP = FRP AFRP EFRP

if s y

where b and h are the width and the height of the beam cross
section, respectively; and d and d are the distances from the
extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the tension
steel reinforcement and to the compression steel reinforcement, respectively.
Having obtained c from [17a] and [17b], one should verify that s y as assumed, where s is computed by [15a]. If
such is not the case, the cross-sectional area of the FRP is
too great and should therefore be reduced to allow the steel
to yield and thereby improve the ductile behaviour of the rehabilitated section. The resisting moment with respect to the
neutral axis can then be computed as

C c = Ts + TFRP C s

fy h c

Es d c

and [19] can be written as follows:

[22]

1c fc (1c)b = s fy As
+ FRP AFRP EFRP

fy h c

s fs As
Es d c

Dividing both sides of [22] by bd and noting that (As/bd) =

s, ( As / bd) = s and (AFRP/bd) = FRP, it follows that
1998 NRC Canada

696

[23]

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 25, 1998

c

d bal

fy h c

FRP s fs s
Es d c
1c1 fc

s fy s + FRP EFRP

[26]

1/ 2

ks

bFRPt FRP
= V +
(h c)
M
EFRP bFRPt FRP

Iba

[27]

= k1

where kl is a constant calculated as

1/ 4

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

700
=
700 + fy

[28]

s and s can readily be obtained from the properties of the

beam to be strengthened; therefore the balanced FRP ratio
for beams with tension and compression reinforcement can
then be calculated from [23] as
[24]

700 f

bal
1 c 1 c + f f
FRP
=
s s s
s y s
700 + fy

fy h c

FRP EFRP
Es d c

where c is computed using [20]. Again, FRP should be infebal

rior to FRP
to ensure that steel reinforcement yields before
the crushing of the concrete. It is also possible, assuming a
plate width bFRP, to compute the FRP plate thickness at balbal
anced load conditions, t FRP
. The latter should be viewed as
the maximum plate thickness to ensure a ductile flexural
failure:
[25]

bal
t FRP

bal
bd FRP
=
bFRP

It may be worth noting that other types of ductility measurements, such as those based on shear overstrength capacity, have been used for members strengthened with FRP
(e.g., Maruyama 1997; Abdelrahman et al. 1997). The resisting moment corresponding to balanced failure can be calculated using [18a] and [18b] with c = [700/(700 + fy)]d. The
curvature at midspan, , can also be calculated by dividing
the concrete strain at the extreme compressive fiber by the
distance to the neutral axis c, that is, = cu/c.

This section deals with the evaluation of the interface

peak stresses at the location of plate curtailment, since, as
mentioned earlier, premature failure generally initiates at
this location. These stresses will be compared with the maximum allowable stresses corresponding to the two premature
failure modes considered in this paper.
Shear and normal stresses at plate curtailment
The shear and normal stresses and , respectively, at the
plate curtailment can conveniently be evaluated using Roberts approximate analytical solution assuming elastic behaviour (Roberts 1989). The analysis, developed on the basis of
a superposition of two-stage solutions, yields

k1 = t FRP

kn

4 EFRP I FRP

where ks and kn are the shear and normal stiffnesses, respectively, of the adhesive per unit length, given by
[29]

ks = G a

ba
ta

[30]

kn = Ea

ba
ta

and where V and M are the shear force and bending moment,
respectively, at plate curtailment; ba is the width of the adhesive; ta is the thickness of the adhesive; Ea is Youngs modulus of the adhesive; Ga is the shear modulus of the adhesive;
IFRP is the moment of inertia of the FRP plate; and I is the
moment of inertia of fully composite transformed section
equivalent to FRP.
Maximum allowable shear stresses corresponding to
premature failures
Case 1: debonding at interface
Debonding of the plate occurs in the direction parallel to
the adhesive line (Fig. 3), as the sustainable shear stress of
the adhesive combined to normal stress reaches its ultimate
value. This type of failure can conveniently be described by
the MohrCoulomb law:
[31]

debonding = C n tan

where debonding is the internal debonding shear stress at interface, C is the cohesion, n is the stress normal to the adhesive line, and is the angle of internal friction. Note that
C and depend on the properties of the adhesive and of the
concrete, as well as the surface preparation. They can be
determined experimentally using a single lap shear test
(i.e., n = 0) and a flexural beam test designed to fail by
debonding (i.e., = (i j) EFRPAFRP/bFRPdx, see Fig. 3, and
equating [31] and [27]). Such tests have been performed by
Varastehpour and Hamelin (1996) with different adhesive
and FRP types. The authors suggested a maximum shear
stress debonding
= 5.4 n tan 33, which can be written, takmax
ing into account [27] and [28], as
[32]

debonding
=
max

5.4
1 + k1 tan 33

where k1 is computed by [28].

