Table of Content of Printouts:: Flexural Strengthening

Table of content of printouts:
 Introduction
 Materials and Properties of Polymer Matrix Composites
 Mechanics of a Lamina
 Laminate Theory
 Ply by Ply Failure Analysis
 Externally Bonded FRP Reinforcement for RC Structures: Post Strengthening
 Flexural Strengthening
 Strengthening in Shear
 Column Confinement
 FRP Strengthening of Masonry
 CFRP Strengthening of Aluminum Profiles
 FRP Strengthening of Wooden Structures
 Design of Flexural Post-Strengthening of RC: Swiss Code 166 and Other Codes/Guidelines
 Design of FRP Profiles and all FRP Structures
 An Introduction to FRP Reinforced Concrete
 Monitoring and Testing of Civil Engineering Structures
 Composite Manufacturing
 Testing Methods
Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Flexural strengthening
Book Composite for Construction, L. C. Bank, Chapter 9

Initial situation prior to strengthening
The effect of the initial load prior to strengthening should be considered

in the calculation of strengthened member. Based on the theory of elasticity
and with M0 the service moment (no load safety factors are applied) acting
on the critical RC section during strengthening, the strain distribution of the
member can be evaluated. As M0 is typically larger than the cracking
moment Mcr, the calculation is based on a cracked section.

If M0 is smaller than Mcr, its influence on the
calculation of the strengthened member may easily
be neglected.

Based on the transformed cracked section, the neutral axis depth x0
can be solved from:
1 2
bx 0  ( s  1) As 2 ( x 0  d 2 )   s As1 (d  x 0 )
2
Where:
Es
s 
Ec

The concrete strain at the top fiber can be expressed as:
M 0 x0
 c0 
Ec I 02
Where I02 is the moment of inertia of the transformed cracked section:
bx03
I 02   ( s  1) As 2 ( x0  d 2 ) 2   s As1 (d  x0 ) 2
3
Based on strain compatibility, the concrete strain at the extreme tension
fiber can be derived as:
This strain equals the initial axis
h  x0
 0   c0 strain at the level of the FRP,
x0 needed for the evaluation of the
strengthened member.

Failure modes – ultimate limit states (ULS)
a)
Full composite action of concrete and FRP is maintained until the
concrete reaches crushing in compression or the FRP fails
in tension.
b)
Composite action is lost prior to class (a) failure, e.g.
due to peeling-off the FRP.

a) Full composite action
 Steel yielding followed by concrete crushing.
 Steel yielding followed by FRP fracture.
 Concrete crushing.

b) Loss of composite action
Debonding and bond failure modes
 Debonding in the concrete near the surface or along a

weakened layer, e.g. along the line of the embedded
steel reinforcement.
 Debonding in the adhesive (cohesion failure).
 Debonding at the interfaces between concrete and adhesive

or adhesive and FRP (adhesion failure).
 Debonding inside the FRP (interlaminar shear failure).

Bond behavior:
Bond test

Bond failure of RC members strengthened with FRP

Bond failure modes
 Mode 1: peeling-off in an uncracked anchorage zone.
 Mode 2: peeling-off caused at flexural cracks.
 Mode 3: peeling-off caused at shear cracks.
 Mode 4: peeling-off caused by the unevenness of the

concrete surface

FRP end shear failure

Analysis of Ultimate Limit State (ULS)
a) Full composite action

Steel yielding followed by concrete crushing

Calculation of neutral axis depth, x:
0.85. . f cd bx  As 2 E s  s 2  As1 f yd  A f E fu  f
Where:
  0 .8
and:
x  d2
 s 2   cu (Esεs2 not to exceed fyd)
x
hx
 f   cu 0
x

Design bending moment capacity:
M Rd  As1 f yd ( d   G x )  A f E f  f (h   G x )  As 2 Es s 2 ( G x  d 2 )
Where:
 G  0 .4

Check if
a) Yielding of tensile steel reinforcement:
d  x f yd
 s1   cu 
x Es
b) Straining of the FRP is limited to the ultimate strain:
hx
 f   cu   0   fud
x

Steel yielding followed by FRP fracture
The failure mode involving steel yielding / FRP fracture is theoretically possible.
However, it is quite likely that premature FRP debonding will precede FRP
fracture and this mechanism will not be activated.
Previous equations still apply, with the following modification:
εcu is replaced by εc; εf is replaced by εfud and:
 1000
1000 c (0.5  12  c )... for :  c  0.002
 
1  2 ... for : 0.002   c  0.0035
 3000 c
 8  1000 c
 4(6  1000 ) ... for :  c  0.002

