infrastructures

Article
Experimental Analysis of the Strengthening of
Reinforced Concrete Beams in Shear Using
Steel Plates
Marília M. Bez Batti 1 , Bruno do Vale Silva 2 , Ângela Costa Piccinini 1, *,
Daiane dos Santos Godinho 1 and Elaine Guglielmi Pavei Antunes 1
1 Departamento de Engenharia Civil, Universidade do Extremo Sul Catarinense, Criciúma 88806-000,
SC, Brazil; mariliabezbatti@hotmail.com (M.M.B.B.); dss.engcivil@gmail.com (D.d.S.G.);
elainegpa@unesc.net (E.G.P.A.)
2 Departamento de Engenharia Civil, Faculdades Adamantinenses Integradas, Adamantina 17800-000,
SP, Brazil; dovalesilva@hotmail.com
* Correspondence: acp@unesc.net; Tel.: +55-48-3431-2558




Received: 31 July 2018; Accepted: 13 November 2018; Published: 16 November 2018


Abstract: In some situations, it is necessary to strengthen or rehabilitate a structure in the short

term, but before doing so, a critical analysis of the underlying causes is required to find the best
technique to solve the problem. The structural strengthening is used to increase an element’s ability
to resist a stress when it no longer meets the original conditions or new necessities of use due to
faults, deterioration, thermal variations, and lack of maintenance. The present article aims to evaluate
the strengthening of reinforced concrete beams with 0.75 mm thick SAE 1020 steel plates bonded
with epoxy-based structural adhesive. The steel plates were attached to the sheared area before and
after the beams were taken to the breaking point load. According to the results, it was possible to
conclude the effectiveness of the strengthening applied to healthy beams that had its bearing capacity
increased up to 50%. The beam that was strengthened after the shear, with a fissure that was restored
with epoxy-based structural adhesive, had its load bearing capacity increased by 49.2%. The beams
with fissures that were filled with mortar had their bearing capacity decreased by 58.70% if compared
with the reference beams, and thus they presented an unsatisfactory performance.

Keywords: concrete; shear; strengthening; steel plates

1. Introduction
Since ancient times, mankind has been worried about ways to adapt its buildings to meet its needs.
The development of new technologies is responsible for major transformations in the construction
industry, but failures in some structures may lead to unsatisfactory results. According to some studies,
De Souza et al. and Deghenhard [1,2], this set of factors is called structural deterioration and can
present different causes: From “natural” aging of the structure to accidents and even irresponsibility of
some professionals who choose to use materials that do not follow specifications, alleging, most of the
time, budget reasons.
A relatively new branch has emerged in the field of civil engineering. This branch is the study of
pathological manifestations in buildings, and, as the name suggests, it is responsible for investigating
the origins, causes, manifestations, and consequences of problems that may arise in buildings [1].
In several situations, it is necessary to strengthen or rehabilitate structures in the short term, but it
is necessary to analyze the causes of the damage to define the best techniques to recover the system.
According to some studies Metha et al. and Pimenta [3,4], the structural strengthening is used to
increase the structural element’s ability to resist a stress when it no longer meets the original conditions

Infrastructures 2018, 3, 52; doi:10.3390/infrastructures3040052 www.mdpi.com/journal/infrastructures