Case 2: ripping off of the concrete cover
Ripping off of the concrete cover is initiated at the shear
diagonal cracks closest to plate cutoff, as illustrated in
Fig. 4. Considering an individual concrete tooth between
1998 NRC Canada

Chaallal et al.

697

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

Fig. 3. Internal stresses causing debonding.

Fig. 4. Typical ripping off of concrete cover: (a) shear cracking;

and (b) detail of one tooth.

of the longitudinal bar located closest thereto. Ripping off

occurs when the concrete reaches its tensile strength ft, that
is, when A = ft . Therefore, substituting [34] into [33] and
setting A = ft , the ultimate shear peeling stress that can be
supported may be written as
[35]

f L b

peeling
= t t
ult

6dc bFRP

increases with crack spacing and deIt is seen that peeling

ult
creases with FRP plate width.
The tensile strength of the concrete can be expressed
as a function of its compressive strength fc (Mirza et al.
1979):
[36]

ft = 053
.
fc

Primary cracks in reinforced concrete elements are initiated when the external load reaches the cracking load. As
loading is increased, additional cracks will form, and the
number of cracks will stabilize when the stress in the concrete no longer exceeds its tensile strength at locations farther away, regardless of the load increase. Experimental
results on beams in flexure showed that the average crack
spacing in the shear zone, Lt, avg, equals more or less the stirrups spacing in that zone (Park and Paulay 1975).

two adjacent cracks deforming like a cantilever under shear

stress (see Fig. 4b), the tensile stress at A, A, is given by
[33]

A =

MA
IA

Lt

2

where
[34]

M A = Lt bFRP dc

and where I A = bL3t / 12, Lt is the length of a tooth between

two adjacent cracks, bFRP is the width of the laminate, and dc
is the distance from the extreme tension fiber to the centre

The objective of this part of the study is to present a rational design procedure for RC beams or unidirectional slabs
strengthened with externally bonded FRP plates. This is believed to be particularly useful to the practising engineer in
charge of structural rehabilitations and repairs. For the procedure to be complete, it must consider the different modes
of failure outlined previously.
The problem of strengthening with bonded FRP plates
generally translates into the determination of the plate section (bFRP tFRP) required to achieve a targeted resisting moment without premature failure. However, the plate should
1998 NRC Canada

698

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 25, 1998

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

be as wide as possible, since an increase in bFRP reduces

tFRP. The latter has a marked influence on the failure mode,
since a lower tFRP results in a more ductile failure. It has
been shown, for instance, that as the plate thickness is increased, the shear and normal stresses at the end of the plate
will increase and will result in a premature failure due to
plate separation and then ripping off of concrete (Sharif et
al. 1994).
Clearly, the FRP plate width cannot exceed the width of
the concrete section. It can be selected such that (Ziraba et
al. 1994)
[37]

b 20 < bFRP < b

where b and bFRP are in millimetres. Having selected bFRP,

the design procedure should (i) determine the required FRP
plate thickness in flexure, and (ii) ensure that interface
stresses are within allowable limits to avoid premature plate
debonding or ripping off of concrete cover.
Design procedure for external FRP plate thickness in
flexure
The Canadian Concrete Standard method for determining
ultimate strength of RC elements is based on the ability of
the reinforcement to deform plastically. Although this holds
true for internal steel reinforcement, it is incompatible with
FRP materials, since their stressstrain curves do not present
a yield plateau. As a result, the design procedure is iterative.
It assumes values of c and tFRP and computes the flexural
resisting moment, from compatibility and equilibrium principles, using a trial and error process. Note that steel is asbal
sumed to have yielded and tFRP is maintained below t FRP
in
order to achieve ductility as well as efficiency (Heffernan
and Erki 1996).
Verification of interface stresses
The shear stresses developed at the plate curtailment
(see [26]) should remain below debonding
or peeling
, whichmax
ult
ever is smaller, that is,