G   c
1000 c (3000 c  4)  2 ... for : 0.002    0.0035

 2000 c (3000 c  2) c

Tee Beams
bf
hf c
h
= +
Afrp
bfrp Mr Mrf Mrw
• Similar analysis procedure
Neutral axis in flange: treat as rectangular section
Neutral axis in web: treat as tee section

b) Loss of composite action
Peeling-off caused at shear cracks

Based on experimental results
(concrete grades C25/30 to C30/37, CFRP prefab on wet lay-up type),
shear resistance:
VR   R .bd
With a characteristic value for the shear strength:
 Rk ( MPa )  0.38  151 eq

Ef
As  A f
Es
 eq 
bd
FRP end shear failure
aL
 
f s
d 200 3
 Rd  0.15 3 3 (1  ) 100  s f ck
aL d
(1   s ) 2
aL  4 dL3
s
a  L  d , aL  a
Peeling-off at flexural cracks and at the end anchorage
prevent peeling-off at flexural cracks:

Strain f,lim at ULS < 0.0065 to 0.0085
prevent peeling-off at the end anchorage:

has to be verified using methods based on
fracture mechanics and bond stress-slip relationships

Peeling-off at the end anchorage
the maximum FRP force which can be anchored and the maximum
anchorage length equal to:
N fa ,max ( N )   .c1 .k c .k b .b f . E f .t f . f ctm
E f .t f
l b ,max ( mm) 
c 2 . f ctm

Where:
α : reduction factor, approximately equal to 0.9. Note that α = 1
in beams with sufficient internal and external shear reinforcement
and in slabs.
kc : state of compaction of concrete, can generally be assumed to be
equal to 1.0, but for FRP bonded to concrete faces with low
compaction equals by 0.67. bf
2
kb : geometry factor: bk b  1.06 1
bf
1
400
With: bf
 0.33
b
c1, c2: obtained through calibration with test results; for
CFRP strips they are equal to 0.64 and 2, respectively.

For l b  l b ,max
ultimate bond force according to Holzenkämpfer:
lb lb
N fa  N fa ,max (2  )
lb ,max lb ,max

Serviceability Limit State (SLS)
Basis of calculation
 linear elastic material behavior

 cracked section analysis

Calculation of neutral axis xe:
1 2  0 
bxe  ( s  1) As 2 ( xe  d 2 )   s As1 (d  xe )   f A f h  (1  ) xe 
2  c 
Ef
Where: f 
Ec
Es
s 
Ec
And the cracking moment for rectangular beams:
2
bh
M cr  f ctm .
6
Stress limitation
limit stresses in the concrete, steel and FRP to prevent
 damage or excessive creep of the concrete

 steel yielding
 excessive creep or creep rupture of the FRP

 c  0.60 f ck under the rare load combination
 c  0.45 f ck under the quasi-permanent load combination
where:
 c  Ec  c

To prevent yielding of the steel at service load:
d  xe
 s  E s . c .  0.80 f yk rare load combination
xe

FRP stress under service load should be limited as:
h  xe
 f  E f .( c .   0 )   . f fk quasi-permanent load combination
xe
0.8 : CFRP

Where   0.5 : AFRP
0.3 : GFRP


Verification of deflections
The mean deflection, a, is calculated from:
a  a1 .(1   b )  a 2 . b
Where a1 and a2 are the deflections in the uncracked and the
fully cracked state, respectively and the distribution coefficient is:
 b  0........M k  M cr
M cr n / 2
 b  1   1 . 2 .( ) ........M k  M cr
Mk
 Where β1 is a coefficient taking into account the bond characteristics
of the reinforcement and equals 0.5 and 1 for smooth and deformed
steel, respectively;
 β2 is a coefficient taking into account the loading

type and equals 0.5 and 1 for long-term and short
term loading, respectively.
 The power n equals 2. For high strength concrete

more accuracy is obtained with n equal to 3.

The deflection in the uncracked state, a1,
and in the fully cracked state, a2,
can be calculated by classical elasticity analysis,
referring to a flexural stiffness in the
uncracked state EcI and in the
fully cracked state EcI2, respectively.

Verification of crack widths
Neglecting the tension stiffening effect (ζ = 1) and assuming 0  0

Mk 1
wk  2.1 c ,eff . .
E s d eq (u s  0.694u f )
Where the ratio of the effective area in tension is:
Ac ,eff
 c ,eff 
bd
 eq is the equivalent reinforcement ratio and us and uf is the bond
perimeter of the steel and FRP reinforcement.