Infrastructures 2018, 3, 52 2 of 10

or new necessities of use due to design or design failures, alteration of a building’s function, natural
deterioration, thermal variations in concrete, lack of maintenance, and other reasons.
Reinforcement can increase the strength of the structural part against bending and shear forces in
addition to increasing stiffness and decreasing its deformability [5].
In the 1960s, researchers in France [6,7] began to test the structural strengthening of reinforced
concrete beams using steel plates bonded with epoxy resin. These studies were based on the resistance
properties of steel and the adhesion offered by epoxy resins [8].
When applied under normal conditions, this type of strengthening has a relatively low cost and
a great efficiency level. However, there are some disadvantages, such as the resin’s low fire resistance
and the high weight of the steel plates and its possibility of corrosion.
According to Pimenta [4], the reinforcement allows a monolithic bond between the steel plate and
the concrete structure causing the reinforced structure to work under predicted stresses in calculation
and thus to continue to work satisfactorily over time.
According to Appleton et al. [9], the strength of the steel used in the reinforcement should not be
of very high strength, so high deformation is not required to mobilize its strength.
Higashi [5] states that in order to implement the reinforcement, the structure of all removable
permanent and variable actions should be alleviated in order to ensure that the steel plates are
mobilized for the service loads.
Moreover, according to Appleton et al. [9], the reinforcement project should include the sizing
and an analytical evaluation of the effectiveness of the intervention, and, after the execution of
the reinforcement, load tests must be performed for the service actions to prove the result of
the intervention.
In addition to the advantages such as rapid execution, which, through a qualified professional,
becomes the most cost-effective reinforcement of the market, there is also an insignificant increase
in the section of reinforced concrete that may be coated by mortar after curing and thus rendering it
imperceptible; the reinforcement allows a significant improvement of the resistant capacity (up to 50%);
and intervention can occur without interruption of the use of the structure and through non-demolition
of the structural elements [10].
Meier et al. and Täljsten [11,12] indicate that although steel is the most widely reported reinforcing
material, it also has some significant drawbacks. Among them are the systems with high weight,
making the manipulation and placement difficult; the corrosivity of the steel on the surface of the joint
between the steel and the adhesive; and the need to create connecting joints between plates due to the
limitations of the dimensions for their transport. In addition to the above disadvantages, Branco [10]
reports on the sensitivity to atmospheric agents, which may cause glue deterioration with increasing
temperatures and the possibility of displacement of the plate end if the execution had weaknesses.
Beams and slabs may have reinforcements to solve problems caused both by stresses due to the
bending moment and stresses due to shear force. In the case of the action of the bending moment,
the fault stems from the insufficiency of the tensile strength ratio causing fissures in the central region
of the beam and can lead the piece to ruin, or from the insufficiency of the reinforcement in the
compressed zone, the upper part of the beam. In the case of a deficiency in shear force, failures can
occur due to a lack or misplacement of the transverse reinforcement [13].
Figure 1 presents the technique related to reinforcement with steel plates due to deficiencies in the
shear force and indicates the two possibilities: The first with the steel plates and the epoxy resin and
the second with the steel plates, epoxy resin, and the bushings expansive (Sousa [14] apud Higashi [5]).
There are several techniques for structural strengthening, but this study was based on the research
developed by Almeida [15]. Thus, the objective of this experimental procedure was to analyze the load
capacity of healthy beams and beams after rupture. The analysis took into consideration the structural
strengthening with 0.75 mm thick SAE 1020 steel plates bonded with epoxy-based structural adhesive
in the shear areas of the beams to stabilize or increase the beam shear resistance.
Infrastructures 2018, 3, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 10
Infrastructures 2018, 3, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 10

epoxy-based structural adhesive in the shear areas of the beams to stabilize or increase the beam shear
epoxy-based structural adhesive in the shear areas of the beams to stabilize or increase the beam shear
resistance. 2018, 3, 52
Infrastructures 3 of 10
resistance.