[38]

b t
k
s

= V +
M FRP FRP (h c) all

EFRP bFRPt FRP

Iba

where all is the allowable stress that can be supported by the

interface:
[39]

; peeling
)
all = min (debonding
max
ult

(3) assume c = 0.0035 in the extreme compressive fiber of

concrete and compute suitable 1 and 1 from [13] and
[14], respectively;
(4) assume s y and determine the neutral axis depth c
from [17b]; verify that s y by [15a]; if not, start over
from step 1 assuming a smaller cross-sectional area for
the FRP plate;
(5) compute from [15b] and verify the assumption made in
step 4; if it holds true, proceed to step 6; if not, return to
step 4, assuming s < y and substituting [17a] for
[17b];
(6) compute FRP from [16a] and verify that FRP uFRP;
(7) calculate the resisting moment using [18a] and [18b];
(8) verify that the calculated resisting moment is equal to
the targeted value; if not, start again at step 1 using a
different value for AFRP (i.e., tFRP); iterate until the calculated Mr equals the targeted Mr;
bal
(9) compute t FRP
using [25], which should be greater than
tFRP;
(10) compute the allowable shear stress all using [39], [32],
and [35];
(11) compute the actual shear stress at the plate curtailment
using [38] and verify that all; if not, increase the
width or the development length of FRP plate or strip
(i.e., decrease M and V in [38]) or add mechanical fasteners.

Due to its brittle nature, shear failure can occur without warning. Therefore, RC members are designed in such
a way as to develop their full flexural strength, thereby
ensuring a ductile failure, prior to any other type of brittle
failure.
Shear strengthening schemes
This paper covers the following four plating patterns
which are commonly used by practising engineers: (i) inclined strips (Fig. 6a), (ii) vertical strips (Fig. 6b),
(iii) wings (Fig. 6c), and (iv) U sheet jackets (Fig. 6d).
Design equations
The shear capacity Vr of a RC member strengthened in
shear with externally bonded FRP plates, strips, or sheets
generally results from three component resistances: concrete
Vc, internal steel stirrup Vs, and FRP plate or strip VFRP.
Therefore, the following relation must be satisfied:
[40]

Vf Vr = Vc + Vs + VFRP

It follows then that

Step-by-step procedure and flow chart
The iterative overall procedure for calculating tFRP (assuming bFRP) for a targeted resisting moment for the rehabilitated section is summarized in Fig. 5. It includes the
following steps:
(1) verify that the unstrengthened structure meets
postfailure criteria expressed by [1] and [2] or [5] and
[6], as applicable;
(2) assume a cross-sectional area for the FRP plate and
hence tFRP (see [37]);

[41]

VFRP Vf (Vc + Vs)

where Vr and Vc are given in clauses 11.3.4 and 11.3.5 of

A23.3, and Vs and VFRP can be computed as follows.
Inclined and vertical side strips
The lateral strips are assumed to be inclined at an angle
( = 90 for vertical strips), in the same manner as steel stirrups. A free body diagram showing the internal forces in
FRP strips and in steel stirrups is presented in Fig. 7. Note
1998 NRC Canada

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

Chaallal et al.
699

Fig. 5. Flow chart of the design procedure for flexural strengthening.

1998 NRC Canada

700

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 25, 1998

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

Fig. 6. Plating patterns for shear strengthening: (a) inclined

strips, (b) vertical strips, (c) wings, and (d) U sheet jackets.

Fig. 7. Internal forces in FRP strips.