Verification of bond interface cracking
it should be verified that the maximum shear

stress τfl at the FRP end, calculated according
to a linear elastic analysis, is smaller than fctk.
  Ga 
1/ 2
 t (h  x )
 fl  V x 0     f e
M x 0
 E t t   Ic
  f f a  
Where Ga and ta is the shear modulus and thickness,
respectively, of the adhesive at the FRP-concrete
interface; Vx=0 and Mx=0 is the shear force and bending
moment acting on the section corresponding to the end
of the FRP; and Ic is the moment of inertia of the
transformed cracked section.
Summary of design procedure:
 Before strengthening: check ULS and SLS (just to compare with the
strengthened member!).
 From the service moment M0 prior to strengthening determine 0 at the extreme

tension fiber.
 Assume full composite action and from the design moment after strengthening
determine the required FRP cross section to fulfill the ULS. Verify the ductility
requirements.
 Calculate the deflections in the SLS. If allowable deflection is exceeded,

determine the required FRP cross section.

 Calculate the stresses in the concrete, steel and FRP and verify the allowable
stresses.
 Verify that the provided FRP bond width is sufficient to control crack widths in
the SLS. Increase the FRP width, if necessary, or, given a maximum width,
increase the amount (thickness) of FRP.
 Verify the resisting shear force at which bond failure due to shear cracks occurs
(ULS).
 Verify that bond failure at the anchorage does not occur. Otherwise mechanical
anchorage should be provided.

 Verify that FRP end shear failure is avoided. Provide shear strengthening at the
ends if required.
 Verify the accidental situation.
 Verify the shear design resistance of the strengthened member. If needed shear
strengthening should be provided.

Design Examples

Flexural Strengthening of a RC Beam

BeamLength  L  10000 mm
Designed for q SLS, ULS :

q SLS  40 KN / m
q ULS  64 KN / m
Identical bending reinforcement across the entire length.

Additional Point Load P at ULS :
P  80 KN

Geometric Conditions:
h  750 mm
b  300 mm
d  677 mm
d 1 73 mm
d 2  48 mm
b f  150 mm
t f  4 mm

Concrete Properties:
E c  26000 MPa Steel Properties:
f cd  22 MPa
f ctm  2 MPa E s  210000 MPa
 cu  0 .0035 f yd  496 MPa
8 20 A s1  2513 mm 2
4 20 A s 2  1257 mm 2
CFRP Properties:
E fu  160000 MPa
A f  b f .t f  150  4  600 mm 2

1. From M0 Calculate ε0

Initial situation
The effect of the initial load prior to strengthening should be
considered in the calculation of strengthened member.
Based on the theory of elasticity and with M0 the
service moment (no load safety factors are applied)
acting on the critical RC section during strengthening,
the strain distribution of the member can be evaluated.
q
Calculation M0: M  .( L . x  x 2 )
2
L qL 2
M 0 (x  ) 
2 8
40  10 2
M0   500 KN . m
8
And the cracking moment for rectangular beams:
b.h 2
M cr  f ctm .
6
300  750 2
M cr  2  56 . 25 KN . m
6
As M0 is larger than the cracking moment Mcr,

the calculation is based on a cracked section !
M 0  500  M cr  56 . 25  Cracked ...Section ...!

Based on the transformed cracked section,
the neutral axis depth x0 can be solved from:
1 2
bx 0  ( s  1) A s 2 ( x 0  d 2 )   s A s1 ( d  x 0 )
2

Where:
Es 210000
s  s   8 . 08
Ec 26000
1
 300  x 02  (8 . 08  1)  1257  ( x 0  48 )  8 . 08  2513  ( 677  x 0 )
2
150 x 02  29205 x 0  14173691  0  x 0  225 . 1 mm
The concrete strain at the top fiber can be expressed as:
M 0 x0
 c0 
E c I 02
Where I02 is the moment of inertia
of the transformed cracked section:
bx 03
I 02   ( s  1) A s 2 ( x 0  d 2 ) 2   s A s1 ( d  x 0 ) 2
3
300  225 3
I 02   (8 . 08  1)  1257  ( 225  48 ) 2  8 . 08  2513  ( 677  225 ) 2
3
 I 02  5566277707 mm 4
 5 . 57  10 9 mm 4
And now: 5  10 8  225 .1

 c0    c 0  0 . 00077
26000  5 .57  10 9

Based on strain compatibility, the concrete strain
at the extreme tension fiber can be derived as:
h  x0
 0   c0
x0
750  225 . 1
 0  0 . 00077    0  0 . 0018
225 . 1
This strain equals the initial axis strain

at the level of the FRP EBR,
needed for the evaluation of the strengthened member.