Figure 1. Strengthening with steel plates due to shear force with and without bushes, respectively. 1
Figure
Figure 1. Strengthening with
1. Strengthening withsteel
steelplates
platesdue
duetotoshear
shearforce
forcewith
withand
andwithout
without bushes,
bushes, respectively.
= steel plate; 2 = resin; 3 = bushing; ts = plate thickness; tg = epoxy resin thickness; hs respectively. 1
= plate height;
1= =steel
steelplate;
plate;2 2= =resin;
resin;3 3==bushing;
bushing;tsts==plate
platethickness;
thickness;tgtg==epoxy
epoxyresin
resinthickness;
thickness; hs
hs == plate
plate height;
height;
Sousa [14] apud Higashi [5].
Sousa
Sousa [14]
[14] apud
apud Higashi
Higashi [5].
[5].
2. Materials and Methods
2. Methods
2. Materials and Methods
The experimental
The experimental designdesign ofof this
this work
work waswas divided
divided intointo two
two phases.
phases. The first phase corresponded
corresponded
The experimental design of
to a pilot of the four-point bending test this work was divided into two phases. The first phase stirrups
correspondeda
to test with
with twotwo beams.
beams. One Onebeam beamcontained
containedthree three stirrupsand and
to a pilotofof90the four-point bending test with two beams. One beam30contained three stirrups and a
aspacing
spacing of 90cm, cm,andandthetheother
otherbeam
beamcontained
containedsix sixstirrups
stirrupsspaced
spaced 30cm cmapart.
apart.
spacingTheof 90 cm,phase
second and the other beam
followed the contained sixof
manufacture stirrups spaced 30 cm apart.
The second phase followed the manufacture of fivefive standard
standard beams
beams containing
containing six stirrups
six stirrups in eachin
The
eachspaced second
one spaced phase followed the manufacture of five standard beams containing six stirrups in
one 30 cm30 cm apart.
apart. Two of Two of these
these beamsbeams wereas
were used used as reference
reference and stressed
and stressed to the to the breaking
breaking point,
each
point,one
and spaced 30 cmload,
maximum apart. Two ofdisplacements,
vertical these beams were and used
fissuresas reference and stressed to the breaking
and maximum load, vertical displacements, and fissures were were obtained.
obtained. These These
two twobeams beams plusplus
the
point,
the and(ruptured
pilot maximum in load,
the vertical displacements,
previous phase of the and fissures
work), called werehad
VR, obtained.
their These two
fissures beams
filled, two plus
with
pilot (ruptured in the previous phase of the work), called VR, had their fissures filled, two with mortar
the pilotpaste,
mortar (ruptured
calledinandthe previous
VRP-A, and withphase
the otherof the work), called VR, had their fissures filled, two were
with
paste, called VRP-A, the other epoxywith resin,epoxy
calledresin,
VRP-E. called
AfterVRP-E.
that, theyAfter
were that, they
strengthened
mortar paste,
strengthened called
with VRP-A,
steel and
plates. the
The threeother with
remaining epoxy resin,
beams, called
called VRP-E.
VRF, were After that, they were
with steel plates. The three remaining beams, called VRF, were strengthened in strengthened
the shear areainwith the
strengthened
shear area with
withSAE steel
0.751020 plates.
mmsteel The
thickplates
SAE 1020 three remaining
steelwith
plates beams,
bonded called VRF, were strengthened in the
0.75 mm thick bonded epoxy resin.with epoxy resin.
shearThearea with 0.75 mm thick SAE 1020 steel plates bondedcm with epoxy resin.
The beams were made with cross-sections cross-sections of of 12
12 ××20 20 cmand anda alength
lengthofof190 190cm cmcontaining
containing6
The
stirrups beams
of 5 mm were
in made
diameter with
and cross-sections
a spacing of of
30 12 ×
cm. 20 cm
Theses and a
beams length
did of 190
not meet cmthe containing
criteria in 6
in
6 stirrups of 5 mm in diameter and a spacing of 30 cm. Theses beams did criteria
stirrups of 5 mm
specification NBR in 6118
diameter and a spacing of 30 cm. was Theses beams did shear
not meet the criteria in
specification NBR 6118 [16] [16] because
because the intention
the intention was to generatetoshear generate
rupture. For therupture. For the
reinforcements,
specification
reinforcements, NBR 6118
we used [16] because
CA-50 steel the
and followedintention was to generate shear rupture. For the
we used CA-50 steel and followed the criteria of NBRthe 6118criteria of NBR
[16]. Thus, two 6118steel[16].
barsThus,
of 10 two
mm steel bars
diameter
reinforcements,
of 10 mm we used
diameter were CA-50
used steel
for and followed
flexural the criteria
reinforcement of2 NBR
totaling an 6118
area of [16].
1.6 Thus,
cm two steel
2 of steel. bars2
Figure
were used for flexural reinforcement totaling an area of 1.6 cm of steel. Figure 2 2shows the details
of 10 mm
shows thediameter
details ofwere
the used for flexuralinreinforcement
reinforcements totaling an area offive
1.6 cm of steel. Figure 2
of the reinforcements in the beams. Figure the beams.
3 shows theFigure 3 shows
five beams C25the (the beams
class which C25represents
(the class
shows
which the details of the
representscompressive reinforcements
the characteristic in the
compressive beams. Figure
strength 3 shows
of concreted. the
25 MPa atThe five beams
28 concrete C25
days) concreted. (the class
the characteristic strength of 25 MPa at 28 days) was madeThe at
which represents
concrete was the characteristic
made Usinado,
at Concretar compressive
Concreto Usinado, strength of 25
Araranguá-SC, MPa at
Brazil 28 days)
and thewithconcreted.
concrete The
Concretar Concreto Araranguá-SC, Brazil and the concrete was densified the aidwasof
concrete
densifiedwas with made
the aidatofConcretar
immersion Concreto
vibrators. Usinado, Araranguá-SC, Brazil and the concrete was
immersion vibrators.
densified with the aid of immersion vibrators.

Figure 2. Details
Figure 2. Details of
of the
the reinforcements
reinforcements in
in beams.
beams.
Figure 2. Details of the reinforcements in beams.
Infrastructures 2018, 3, 52 4 of 10
Infrastructures 2018, 3, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 10

Infrastructures 2018, 3, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 10

Figure 3. Beams after concreting.

Figure 3. Beams after concreting.