[45]

VFRP = FRP AvFRP fuFRP

d
sFRP

(sin + cos )

Combining [41] and [45], the required cross-sectional area

of FRP, AvFRP (or sFRP), for shear strengthening can readily
be computed as
[46]

that the diagonal cracks are assumed to be inclined at an angle . With reference to Fig. 7, Vs and VFRP, which are the
vertical components of the forces in the steel transverse bars
and FRP strips, can be derived as
[42]

Vs = n s s Av fy sin = s Av fy

(sin + cos tan )

s

and
[43]

VFRP = n FRP FRP AvFRP fuFRP sin

= FRP AvFRP fuFRP

(sin + cos tan )

sFRP

where sFRP is the spacing of FRP side strips, and ns and nFRP
are, respectively, the number of internal steel stirrups and
externally bonded FRP side strips pairs. By virtue of clauses
11.3.4 and 11.3.5 of A23.3, Vr and VFRP must satisfy
(Vs + VFRP ) 08
.
c fc bwd .
For design purposes a good approximation of distance
and angle (see Fig. 7) would be = d and = 45 (e.g.,
MacGregor 1988). Assuming these values for and yields
the following:
[44]
and

Vs = s Av fy

d
(sin + cos )
s

AvFRP =

(Vf Vc Vs) sFRP

FRP fuFRP d(sin + cos )

Vf sFRP
FRP fuFRP d(sin + cos )

where Vf is the targeted factored shear force that the

strengthened beam can sustain, and is computed from [45].
For vertical strips, where = 90, [46] simplifies to
[47]

AvFRP =

(Vf Vc Vs) sFRP

Vf sFRP
=
FRP fuFRP d
FRP fuFRP d

Internal steel stirrups are solidly anchored into the concrete; as a result, steel stirrups can develop their full yielding capacity. This may not hold true for externally bonded
plates or strips where debonding may occur. Therefore, care
should be taken that the forces developed in the lateral strips
or plates do not exceed the maximum shear stress (Fig. 8).
As seen in Fig. 8, the shear stress reaches a maximum at the
cutoff of the strip in a zone of high stress concentration. For
lateral strips inclined at an angle (see Fig. 8a), it follows
that
[48]

VFRP

2 FFRP d(sin + cos )

sFRP

b h

= 2 avg FRP FRP d(sin + cos )

sFRP
For vertical lateral strips, = 90 and [48] becomes (see
Fig. 8b)
1998 NRC Canada

Chaallal et al.

701

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

Fig. 8. Shear stress distribution in strips: (a) inclined side strips,

and (b) vertical side strips.

[49]

b h
1
2 FFRP d
= 2 avg FRP FRP d
sFRP
2

sFRP

VFRP

Note that the average shear stress avg can be taken as

[50]

avg =

debonding
max

where debonding
can be computed using [32].
max
Lateral wings and U sheet jackets
These cases are illustrated in Fig. 9 and can be viewed as
a special case of vertical strips whose spacing is nil. Therefore, the required AvFRP can be deduced from [47] as
[51]

AvFRP = t FRP d =

Vf Vc Vs
FRP fuFRP

and
[52]

VFRP = FRP AvFRP fuFRP

Again verifying the shear stress yields (see Fig. 9)

[53]

dh
VFRP = 2 FFRP = 2 avg w
2

for wings, and

Fig. 9. Shear stress distribution in (a) wings, and (b) U sheet

jackets.

[54]

VFRP = 2 FFRP = 2 ult

dh j

for U sheet jackets, where avg is given in [50], hw is the

height of the lateral wing, hj is the height of the sheet
jacket, and FFRP is the tensile force in the FRP due to shear.
In the case of shear strengthening by jacketing, ult can be
used instead of avg. This is due to the greater anchorage
length and the continuity offered by the geometry of the
sheet jacket, which minimize the effect of stress concentrations present in the plate curtailments in the tension stressed
zone.
Procedure
Given the targeted shear force Vf of the rehabilitated section or the increase in shear force provided by the strengthening, the following procedure can be adopted:
(1) verify that the unstrengthened structure meets the
postfailure criteria given in [3] and [4] or [5] and [6], as
applicable;
(2) determine the shear force component to be carried by
the FRP (see [41])
VFRP = Vf = Vf (Vc + Vs)
1998 NRC Canada

702

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

Fig. 10. Example beam to be strengthened. Dimensions in

millimetres.