Analysis of ULS
2. Assume Full Composite Action,

steel yielding followed by concrete crushing,
check if the design moment after strengthening is
sufficient for ULS.

Analysis of cross section for the ultimate limit state in bending

The design bending moment capacity may be calculated
based on the following:
Calculation of neutral axis depth, x:
0 . 85 . . f cd bx  A s 2 E s  s 2  A s1 f yd  A f E fu  f
Where:   0 .8
x  d2
 s 2   cu (Esεs2 not to exceed fyd)
x
hx
 f   cu 0
x

x  48
0 . 85  0 . 8  22  300 x  1257  210000  0 . 0035  
x
750  x
 2513  496  600  160000  ( 0 . 0035  0 . 0018 )
x
x  48 750  x
4488 x  923895   1246448  96000  ( 3 . 5  1 .8 )
x x
4488 x 2  186247 x  296346960  0
 x  237 mm

Design bending moment capacity without CFRP:
M Rd  A s1 f yd ( d   G x )  A s 2 E s  s 2 ( G x  d 2 )
Where:  G  0 .4
M Rd  2513  496  ( 677  0 .4  237 ) 

237  48
........  1257  210000  0 .0035   ( 0 .4  237  48 )
237
M Rd  725682026  34481165  760163191 N . mm
 M Rd  760 . 16 KN . m
Design bending moment capacity with CFRP:
M Rd  A s1 f yd ( d   G x )  A f E f  f ( h   G x )  A s 2 E s  s 2 ( G x  d 2 )
Where:  G  0 .4
M Rd  2513  496  ( 677  0 .4  237 ) 

750  237
........  600  160000  ( 0 . 0035   0 . 0018 )  ( 750  0 . 4  237 ) 
237
237  48
........  1257  210000  0 . 0035   ( 0 .4  237  48 )
237
M Rd  725682026  363302594  34481165  1123465785 N . mm

 M Rd  1123 . 47 KN . m
L2 L
M ULS  q.  P.
8 4
10 2 10
M ULS  64   80 .  1000 KN . m
8 4
Without CFRP:
M Rd  760 . 16 KN . m  M ULS  1000 KN . m
Not O.K
With CFRP:
M Rd  1123 . 47 KN . m  M ULS  1000 KN . m
O.K

For the equation given to be valid,
the following assumptions should be checked:
a) Yielding of tensile steel reinforcement:

dx f yd
 s1   cu 
x Es
677  237 f yd 496
 s1  0 .0035  0 . 0065    0 . 0023 O.K
237 Es 210000
b) Straining of the FRP is limited to the ultimate strain:

hx
 f   cu   0   fud
x
750  237
 f  0 . 0035  0 . 0018  0 . 0058   fud  0 . 006 O.K
237
3. Calculate Nfa,max and lb,max
The maximum FRP force which can be anchored and

the maximum anchorage length equal to:
N fa , max ( N )   .c 1 .k c .k b .b f . E f .t f . f ctm
E f .t f
l b , max ( mm ) 
c 2 . f ctm

Where:
α : reduction factor, approximately equal to 0.9.
Note that α = 1 in beams with sufficient internal and
external shear reinforcement and in slabs.
kc : state of compaction of concrete, can generally
be assumed to be equal to 1.0,
but for FRP bonded to concrete faces with low compaction
equals by 0.67.
kb : geometry factor:
bf 150
2 2
b k b  1 . 06 300  1 . 11  1
k b  1 . 06 1 150
bf 1
1 400
400
bf 150
With:   0 . 5  0 . 33
b 300
c1, c2: obtained through calibration with test results;
for CFRP strips they are equal to 0.64 and 2, respectively.
N fa , max ( N )   .c 1 .k c .k b .b f . E f .t f . f ctm
N fa , max ( N )  0 . 9  0 . 64  1  1 . 11  150  160000  4  2

 N fa , max ( N )  108503
E f .t f 160000  4
l b , max ( mm )  l b , max ( mm )   400
c 2 . f ctm 22
 l b , max ( mm )  400
Beam/One-Way Slab Strengthening
Flexural Example
Problem statement
Calculate the moment resistance (Mr) for an FRP-
strengthened rectangular concrete section
Section information
Afrp = 60 mm2
d = 325 mm
h = 350 mm
f’c = 45 MPa frpu = 1.55 %