The slump
slump testtestwaswasperformed
performedininthe thefresh-state
fresh-state following
following thethe
recommendations
recommendations of NBR 61186118
of NBR [16],
which established
[16], which established
The slump
values
test wasvalues
of 10 ± 2 cm.
of 10in±the
performed
The
2 cm. result for
The result
fresh-state
the concrete
for thethe
following
was
concrete 11 cm.
was 11 cm.of NBR 6118
recommendations
[16],On theestablished
the
which same day,
same day,values
fourteen
fourteen cylindrical
cylindrical
of 10 specimens
± 2 cm. Thespecimens
result for the(Ø(Ø 1010 × was
× 20
concrete 20
cm)cm)
11werewere
cm. molded
molded according
according to
to the
the specifications
specifications
On the sameof NBRof NBR
day, 57385738
fourteenand and
NBR NBR5739
cylindrical 5739 [17,18]
[17,18]
specimens toto
(Ø obtain
obtain
10 the
the
× 20 cm) axial
axial
were compressive
compressive
molded strength
accordingstrength
to the of of the
concrete after 7,
specifications of 14,
NBR 28,5738
andand
35 days.
NBR
days. Diametrical
5739 [17,18] to compression
obtain the and
axial modulus
compressive
modulus of elasticity
strength of tests
the were
performed at 28 days according to NBR 7722 and
concrete after 7, 14, 28, and 35 days. Diametrical and NBR
NBR 8522
compression 8522 [19,20].
and modulus
[19,20]. of elasticity tests were
performed
After 28 at 28 days
days accordingthe
following to NBR 7722the
curing, andbeams
NBR 8522 were [19,20].
unmolded and taken to an experimental
Afterlaboratory
structures 28 days following the curing,
(Laboratório the beamsde
Experimental were unmolded
Estruturas and of
(LEE) taken to an experimental
Universidade do Extremo Sul
structures laboratory (Laboratório Experimental de Estruturas (LEE) of Universidade do Extremo Sul
Catarinense (UNESC)) for testing.
Catarinense (UNESC)) for testing.
We used twenty 750 µm thick SAE 10201020steel plates, with with
dimensions of 5 × of 20 cm××
20 5cm× (width length)
We used
used twenty
twenty 750 750 μm
μm thick
thick SAESAE1020 steelsteel plates,
plates, dimensions
with dimensions of 5 × 20 cm (width (width ×
and a
length) spacing
and a of 5
spacing cm between
of 5 cm them.
between The
them. plates
The were
plates applied
were in the
applied shear
in
length) and a spacing of 5 cm between them. The plates were applied in the shear area on both faces the area
shear on both
area on faces
both of the
faces
beam.
ofofthe Figure
thebeam. 4 shows
beam. Figure
Figure the application
44shows
shows theapplication
the of of
application thethe
ofsteel
the plates
steelsteel
plates following
plates thediagrams
following
following the diagrams
the diagramsof the
of the ofshear
shear and
the shear
bending
and moment
andbending
bending moment of
moment of the beam.
ofthe
thebeam.
beam.

Figure 4. Scheme
Figure 4. ofthe
Scheme of theapplication
application of steel
of steel plates
plates versus
versus the shear
the shear diagram
diagram and the
and versus versus the bending
bending
moment diagram.
moment diagram.
Figure 4. Scheme of the application of steel plates versus the shear diagram and versus the bending
For thebonding
For the
moment bonding
diagram. of steel
of the the steel
plates,plates, an EPstructural
an EP (epoxy) (epoxy)adhesive
structural
was adhesive
used. It waswas used.® It was
a bautech
bautech® epoxy-based
a epoxy-based bi-component bi-component that wasand
that was pre-dosed pre-dosed
presentedandthepresented
followingthe following characteristics:
characteristics: high
adhesion,
high For mechanical,
adhesion, and
mechanical,
the bonding chemical resistance,
andplates,
of the steel chemical impermeability
an EPresistance, to water
impermeability
(epoxy) structural and oil,
adhesivetowas total cure
water
used. in
and 7 days,
oil, atotal
It was cure
bautech ®

inand
7 initial and
days, hardness in 12
initial h. The application
hardness in 12 h. of
The theapplication
structural adhesive
of the followed
structural theadhesive
manufacturer’s
followed the
epoxy-based bi-component that was pre-dosed and presented the following characteristics: high
recommendations
manufacturer’s which specifies that
recommendations the surface must be the
free surface
from dust, release agents,
fromor any release
adhesion, mechanical, and chemicalwhich specifies
resistance, that
impermeability must
to water andbe oil,
freetotal dust,
cure in 7 days,
substance that may impair the adhesion. In order to improve the adhesion before bonding, grooves
agents,
and or hardness
initial any substance
in 12 that may
h. The impair the
application of adhesion. In order
the structural to improve
adhesive followedthe
theadhesion before
manufacturer’s
recommendations which specifies that the surface must be free from dust, release agents, or any
substance that may impair the adhesion. In order to improve the adhesion before bonding, grooves
Infrastructures 2018, 3, 52 5 of 10

Infrastructures 2018, 3, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 10

bonding, grooves were made in the steel plates and in the concrete beams with the aid of an N50
were made in the steel plates and in the concrete beams with the aid of an N50 sandpaper. The epoxy-
sandpaper. The epoxy-based structural adhesive was applied with a maximum thickness of 2.0 mm
based structural adhesive was applied with a maximum thickness of 2.0 mm and with the aid of
and with the aid of spatulas. Figure 5 shows the application of the structural adhesive on the steel
spatulas. Figure 5 shows the application of the structural adhesive on the steel plates, the bonding
plates, the bonding
process, and the process, and the
concrete beam concrete
after beam after the bonding.
the bonding.