(3) determine the required transverse FRP cross-sectional

area AvFRP (or spacing sFRP) using [46] and [47] for lateral strips or [51] for lateral wings and U sheet jackets;
(4) verify that the anchorage of the transverse FRP reinforcement is adequate and can sustain VFRP without failure using (i) [48] and [49] for diagonal and vertical
lateral strips, or (ii) [53] or [54] for lateral wings and U
sheet jackets.
Note that the anchorage by bonding may be supplemented
by the use of mechanical fasteners to enhance the bond or to
control the outward forces that can be present in side strips
or U sheet jackets, particularly in nonrectangular
cross-sectional shapes (e.g., Sato et al. 1997; Hutchinson et
al. 1997).

Problem
A simply supported beam spanning 8 m has a section as
shown in Fig. 10. It was originally designed to carry a factored maximum shear Vf = 190 kN and moment Mf = 380
kNm (specified dead loads = 15 kN/m, specified live loads
= 19 kN/m). The structural engineer may wish to strengthen
such a beam for shear and flexure using externally bonded
carbon (CFRP) plates, on the soffit for flexure and on the
sides for shear, to be able to carry an extra factored shear
force of 60 kN and an extra factored moment of 120 kNm
(i.e., an extra specified dead load is 4.8 kN/m and an extra
specified live load is 6 kN/m).
Design parameters
The design parameters are given as follows:

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 25, 1998

(1) Concrete: fc = 30 MPa, Ec = 24 647 MPa, c = 0.6, b =

350 mm, h = 600 mm, d = 535 mm.
(2) Internal steel reinforcement: As = 2400 mm2 (2M30 and
2M25), As = 400 mm2 (2M15), Av = M8 spaced at
270 mm, Es = 200 GPa, fy = 400 MPa, s = 1.27%, s =
0.21%, s = 0.85.
(3) Adhesive (interface layer): ta = 2 mm, Ea = 12.8 MPa,
Ga = 5.5 MPa.
(4) External CFRP plate: EFRP = 150 GPa, fuFRP =
2400 MPa, FRP = 0.8, uFRP = 1.4%.
Flexural strengthening
Following the procedure outlined previously for flexural
strengthening:
(1) Verify that the unstrengthened structure meets
postfailure criteria for flexure: MD = 158.4 kNm, ML =
200 kNm, and assuming Mn = 1.2Mr = 1.2Mf = 456
kNm, it follows from [5] that Mn = 465 kNm >1.2(MD
+ ML) = 430 kNm; hence the unstrengthened section
qualifies for strengthening in flexure.
(2) Compute the total moment to be carried out by the
strengthened beam: Mf = 500 kNm.
(3) Select the width of the CFRP plate using [37]: bFRP =
350 20 = 330 mm.
(4) Carrying out steps 18 from the step-by-step procedure,
the following results are obtained: c = 0.0035, 1 =
0.805, c = 203.5 mm, 1 = 0.895, tFRP = 1.0 mm, FRP =
0.0018, and Mr = 503.8 kNm.
bal
bal
(5) Compute t FRP
using [25]: t FRP
= 9.13 mm > tFRP =
1.0 mm; ductile failure is expected.
(6) Compute curvature: = cu/c = 0.0172m1.
(7) Compute allowable shear stress using [32], [35], and
[39]: debonding
= 3.89 MPa, peeling = 2.13 MPa with
max
L t = s = 270 mm, all = min (3.89; 2.13) = 2.13 MPa.
(8) Compute using [38]: = 0.029 MPa < all = 2.13 MPa.
Therefore, the design is adequate.
Shear strengthening
Following the procedure for shear strengthening:
(1) Verify that the unstrengthened structure meets
postfailure criteria for shear: VD = 79.2 kN, VL = 100
kN, and assuming Vn = 1.2Vr = 1.2Vf = 300 kN, it follows from [6] that Vn = 300 kN > 1.2(VD + VL) = 215
kN; hence the unstrengthened section qualifies for
strengthening in shear.
(2) Shear force component to be carried by CFRP plate: Vf
= 60 kN.
(3) Transverse CFRP cross-sectional area [47]: assuming
AvFRP = 2(50 mm 0.2 mm) = 20 mm2 and d =
535 mm, it follows that sFRP = (20 0.8 2400
535)/(60 103) = 340 mm.
(4) Verify anchorage [49]: assuming ta = 1 mm, bFRP =
50 mm, and hFRP = 600 mm, and using [32], it follows
that debonding
= 3.89 MPa; assuming avg = debonding
,
max
max
[49] yields

50 600
1
max
= 91 798 N
VFRP
= 2 1945
.