3-10M bars
CFRP
fy = 400 MPa Efrp = 155 GPa
b = 105 mm Es = 200 GPa

ISIS EC Module 4
Flexural Example
Solution
Step 1: Assumed failure mode
Assume failure of beam due to crushing of concrete in

compression after yielding of internal steel reinforcement
ISIS EC Module 4
Analysis Procedure
b cu 1Φcf’c
c a = 1c
d Cc
h
As
s
fs Ts
frp ffrp Tfrp
bfrp Equiv. Stress Distribution
Cross Section Strain Distribution Stress Distribution
Step 2: Determine compressive stress block factors

1 = 0.85-0.0015f’c > 0.67
1 = 0.97-0.0025f’c > 0.67
ISIS EC Module 4
Flexural Example
Solution
Step 2: Calculate concrete stress block factors
1 = 0.85 – 0.0015 f’c > 0.67
 1 = 0.85 – 0.0015 (45) = 0.78

1 = 0.85 – 0.0025 f’c > 0.67
 1 = 0.85 – 0.0025 (45) = 0.86
ISIS EC Module 4
Analysis Procedure
b cu 1Φcf’c
c a = 1c
d Cc
h
As
s
fs Ts
frp ffrp Tfrp
bfrp Equiv. Stress Distribution
Cross Section Strain Distribution Stress Distribution
Step 3: Determine neutral axis depth, c
sAsfs + frpAfrpEfrpfrp = c1f’c1bc
ISIS EC Module 4
Flexural Example
Solution
Step 3: Find depth of neutral axis, c
c1f’c1bc = sAsfs + frpAfrpEfrpfrp
0.6 (0.78) (45) (0.86) (105) c 0.85 (300) (400)
350 - c
0.75 (60) (155000) 0.0035
c
c = 90.5 mm
ISIS EC Module 4
Flexural Example
Solution
Step 4: Check failure mode
frp = cu (h-c)/c vs. frpu = 0.0155
350 - 90.5
frp = 0.0035
90.5
frp = 0.01 < frpu = 0.0155
Therefore, FRP rupture does NOT occur and assumed
failure mode is correct
ISIS EC Module 4
Flexural Example
Solution
Step 4: Check failure mode
To promote ductility, check that steel has yielded:
d-c
s = cu
c
325 - 90.5
s = 0.0035 = 0.009 > 0.002 = y
90.5
If the steel had NOT yielded, the beam failure could be expected to be less ductile,
and we would need to carefully check the deformability of the member
ISIS EC Module 4
Flexural Example
Solution
Step 5: Calculate moment resistance
a a
Mr = sAsfy d  + frpAfrpEfrpfrp h
2 2
0.85 (300) (400) 325 - 0.86 x 90.5

2
0.75 (60) (155000) (0.01) 0.86 x 90.5
350 -
2
65% increase over
Mr = 50.9  106 N· mm = 50.9 kN· m unstrengthened beam!
ISIS EC Module 4

Table of Content of Printouts:: Flexural Strengthening

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Table of Content of Printouts:: Flexural Strengthening

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Table of content of printouts:

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

The effect of the initial load prior to strengthening should be considered

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

 Steel yielding followed by concrete crushing.

 Steel yielding followed by FRP fracture.

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

 Debonding in the concrete near the surface or along a

 Debonding in the adhesive (cohesion failure).

 Debonding at the interfaces between concrete and adhesive

 Debonding inside the FRP (interlaminar shear failure).

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

 Mode 1: peeling-off in an uncracked anchorage zone.

 Mode 2: peeling-off caused at flexural cracks.

 Mode 3: peeling-off caused at shear cracks.

 Mode 4: peeling-off caused by the unevenness of the

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

a) Full composite action

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

a) Yielding of tensile steel reinforcement:

b) Straining of the FRP is limited to the ultimate strain:

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

1000 c (3000 c  4)  2 ... for : 0.002    0.0035

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Neutral axis in web: treat as tee section

Peeling-off caused at shear cracks

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

 Rk ( MPa )  0.38  151 eq

prevent peeling-off at flexural cracks:

prevent peeling-off at the end anchorage:

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

N fa ,max ( N )   .c1 .k c .k b .b f . E f .t f . f ctm

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

ultimate bond force according to Holzenkämpfer:

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

 linear elastic material behavior

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

limit stresses in the concrete, steel and FRP to prevent

 damage or excessive creep of the concrete

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

 c  0.45 f ck under the quasi-permanent load combination

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

The mean deflection, a, is calculated from:

 β2 is a coefficient taking into account the loading

 The power n equals 2. For high strength concrete

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

Neglecting the tension stiffening effect (ζ = 1) and assuming 0  0

Externally Bonded FRP: Flexural Fibre Composites, FS12 Masoud Motavalli

it should be verified that the maximum shear