FigureFigure 5. Beam
5. Beam strengthening. (a)
strengthening. (a)Application
Applicationof the structural
of the adhesive.
structural (b) Concrete
adhesive. beam afterbeam
(b) Concrete
bonding.
after bonding.

The The beams were moved 35 days after concreting and met the minimum requirement of 24 h
beams were moved 35 days after concreting and met the minimum requirement of 24 h
without moving them after the bonding of steel plates and 7 days before releasing of the load. For the
without moving them after the bonding of steel plates and 7 days before releasing of the load. For the
four-point bending test, we used a steel reaction frame with a hydraulic cylinder and a load cell with
four-point bending test, we used a steel reaction frame with a hydraulic cylinder and a load cell
a maximum reading capacity of 500 kN attached to its base. To measure the beam deflection, a
with displacement
a maximum reading
transducercapacity
(LinearofVariable
500 kN Differential
attached toTransformer—LVDT)
its base. To measurewiththe abeam deflection,
maximum
a displacement transducer (Linear Variable Differential Transformer—LVDT) with a maximum
reading of 100 mm was located in the center of the beam. These devices were connected to the reading
of 100Quantum
mm wasX located
® in the center
data acquisition ofthat
system the used
beam. TheseEasy
Catman devices
® were both
software, connected . Quantum X®
to the
from HBM ®

®
data acquisition system that used Catman Easy software, both from HBM . ®
3. Results
3. ResultsTable 1 presents the results of resistance during the ages of curing executed by molding of
specimens.
Table 1 presents the results of resistance during the ages of curing executed by molding
of specimens.
Table 1. Results of resistance gain control tests over age.

Compression
Table 1. Results Tensile
of resistance gain Strength
control testsbyover
Diametral
age. Modulus of
Age (Days)
Resistance (MPa) Compression (MPa) Elasticity (MPa)
7 Compression
15.9 Tensile -Strength by Modulus
- of
Age (Days)
7 Resistance
16.5 (MPa) Diametral Compression
- (MPa) Elasticity
- (MPa)
7 7 15.1
15.9 -
- -
-
Average (standard deviation) 15.8 (0.7)
7 16.5 - -
7 14 19.3
15.1 -
- -
-
14 19.7 - -
Average (standard deviation) 15.8 (0.7)
14 18.7 - -
14
Average (standard deviation) 19.219.3
(0.5) - -
14 28 19.7
22.9 3.03- 35.5 -
14 28 18.7
25.3 2.87- 36.7 -
Average (standard
28 deviation) 19.2 (0.5)
23.9 3.02 34.8
Average (standard
28 deviation) 24.022.9
(1.2) 2.97 (0.09)
3.03 35.7 (0.9)
35.5
28 35 26.7
25.3 -2.87 - 36.7
28 35 28.7
23.9 -3.02 - 34.8
Average (standard deviation) 27.7 (1.4)
Average (standard deviation) 24.0 (1.2) 2.97 (0.09) 35.7 (0.9)
35 26.7 - -
35 28.7 - -
Average (standard deviation) 27.7 (1.4)
Infrastructures 2018,2018,
Infrastructures 3, x FOR
3, 52PEER REVIEW 6 of 10
6 of 10

Table 2 presents the nomenclature used to represent the variables in the study.
Table 2 presents the nomenclature used to represent the variables in the study.
Table 2. Nomenclature used for each type of beam.
Table 2. Nomenclature used for each type of beam.
Nomenclature Description
VR Nomenclature
Reference Beam Description
VRF Strengthened Healthy Beam
VR Reference Beam
VRP-E
VRF Beam strengthened
Strengthened after the shear
Healthy Beam (fissure filling with epoxy-based structural adhesive)
VRP-A
VRP-E Beam strengthened after the shear (fissure
Beam strengthened after the shear fillingfilling
(fissure with with
Mortar AC III) structural adhesive)
epoxy-based
VRP-A Beam strengthened after the shear (fissure filling with Mortar AC III)
By applying the load until the beams reached their breaking point, we have obtained the
maximum displacement according to the regulation, which specifies that this value should be
By applying the load until the beams reached their breaking point, we have obtained the maximum
obtained from dividing its length by 250 (L/250). The reference beams (VR) had their rupture mode
displacement according to the regulation, which specifies that this value should be obtained from
by shear at the breaking point with a maximum load average of 45.20 kN. The strengthened healthy
dividing its length by 250 (L/250). The reference beams (VR) had their rupture mode by shear at the
beams, with steel plates, had their rupture mode by bending, showing that the strengthening behaved
breaking point with a maximum load average of 45.20 kN. The strengthened healthy beams, with steel
as expected.
plates, had their rupture mode by bending, showing that the strengthening behaved as expected.
Three beams with fissure filling after rupture, one beam with epoxy adhesive (VRP-E), and two
Three beams with fissure filling after rupture, one beam with epoxy adhesive (VRP-E), and two
with mortar (VRP-A), when subjected to the four-point flexural test again, presented very different
with mortar (VRP-A), when subjected to the four-point flexural test again, presented very different
shear ruptures. In VRP1-E, a new fissure was opened, and the beam supported a 67.44 kN load.
shear ruptures. In VRP1-E, a new fissure was opened, and the beam supported a 67.44 kN load.
However, VRP2-A and VRP3-A presented rupture in the same fissure that was opened in the first
However, VRP2-A and VRP3-A presented rupture in the same fissure that was opened in the first test
test and supported an average of 28.58 kN.
and supported an average of 28.58 kN.
Figure 6 presents the load versus displacement curves during the bending test.
Figure 6 presents the load versus displacement curves during the bending test.