535
2
340

max
and VFRP = 60 kN < VFRP
= 92 kN.

1998 NRC Canada

Chaallal et al.

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

Strips (50 mm 0.2 mm) spaced at 300 mm are then adequate.

Abdelrahman, A., Rizkalla, S., and Tadros, G. 1997. Deformability

of flexural concrete members prestressed with FRP. Proceedings
of the 3rd International Symposium on Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures, Sapporo, Japan, Vol. 2,
pp. 767774.
An, W., Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M.R. 1991a. RC Beams
strengthened with FRP Plates. Part I: experimental study. ASCE
Journal of Structural Engineering, 117(11): 34173433.
An, W., Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M.R. 1991b. RC Beams
strengthened with FRP Plates. Part II: analysis and parametric
study. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 117(11):
34343455.
Chaallal, O., Nollet, M.-J., and Perraton, D. 1997. Experimental investigation of RC Beams strengthened with externally-bonded
CFRP Strips. Proceedings of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering (CSCE) Annual Conference, Sherbrooke, Que., 2730
May, Vol. 6, pp. 2130.
Clarke, J.L. (Editor). 1993. Alternative materials for the reinforcement and prestressing of concrete. Blackie Academic and Professional, An imprint of Chapman & Hall, Glasgow, United
Kingdom.
CSA. 1994. Design of concrete structures. CSA Standard
A23.3-94, Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale, Ont.
CSA. 1996. Design and construction of building components with
fiber reinforced plastics. Standard CAN/CSA-S806-96, Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale, Ont. In press.
Deblois, M., Picard, A., and Beaulieu, D. 1992. Renforcement de
poutres en bton arm laide de matriaux composites: tudes
thorique et exprimentale. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Advanced Composite Materials for
Bridges and Structures, Sherbrooke, Que. Edited by K.W. Neale
and P. Labossire. Canadian Society for Civil Engineering,
Montreal, Que., pp. 265275.
Dussek, I.J. 1980. Strengthening of bridge beams and similar structures by means of epoxy-resin-bonded external reinforcement.
Transportation Research Board, Crowthorne, United Kingdom,
Transportation Research Record 785, pp. 2124.
El-Badry, M. (Editor). 1996. Proceeding of the 2nd International
Conference on Advanced Composite Materials for Bridges and
Structures. Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Montreal,
Que., 1114 August.
Heffernan, P.J., and Erki, M.A. 1996. Equivalent capacity and efficiency of RC Beams strengthened with carbon fibre reinforced
plastic sheets. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 23(1):
2139.
Hutchinson, R., Abdelrahman, A., and Rizkalla, S. 1997. Shear
strengthening using CFRP Sheets for a prestressed concrete
highway bridge in Manitoba, Canada. In Proceedings of the
USCanadaEurope Workshop on Recent Advances in
Bridge Engineering, Zrich, 1115 July. Edited by U. Meier and
R. Betti. EMPA, Dbendorf, Switzerland, pp. 97104.
Klaiber, F.W., Dunker, K.F., Wipt, T.J., and Sanders, W.W. 1987.
Methods of strengthening existing highway bridges. Transportation Research Board, Crowthorne, United Kingdom, NCHRP
Research Report 293.
MacGregor, J.G. 1988. Reinforced concrete mechanics and design.
Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

703
Maeda, Y., Matsui, S., Shimada, I., and Dato, H. 1980. Deterioration and repairing of reinforced concrete slabs of highway
bridges in Japan. Technology Reports (Osaka University),
30(1599): 135144.
Maruyama, K. 1997. JCI activities on continuous fiber reinforced
concrete. Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on
Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures,
Sapporo, Japan, Vol. 1, pp. 312.
Meier, U. 1992. Carbon fiber-reinforced polymers: modern materials in bridge engineering. Structural Engineering International,
2: 712.
Meier, U., and Kaiser, H. 1991. Strengthening of structures with
CFRP laminates. Advanced composite materials in civil engineering structures. Proceedings of the Speciality Conference,
Las Vegas, Nev., 31 January 1 February, pp. 288301.
Meier, U., Deuring, M., Meier, H., and Shwegler, G. 1992.
Strengthening of structures with CFRP laminates: research and
applications in Switzerland. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges
and Structures, Sherbrooke, Que. Edited by K.W. Neale and P.
Labossire. Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Montreal,
Que., pp. 243251.
Mirza, S.A., Hatzinikolas, M., and MacGregor, J.G. 1979. Statistical descriptions of the strength of concrete. ASCE Journal of the
Structural Division, 105(ST6): 10211037.
Mufti, A.A., Erki, M.-A., and Jaeger, L.G. (Editors). 1991. Advanced
composite materials with applications to bridges state-of-the-art
report. Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Montral, Que.
Nanni, A., and Dolan, C.W. (Editors). 1993. Fiber-reinforced Plastic Reinforcement for Concrete Structures, Proceedings of the
International Symposium, ACI-SP138, Vancouver, B.C., March
2831.
Neale, K.W., and Labossire, P. (Editors). 1992. Proceedings of the
1st International Conference on Advanced Composite Materials
in Bridges and Structures, Sherbrooke, Que.
Park, R., and Paulay, T. 1975. Reinforced concrete structures. John
Wiley & Sons, New York.
Ritchie, P.A., Thomas, D.A., Le-Wu, L., and Connelly, G.M. 1991.
External reinforcement of concrete beams using fiberglass reinforced plastic. ACI Structural Journal, 88(4): 490500.
Roberts, T.M. 1989. Approximate analysis of shear and normal
stress concentration in the adhesive layer of plated RC beams.
The Structural Engineer, 67(12): 229233.
Rostasy, F., and Ranish, E. 1981. Strengthening of bridges with epoxy-bonded steel plates. Proceedings of the International Association of Bridges and Structural Engineering Symposium,
Repair and Rehabilitation of Bridges, Washington, D.C., Vol.
39, pp. 117122.
Rostasy, F., Hankers, C., and Ranisch, E. 1992. Strengthening
of R/C and P/C structures with bonded FRP plates. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Advanced
Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures, Sherbrooke,
Que. Edited by K.W. Neale and P. Labossire. Canadian Society
for Civil Engineering, Montreal, Que., pp. 253263.
Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M.R. 1990. Fiber composite plates
can strengthen beams. ACI Concrete International, March,
pp. 6571.
Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M.R. (Editors). 1996. Proceedings
of the 1st International Conference on Composites in Infrastructure, Tucson, Ariz., 1517 January.
Sato, Y., Katsumata, H., and Kobatake, Y. 1997. Shear strengthening of existing reinforced concrete beams by CFRP sheets. Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Non-Metallic
1998 NRC Canada

704

Varastehpour, H., and Hamelin, P. 1996. Analysis and study of failure mechanism of RC beam strengthened with FRP plate. In
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Advanced
Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures, 1114 August.
Edited by M. El-Badry. Canadian Society for Civil Engineering,
Montreal, Que., pp. 527536.
Ziraba, Y.N., Baluch, M.H., Basunbul, I.A., Sharif, A.M., Azad,
A.K., and Al-Suleimani, G.J. 1994. Guidelines toward the design of RC beams with external plates. ACI Structural Journal,
91(6): 639646.

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by CONCORDIA UNIV on 11/22/16

For personal use only.

(FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures, Sapporo, Japan,

Vol. 1, pp. 507514.
Sharif, A., Al-Sulaimani, G.J., Basunbul, I.A., Baluch, M.H., and
Ghaleb, B.N. 1994. Strengthening of initially loaded reinforced
concrete beams using FRP plates. ACI Structural Journal, 91(2):
160168.
Tan, K.-H. 1997. State-of-the-art report on retrofitting and
strengthening by continuous fibers South Asian Perspective.
Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on
Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures,
Sapporo, Japan, Vol. 1, pp. 1323.

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 25, 1998

1998 NRC Canada