Figure
Figure 6. Load
6. Load diagram
diagram versus
versus displacement.
displacement.

Table
Table 3 presentsthe
3 presents theanalysis
analysis of
of the
theresults
resultsforfor
each beam
each and and
beam its maximum displacement
its maximum compared
displacement
to the load obtained in the maximum displacement as specified by the regulation (L/250).
compared to the load obtained in the maximum displacement as specified by the regulation (L/250).
Infrastructures 2018, 3, 52 7 of 10

Infrastructures
Table 3.2018, 3, x FOR
Results PEER REVIEW
of maximum displacement and load in the maximum displacement (according to7 of 10
the specification).
Table 3. Results of maximum displacement and load in the maximum displacement (according to the
specification). L/250—Displacement 7.2 mm Rupture
Nomenclature
LoadL/250—Displacement
(kN) Reading7.2 mm Load (kN) Displacement (mm)
Rupture
Nomenclature
VR1 41.5
Load (kN) After the rupture
Reading 43.2(kN) Displacement
Load 6.5 (mm)
VR2VR1
* - 41.5 After -the rupture 51.2
43.2 6.5-
VR3VR2 * 43.1 - After the rupture
- 41.2
51.2 7.4
-
Average (standardVR3deviation) 42.3 (1.1)
43.1 After the rupture 45.241.2(5.3) 6.9
7.4(0.6)
Average VRF1
(standard deviation) 45.5
42.3 (1.1) Before the rupture 71.7(5.3)
45.2 6.920.3
(0.6)
VRF2VRF1 46.7 45.5 Before thethe
Before rupture
rupture 65.2
71.7 18.3
20.3
VRF3VRF2 50.3 46.7 Before thethe
Before rupture
rupture 66.7
65.2 33.3
18.3
VRF3
Average (standard deviation 50.3 Before the rupture 66.7 33.3
47.5 (2.5) 67.8 (3.4) 24.0 (8.1)
D.P.) deviation D.P.)
Average (standard 47.5 (2.5) 67.8 (3.4) 24.0 (8.1)
VRP1-e
VRP1-e 48.3 48.3 - - 67.4
67.4 26.2
26.2
VRP2-a
VRP2-a 28.2 28.2 Before the rupture
Before the rupture 31.8
31.8 9.8
9.8
VRP3-a - Before the rupture 25.4 4.5
VRP3-a - Before the rupture 25.4 4.5
Average (standard deviation
Average (standard deviation D.P.) 38.2 38.2
(14.2)(14.2) 41.5
41.5(22.7)
(22.7) 13.5(11.3)
13.5 (11.3)
D.P.)
* In VR2, it was not possible to get the displacement reading due to an equipment failure.
* In VR2, it was not possible to get the displacement reading due to an equipment failure.

Each beamgroup
Each beam groupshowed
showed different
different behaviors.
behaviors. The The reference
reference beamsbeams (VR1,and
(VR1, VR2, VR2, and
VR3) VR3)
obtained
obtained rupture values on the shear area, while the strengthened healthy beams,
rupture values on the shear area, while the strengthened healthy beams, i.e., those reinforced with i.e., those
reinforced
steel plateswith
(VRF1,steel plates
VRF2, and(VRF1,
VRF3),VRF2, andrupture
obtained VRF3), values
obtained rupture
in the values
bending inand
area, the the
bending
beamsarea,
that
and
werethe beams that after
strengthened werethestrengthened after the
rupture obtained rupture
rupture obtained
values rupture
on the shear values
area. on the shear area.
Figure
Figure 77 presents
presents the
the reference
reference beams
beams after
after the
the test.
test.

Figure 7.
Figure Reference beams
7. Reference beams after
after the
the test:
test: (a)
(a)VR1;
VR1; (b)
(b) VR2;
VR2; and
and (c)
(c) VR3.
VR3.

Figures 8–10
Figures 8–10 present
present the
the healthy
healthy beams
beams strengthened
strengthened with
with steel
steel plates
plates after
after the
the test.
test.

Figure 8.
Figure BeamVRF1
8. Beam VRF1after
after the
the test.
test. (a)
(a)Beam
Beamoverview.
overview. (b)
(b) Fissure
Fissure details.
details.
Infrastructures 2018, 3, 52 8 of 10
Infrastructures 2018,
Infrastructures 2018, 3,
3, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 88 of
of 10
10

Figure 9.
Figure 9.
Figure Beam VRF2
Beam VRF2
9. Beam after
VRF2 after the
after the test.
the test. (a)
test. (a) Beam
(a) Beam overview.
Beam overview. (b)
overview. (b) Fissure
(b) Fissure details.
Fissure details.
details.

Figure 10.
Figure 10. Beam
Beam VRF3
VRF3 after
after the
the test.
test. (a)
(a) Beam
Beam overview.
overview. (b)
(b) Fissure
Fissure details.
details.

Figure 11
Figure 11 presents
presents the
the results
results of
of the
the beams,
beams, called
called VRP-E
VRP-E and
and VRP-A,
VRP-A, that
that had
had the
the fissures
fissures filled
filled
and were reinforced with
reinforced with
and were reinforced steel
with steel plates
steel plates after
plates after rupture.
after rupture.
rupture.

11. Strengthened
Figure 11.
Figure Strengthened beams after the
beams after the test:
test: (a)
(a) VRP1-E;
VRP1-E; (b)
(b) VRP2-A; and (c)
VRP2-A; and (c) VRP3-A.
VRP3-A.

4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
Conclusions
4.
The beams
beams considered
The beams consideredas asreference
reference(VR)(VR)had hadtheir mode
their mode of of
shear
shearrupture. It was
rupture. observed
It was
was observedthatthat
the
The considered as reference (VR) had their mode of shear rupture. It observed that
strengthened healthy
the strengthened
strengthened healthy beams
healthy beams obtained
beams obtainedsatisfactory
obtained satisfactory results and
satisfactory results had
results and their
and had load bearing
had their
their load capacity
load bearing increased
bearing capacity
capacity
the
by 50% compared
increased by by 50% to the
50% compared
compared toreference
to the beams,
the reference which
reference beams, was in
beams, which accordance
which was was in to expectations
in accordance
accordance to and to Branco
to expectations
expectations and and[10].
to
increased to
BrancoThe strengthened
[10]. beam that had its fissure filled with structural adhesive (VRP-E) presented an
Branco [10].
increase
Theof 49.20% in itsbeam
strengthened load that
bearinghadcapacity
its fissure
fissurein filled
relation
withto structural
the reference beams.(VRP-E)
adhesive However, the beams
presented an
The strengthened beam that had its filled with structural adhesive (VRP-E) presented an
that had
increase oftheir fissures
49.20% in itsfilled
load with
bearing mortar
capacity(VRP-A),
in presented
relation to the a decrease
reference of 58.70%
beams. in
However, their
thebearing
beams
increase of 49.20% in its load bearing capacity in relation to the reference beams. However, the beams
capacity
had in
that had relation
their to the
fissures reference
filled beams (VRP-A),
with mortar
mortar and thus presenting
presented aaandecrease
unsatisfactory
decrease of 58.70%
58.70%performance.
in their
their bearing
bearing
that their fissures filled with (VRP-A), presented of in
The
capacity in epoxy-based
in relation
relation toto thestructural
the reference adhesive
reference beams
beams and was
and thus not difficult
thus presenting
presenting anto apply, since
an unsatisfactory we performance. the
have
unsatisfactory performance.followed
capacity
manufacturer’s specifications
The epoxy-based
epoxy-based structural for bonding
structural adhesive
adhesive was 0.75 mm
was not thick
not difficultSAE
difficult to 1020
to apply,steel
apply, sinceplates.
since we This
havestrengthening
we have followed the the
The followed
contributed
manufacturer’s to an increase
specifications in the
forresistance
bonding of the
0.75 mmbeams subjected
thick SAE 1020to the four-point
steel plates. bending
This test.
strengthening
manufacturer’s specifications for bonding 0.75 mm thick SAE 1020 steel plates. This strengthening
contributed to
contributed to an
an increase
increase in in the
the resistance
resistance of of the
the beams
beams subjected
subjected to to the
the four-point
four-point bending
bending test.
test.
Infrastructures 2018, 3, 52 9 of 10

Finally, if one applies steel plates to healthy or broken beams and fills their fissures with epoxy
structural adhesive, the strengthening offers great efficiency and increases their bearing capacity.
For future work, we suggest a reduction in the spacing between the stirrups to verify the rupture
in the shear area. We also suggest the reduction of the quantity of 0.75 mm thick SAE 1020 steel plates
in the shear area to verify their performance.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Â.C.P., B.d.V.S., and D.d.S.G.; methodology, M.M.B.B., E.G.P.A.,
and B.d.V.S.; formal analysis, Â.C.P. and D.d.S.G.; investigation, M.M.B.B. and B.d.V.S.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. De souza, V.C.M.; Ripper, T. Patologia, Recuperação e Reforço de Estruturas de Concreto; Editora Pini Ltd.:
São Paulo, Brazil, 1998; 255p.
2. Deghenhard, C.C. Análise Experimental da Capacidade Portante em Vigas de Concreto Armado Sujeitas a Flexão
com Reforço Metálico Colado na Face Tracionada; Universidade do Extremo Sul Catarinense: Criciúma, Brazil,
2013; 19p.
3. Metha, P.K.; Monteiro, P.J.M. Concreto: Microestrutura, Propriedades e Materiais; IBRACON: São Paulo, Brazil,
2008; 674p.
4. Pimenta, T.M. Comportamento Estrutural de Vigas de Concreto Armado Reforçadas com Chapas Metálicas, Coladas
com Geopolímero, e com Mantas de Sisal Coladas com Resina Epóxi; Curso de Engenharia Civil, Universidade do
Extremo Sul Catarinense: Paraíba, Brazil, 2012; 65p.
5. Higashi, M.M.Y. Reforço em Estruturas de Betão Armado com Chapas de Aço. Master’s Thesis, Instituto
Superior de Engenharia do Porto, ISEP, Porto, Portugal, November 2016.
6. L’hermite, R. L’application des Colles et Resines dans la Construction; La beton a Coffrage Portant, Annales
l’Institut Technique: Paris, France, 1967; Volume 239.
7. Bresson, J. Nouvelles Recherches et Applications Concernant l0 Utilisation des Collages dans les Structures;
Beton Plaque Annales de l’Institut Tecnique du Batiment et Travaux Publics; Annales l’Institut Technique:
Paris, France, 1971; Volume 278.
8. Juvandes, L.F.P. Reforço e Reabilitação de Estruturas de Betão Usando Materiais Compósitos de “CFRP”.
Ph.D. Thesis, Departamento de Engenharia Civil, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal, 1999.
9. Appleton, J.; Gomes, A. Reforço de Estruturas de Betão Armado por Adição de Armaduras Exteriores; Revista
Portuguesa de Engenharia de Estruturas (RPEE): Lisboa, Portugal, 1997; pp. 1–18.
10. Branco, F.G. Reabilitação e Reforço de Estruturas; Instituto Superior Técnico: Lisboa, Portugal, 2012.
11. Meier, U. Repair Using Advanced Composites. In Proceedings of the International Conference of
Composite Construction—Conventional and Innovative (IABSE), Innsbruck, Austria, 16–18 September 1997;
pp. 113–124.
12. Täljsten, B. Plate Bonding-Strengthening of Existing Concrete Structures with Epoxy Bonded Plates of Steel
or Fiber Reinforced Plastics. Ph.D. Thesis, Division of Structural Engineering, Lulea University of Technology,
Lulea, Sweden, 1994.
13. Reis, A.P.A. Reforço de Vigas de Concreto Armado por meio de Barras de aço Adicionais ou Chapas de aço e
Argamassa de alto Desempenho. Ph.D. Thesis, Escola de Engenharia de São Carlos, São Carlos, Brazil, 1998.
14. Sousa, A.F.V. Reparação, Reabilitação e Reforço de Estruturas de Betão Armado. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculdade de
Engenharia da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal, 2008.
15. Almeida, J.M.A. Vigas de Concreto Armado Reforçadas ao Cisalhamento com Elementos Compósitos com Fibras de
Vidro; Jornadas Sul Americanas de Engenharia Estrutural, ASAEE (Associação Sul Americana de Engenharia
Estrutural): Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2012; 14p.
16. Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. NBR 6118: Projeto de Estruturas de Concreto; Associação Brasileira
de Normas Técnicas: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2014.
17. Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. NBR 5738: Concreto—Procedimento para Moldagem e Cura de
Corpos-de-Prova; Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2003.
Infrastructures 2018, 3, 52 10 of 10

18. Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. NBR 5739: Concreto—Ensaio de Compressão de Corpos de Prova
Cilíndricos; Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2007.
19. Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. NBR 7222: Concreto e Argamassa–Determinação da Resistência
a Tração por Compressão Diametral de Corpos de Prova Cilíndricos; Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas:
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2011.
20. Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. NBR 8522: Concreto—Determinação do Módulo Estático de
Elasticidade à Compressão; Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2008.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).